[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62389-62408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24596]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0525; FRL-9917-83-Region 3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York 
Nonattainment Areas to Attainment for the 1997 Annual and the 2006 24-
Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's requests to redesignate to 
attainment the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York nonattainment areas 
(hereafter ``the Areas'') for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour fine 
particulate matter (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) national ambient air quality 
standard (NAAQS). This proposed approval is contingent upon the United 
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit 
Court) granting EPA's motion to lift the stay of the Cross State Air 
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) that the D.C. Circuit Court issued on December 
30, 2011. EPA is proposing to find that the attainment of the Areas is 
in part due to the emissions reductions resulting from the Clean Air 
Interstate Rule (CAIR) in Pennsylvania and in the states upwind of 
Pennsylvania. Thus, if the D.C. Circuit Court lifts the stay of CSAPR 
and grants EPA's motion to begin implementation of CSAPR on January 1, 
2015, those emission reductions originally required under CAIR will be 
made permanent and enforceable through the implementation of CSAPR. In 
addition to the redesignation requests, EPA is also proposing to 
determine that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Furthermore, EPA is proposing to 
approve as revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan 
(SIP), the associated maintenance plans to show maintenance of the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS through 2025 for the 
Areas. The maintenance plans include the 2017 and 2025 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
and nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) mobile vehicle emissions budgets 
(MVEBs) for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for 
transportation conformity purposes. EPA is also initiating the process 
to determine if these budgets are adequate for transportation 
conformity purposes. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve as 
revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP, the 2007 base year emissions 
inventory for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA's proposed approvals of the maintenance 
plans and MVEBs for the Areas are also contingent upon the lifting of 
the CSAPR stay by the D.C. Circuit Court.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 17, 
2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2014-0525 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#593f3c2b3738373d3c23773a2b302a2d303738193c2938773e362f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="046261766a656a60617e2a67766d77706d6a65446174652a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>.
    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0525, Cristina Fernandez, Associate 
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0525. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you

[[Page 62390]]

consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov 
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' 
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through 
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured 
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact 
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you 
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special 
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or 
viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch 
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal 
are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market 
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by 
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8dfcf8e4e3f9e2a3ffe2fee8cde8fdeca3eae2fb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d3a2a6babda7bcfda1bca0b693b6a3b2fdb4bca5">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. EPA's Requirements
    A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment
    B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
III. Summary of Proposed Actions
IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions
    A. Effects of EME Homer City Decision
    B. Effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Court Decision 
Regarding the PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Under Subpart 4 of 
Part D of Title I of the CAA
V. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania's SIP Submittals
    A. Redesignation Requests
    B. Maintenance Plans
    C. Transportation Conformity
VI. Proposed Actions
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    The first air quality standards for PM<INF>2.5</INF> were 
established on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652). EPA promulgated an annual 
standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), 
based on a three-year average of annual mean PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
concentrations (the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> standard). In the same 
rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ based 
on a three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 
concentrations.
    On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944, 1014), EPA published air quality 
area designations for the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. In that 
rulemaking action, EPA designated the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle 
(Harrisburg) and York Areas as nonattainment for the 1997 annual 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The Harrisburg Area is comprised of Cumberland, 
Dauphin and Lebanon Counties; and the York Area is comprised of York 
County in Pennsylvania. See 40 CFR 81.339.
    On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA retained the annual average 
standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\, but revised the 24-hour standard to 35 
[mu]g/m\3\ based again on the three-year average of the 98th percentile 
of the 24-hour concentrations (the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
standard). On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA published 
designations for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> standard, which 
became effective on December 14, 2009. In that rulemaking action, EPA 
designated the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York (Harrisburg-York) Area 
as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. See 40 
CFR 81.339.
    Today's proposed rulemaking actions address the redesignations to 
attainment for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS for the 
Harrisburg and York Areas, and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
standards for the Harrisburg-York Area.
    On August 25, 2008 (73 FR 49949) and on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 
48863), EPA determined that the Harrisburg and the York Areas, 
respectively, had clean data and monitored attainment for the 1997 
annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. On March 29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA 
determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean data and monitored 
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Pursuant to 40 
CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the requirements for 
the Areas to submit attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably 
available control measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP) 
plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related 
to the attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS are suspended until such time as: The Area is 
redesignated to attainment for the standard, at which time the section 
51.1004(c) requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that the 
Area has again violated the standard, at which time such plans are 
required to be submitted. On July 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA also 
determined that the Harrisburg and York Areas had attained the 1997 
annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of 
April 5, 2010. EPA's review of the most recent certified monitoring 
data for the Areas show that the Areas continue to attain the standard.
    On April 22, 2014, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the 
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), formally 
submitted requests to redesignate the Harrisburg and York Areas from 
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. 
PADEP also formally submitted on April 22, 2014, a request to 
redesignate the Harrisburg-York Area from nonattainment to attainment 
for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Concurrently, PADEP 
submitted maintenance plans for the Areas as SIP revisions to ensure 
continued attainment throughout the Areas over the next 10 years. The 
maintenance plans include the 2017 and 2025 PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> MVEBs for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for 
transportation conformity purposes. PADEP also submitted a 2007 
comprehensive emissions inventory for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS for PM<INF>2.5</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>, sulfur 
dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and 
ammonia (NH<INF>3</INF>). EPA is proposing to approve as SIP revisions 
the maintenance plans for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve as SIP 
revisions the 2007 emissions inventory for both standards to meet the 
emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA's 
proposed approvals are contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court granting 
EPA's motion to lift the stay of CSAPR.

[[Page 62391]]

II. EPA's Requirements

A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA 
allows for redesignation providing that: (1) EPA determines that the 
area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) EPA has fully approved the 
applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k) of the 
CAA; (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air 
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable 
reductions; (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area 
as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) the 
state containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the 
area under section 110 and part D of the CAA. Each of these 
requirements are discussed in Section V. of today's proposed rulemaking 
action.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the ``SIPs; General 
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 
1990,'' (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992) (the ``General Preamble'') and 
has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests in 
the following documents: (1) ``Procedures for Processing Requests to 
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter 
referred to as the ``1992 Calcagni Memorandum''); (2) ``SIP Actions 
Submitted in Response to CAA Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John 
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; 
and (3) ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas 
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 
1994.

B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
Under section 175A of the CAA, the plan must demonstrate continued 
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval 
of a redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan 
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility 
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such 
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems 
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
violations.
    The 1992 Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the 
content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states that a maintenance 
plan should address the following provisions: (1) An attainment 
emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance demonstration showing 
maintenance for 10 years; (3) a commitment to maintain the existing 
monitoring network; (4) verification of continued attainment; and (5) a 
contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIP revisions and maintenance plans for nonattainment 
areas and for areas seeking redesignation to attainment for a given 
NAAQS. These emission control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., RFP and 
attainment demonstration SIP revisions) and maintenance plans create 
MVEBs based on onroad mobile source emissions for the relevant criteria 
pollutants and/or their precursors, where appropriate, to address 
pollution from onroad transportation sources. The MVEBs are the 
portions of the total allowable emissions that are allocated to onroad 
vehicle use that, together with emissions from all other sources in the 
area, will provide attainment, RFP, or maintenance, as applicable. The 
budget serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned 
transportation system. Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an area seeking 
a redesignation to attainment is established for the last year of the 
maintenance plan.
    The maintenance plans for the Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and 
York Counties in Pennsylvania, includes the 2017 and 2025 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> MVEBs for transportation conformity 
purposes. The transportation conformity determinations for the Areas 
are further discussed in Section V.C. of today's proposed rulemaking 
actions and technical support documents (TSDs) dated September 3, 2014, 
available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-R03-
2014-0525.

III. Summary of Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to take several rulemaking actions related to the 
redesignations of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Provided that the D.C. Circuit 
Court grants EPA's motion to lift the December 30, 2011 stay of CSAPR 
and tolls CSAPR's compliance deadlines in order to begin Phase 1 of 
CSAPR on January 1, 2015, EPA is proposing to find that the Areas meet 
the requirements for redesignation for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA 
is thus proposing to approve Pennsylvania's requests to change the 
legal definition for the Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment 
to attainment for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, and the 
Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the associated maintenance plans 
for the Areas as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, including the 2017 and 
2025 PM<INF>2.5</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> MVEBs for the Areas. The 
approval of the maintenance plans is one of the CAA criteria for 
redesignation of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Pennsylvania's maintenance plans 
are designed to ensure continued attainment in the Areas for 10 years 
after redesignation for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    EPA previously determined that the Harrisburg and York Areas have 
attained the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is 
proposing to find that the Harrisburg and York Areas continue to attain 
the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. See 76 FR 45424, July 29, 2011. 
EPA also previously determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean 
data showing monitored attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. See 77 FR 18922, March 29, 2012. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
find that the Harrisburg-York Area continues to attain the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2007 
comprehensive emissions inventory that includes PM<INF>2.5,</INF> 
SO<INF>2</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>, VOC, and NH<INF>3</INF> for the Areas 
as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in order to meet the requirements of 
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA's analysis of the proposed actions is 
provided in Section V. of today's proposed rulemaking action.
    EPA's proposed rulemaking actions are contingent upon the D.C. 
Circuit Court granting EPA's motion to lift the stay of CSAPR. If the 
D.C. Circuit Court does not lift the stay of CSAPR, EPA will reevaluate 
the basis for approval of these proposed redesignations and repropose 
actions if necessary before issuing the final rule.

[[Page 62392]]

IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions

A. Effects of EME Homer City Decision

1. Background
    In 2008, the D.C. Circuit Court initially vacated CAIR, North 
Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded 
the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits 
provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 
2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit 
Court's remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR, to address interstate transport 
of emissions and resulting secondary air pollutants and to replace 
CAIR.\1\ CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from electric generating units (EGUs) in 28 
states in the Eastern United States. Implementation of CSAPR was 
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR's cap-and-trade 
programs would have superseded the CAIR cap-and-trade programs. 
Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and on December 
30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an order staying CSAPR pending 
resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to administer 
CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir. 
Dec. 30, 2011), Order at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CAIR addressed the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> annual NAAQS and 
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. CSAPR addresses contributions from 
upwind states to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as well as the ozone and 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS addressed by CAIR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court issued its ruling, 
vacating and remanding CSAPR to EPA and once again ordering continued 
implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit Court subsequently denied 
EPA's petition for rehearing en banc. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. 
v. EPA, No. 11-1302, 2013 WL 656247 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013), at *1. 
EPA and other parties then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of 
certiorari, and the Supreme Court granted the petitions on June 24, 
2013. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013).
    On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court vacated and reversed the D.C. 
Circuit Court's decision regarding CSAPR, and remanded that decision to 
the D.C. Circuit Court to resolve remaining issues in accordance with 
its ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 
(2014). Though CSAPR remains presently stayed by the D.C. Circuit 
Court, EPA has moved to have that stay lifted in light of the Supreme 
Court decision. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, Case No. 11-
1302, Document No. 1499505 (D.C. Cir. filed June 26, 2014). In its 
motion, EPA asks the D.C. Circuit Court to toll CSAPR's compliance 
deadlines by three years, so that the Phase 1 emissions budgets apply 
in 2015 and 2016 (instead of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 emissions 
budgets apply in 2017 and beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond).
2. Proposal on This Issue
    EPA promulgated CAIR on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), creating 
regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions. CAIR applies to 27 eastern states, including 
Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia. EPA approved Pennsylvania's 
SIP on December 10, 2009 (74 FR 65446) that addressed the requirements 
of CAIR for the purpose of reducing SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions and Pennsylvania's SIP redesignation requests list CAIR as a 
control measure. CAIR was thus in place and getting emission reductions 
in Pennsylvania and in states upwind of Pennsylvania when the Areas 
began monitoring attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The quality-assured, certified monitoring data 
used to demonstrate attainment of the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 
1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the April 5, 2010 attainment 
deadline was impacted by CAIR. The Harrisburg-York Area that has 
monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS was 
also impacted by CAIR.
    Under the tolled compliance deadline schedule proposed by EPA in 
its motion to lift the CSAPR stay, CAIR would sunset at the end of 2014 
and be replaced by CSAPR beginning January 1, 2015. Provided that the 
stay is lifted and EPA's tolled compliance deadlines are put in place, 
the emission reductions associated with CAIR that helped the Areas 
achieve attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS would be permanent and enforceable for purposes 
of redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA, because 
CSAPR requires similar or greater emission reductions from relevant 
upwind areas starting in 2015 and beyond.

B. Effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Court Decision Regarding 
PM2.5 Implementation Under Subpart 4 of Part D of Title I of the CAA

1. Background
    On January 4, 2013, in NRDC v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit Court remanded 
to EPA the ``Final Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule'' (72 FR 
20586, April 25, 2007) and the ``Implementation of the New Source 
Review (NSR) Program for PM<INF>2.5</INF>'' final rule (73 FR 28321, 
May 16, 2008) (collectively, ``1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation 
Rule''). 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The D.C. Circuit Court found 
that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
pursuant to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of Part 
D of Title I of the CAA (subpart 1), rather than the particulate-
matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of Part D of Title I (subpart 
4).
    Prior to the January 4, 2013 decision, the states had worked 
towards meeting the air quality goals of the 1997 and 2006 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in accordance with EPA regulations and guidance 
derived from subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA. In response to 
the D.C. Circuit Court's remand, EPA took this history into account by 
setting a new deadline for any remaining submissions that may be 
required for moderate nonattainment areas as a result of the D.C. 
Circuit Court's decision regarding the applicability of subpart 4 of 
Part D of Title I of the CAA.
    On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), EPA issued a final rule, 
``Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for 
Submission of SIP Provisions for the 1997 and 2006 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS'' (the PM<INF>2.5</INF> Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline 
Rule), which identifies the classification under subpart 4 for areas 
currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual and/or 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards. The final rule sets a deadline for 
states to submit attainment plans and meet other subpart 4 
requirements. The final rules specifies December 31, 2014 as the 
deadline for states to submit any additional attainment-related SIP 
elements that may be needed to meet the applicable requirements of 
subpart 4 for areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and/or 2006 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and to submit SIPs 
addressing the nonattainment new source review (NSR) requirements in 
subpart 4.
    Therefore, as explained in detail in the following section, any 
additional attainment-related SIP elements that may be needed for the 
Areas to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4

[[Page 62393]]

were not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation 
requests for the Areas. Pennsylvania submitted its requests for 
redesignation for the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and the Harrisburg-York Areas for the 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS on April 22, 2014.
2. Proposal on This Issue
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA addresses the effect of the 
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision ruling and the June 2, 
2014 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the 
Areas redesignation requests. EPA is proposing to determine that the 
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision does not prevent EPA from 
redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Even in light of the D.C. Circuit 
Court's decision, redesignation for these Areas is appropriate under 
the CAA and EPA's longstanding interpretations of the CAA's provisions 
regarding redesignation. EPA first explains its longstanding 
interpretation that requirements that are imposed, or that become due, 
after a complete redesignation request is submitted for an area that is 
attaining the standard, are not applicable for purposes of evaluating a 
redesignation request. Second, EPA then shows that, even if EPA applies 
the subpart 4 requirements to the redesignation requests of the Areas 
and disregards the provisions of its 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Implementation Rule recently remanded by the D.C. Circuit Court, 
Pennsylvania's request for redesignation of the Areas still qualifies 
for approval. EPA's discussion takes into account the effect of the 
D.C. Circuit Court's ruling and the June 2, 2014 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the maintenance plans of 
the Areas, which EPA views as approvable when subpart 4 requirements 
are considered.
a. Applicable Requirements Under Subpart 4 for Purposes of Evaluating 
the Redesignation Requests of the Areas
    With respect to the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Rule, the 
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 ruling rejected EPA's reasons for 
implementing the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS solely in accordance with the 
provisions of subpart 1, and remanded that matter to EPA, so that it 
could address implementation of the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
under subpart 4 of Part D of the CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For the 
purposes of evaluating Pennsylvania's redesignation requests for the 
Areas, to the extent that implementation under subpart 4 would impose 
additional requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA 
believes that those requirements are not ``applicable'' for the 
purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, and thus EPA is not 
required to consider subpart 4 requirements with respect to the 
redesignation of the Areas. Under its longstanding interpretation of 
the CAA, EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a 
threshold matter, that the part D provisions which are ``applicable'' 
and which must be approved in order for EPA to redesignate an area 
include only those which came due prior to a state's submittal of a 
complete redesignation request. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum. See also 
``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to 
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS on or after 
November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant 
Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 (Shapiro 
memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459, 
12465-66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri, 
(68 FR 25418, 25424-27, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 
537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA's redesignation rulemaking 
applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra Club's view 
that the meaning of ``applicable'' under the statute is ``whatever 
should have been in the plan at the time of attainment rather than 
whatever actually was in the plan and already implemented or due at the 
time of attainment'').\2\ In this case, at the time that Pennsylvania 
submitted its redesignation requests for the 1997 and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, the requirements under subpart 4 were not due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent 
to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request remain 
applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not required 
as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's view that, for purposes of evaluating the redesignation of 
the Areas, the subpart 4 requirements were not due at the time 
Pennsylvania submitted the redesignation requests is in keeping with 
the EPA's interpretation of subpart 2 requirements for subpart 1 ozone 
areas redesignated subsequent to the D.C. Circuit Court's decision in 
South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 
2006). In South Coast, the D.C. Circuit Court found that EPA was not 
permitted to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standard solely under 
subpart 1, and held that EPA was required under the statute to 
implement the standard under the ozone-specific requirements of subpart 
2 as well. Subsequent to the South Coast decision, in evaluating and 
acting upon redesignation requests for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 
that were submitted to EPA for areas under subpart 1, EPA applied its 
longstanding interpretation of the CAA that ``applicable 
requirements,'' for purposes of evaluating a redesignation, are those 
that had been due at the time the redesignation request was submitted. 
See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation of Manitowoc County and Door County 
Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047, 22050, April 27, 2010). In those 
rulemaking actions, EPA therefore, did not consider subpart 2 
requirements to be ``applicable'' for the purposes of evaluating 
whether the area should be redesignated under section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA.
    EPA's interpretation derives from the provisions of section 
107(d)(3) of the CAA. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an area 
to be redesignated, a state must meet ``all requirements `applicable' 
to the area under section 110 and part D.'' Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) 
provides that EPA must have fully approved the ``applicable'' SIP for 
the area seeking redesignation. These two sections read together 
support EPA's interpretation of ``applicable'' as only those 
requirements that came due prior to submission of a complete 
redesignation request.
    First, holding states to an ongoing obligation to adopt new CAA 
requirements that arose after the state submitted its redesignation 
request, in order to be redesignated, would make it problematic or 
impossible for EPA to act on redesignation requests in accordance with 
the 18-month deadline Congress set for EPA action in section 
107(d)(3)(D). If ``applicable requirements'' were interpreted to be a 
continuing flow of requirements with no reasonable limitation, states, 
after submitting a redesignation request, would be forced continuously 
to make additional SIP submissions that in turn would require EPA to 
undertake further notice-and-comment rulemaking actions to act on those 
submissions. This would create a regime of unceasing rulemaking that 
would delay action on the redesignation request beyond the 18-month 
timeframe provided by the CAA for this purpose.
    Second, a fundamental premise for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment is that the area has attained the relevant NAAQS due 
to emission reductions from existing controls. Thus, an area for which 
a redesignation

[[Page 62394]]

request has been submitted would have already attained the NAAQS as a 
result of satisfying statutory requirements that came due prior to the 
submission of the request. Absent a showing that unadopted and 
unimplemented requirements are necessary for future maintenance, it is 
reasonable to view the requirements applicable for purposes of 
evaluating the redesignation request as including only those SIP 
requirements that have already come due. These are the requirements 
that led to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, for redesignation 
approval, that a state also satisfy additional SIP requirements coming 
due after the state submits its complete redesignation request, and 
while EPA is reviewing it, would compel the state to do more than is 
necessary to attain the NAAQS, without a showing that the additional 
requirements are necessary for maintenance.
    In the context of this redesignation, the timing and nature of the 
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA and EPA's 
June 2, 2014 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline 
Rule, compound the consequences of imposing requirements that come due 
after the redesignation request is submitted. Pennsylvania submitted 
its redesignation requests for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS on April 22, 2014 for the Areas, which is prior 
to the deadline by which the Areas are required to meet the attainment 
plan and other requirements pursuant to subpart 4.
    To require Pennsylvania's fully-completed and pending redesignation 
requests for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS to 
comply now with requirements of subpart 4 that the D.C. Circuit Court 
announced only in January 2013 and for which the deadline to comply has 
not yet come, would be to give retroactive effect to such requirements 
and provide Pennsylvania a unique and earlier deadline for compliance 
solely on the basis of submitting its redesignation requests for the 
Areas. The D.C. Circuit Court recognized the inequity of this type of 
retroactive impact in Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 
2002),\3\ where it upheld the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling refusing to 
make retroactive EPA's determination that the Areas did not meet their 
attainment deadlines. In that case, petitioners urged the D.C. Circuit 
Court to make EPA's nonattainment determination effective as of the 
date that the statute required, rather than the later date on which EPA 
actually made the determination. The D.C. Circuit Court rejected this 
view, stating that applying it ``would likely impose large costs on 
States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air 
pollution prevention plans . . . even though they were not on notice at 
the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, it would be unreasonable to penalize 
Pennsylvania by rejecting its redesignation requests for areas that are 
already attaining the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS and that met all applicable requirements known to be in effect at 
the time of the requests. For EPA now to reject the redesignation 
requests solely because Pennsylvania did not expressly address subpart 
4 requirements which have not yet come due and for which it had little 
to no notice, would inflict the same unfairness condemned by the D.C. 
Circuit Court in Sierra Club v. Whitman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Sierra Club v. Whitman was discussed and distinguished in a 
recent D.C. Circuit Court decision that addressed retroactivity in a 
quite different context, where, unlike the situation here, EPA 
sought to give its regulations retroactive effect. National 
Petrochemical and Refiners Ass'n v. EPA. 630 F.3d 145, 163 (D.C. 
Cir. 2010), rehearing denied 643 F.3d 958 (D.C. Cir. 2011), cert 
denied 132 S. Ct. 571 (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Subpart 4 Requirements and Pennsylvania's Redesignation Requests
    Even if EPA were to take the view that the D.C. Circuit Court's 
January 4, 2013 decision requires that, in the context of pending 
redesignations for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, subpart 4 requirements were due and in effect 
at the time Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation requests, EPA 
proposes to determine that the Areas still qualify for redesignation to 
attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. As explained subsequently, EPA believes that the redesignation 
request for the Areas, though not expressed in terms of subpart 4 
requirements, substantively meet the requirements of that subpart for 
purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    With respect to evaluating the relevant substantive requirements of 
subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating the Areas, EPA notes that 
subpart 4 incorporates components of subpart 1 of part D, which 
contains general air quality planning requirements for areas designated 
as nonattainment. See section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains 
specific planning and scheduling requirements for coarse particulate 
matter (PM<INF>10</INF>) \4\ nonattainment areas, and under the D.C. 
Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same 
statutory requirements also apply for PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment 
areas. EPA has longstanding general guidance that interprets the 1990 
amendments to the CAA, making recommendations to states for meeting the 
statutory requirements for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, the 
General Preamble. In the General Preamble, EPA discussed the 
relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP requirements, and pointed 
out that subpart 1 requirements were to an extent ``subsumed by, or 
integrally related to, the more specific PM<INF>10</INF> requirements'' 
(57 FR 13538, April 16, 1992). The subpart 1 requirements include, 
among other things, provisions for attainment demonstrations, RACM, 
RFP, emissions inventories, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ PM<INF>10</INF> refers to particulates nominally 10 
micrometers in diameter or smaller.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of these redesignation requests, in order to 
identify any additional requirements which would apply under subpart 4, 
consistent with EPA's June 2, 2014 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Subpart 4 
Classification and Deadline Rule, EPA is considering the Areas to be 
``moderate'' PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas. As EPA explained in 
its June 2, 2014 rule, section 188 of the CAA provides that all areas 
designated nonattainment areas under subpart 4 are initially classified 
by operation of law as ``moderate'' nonattainment areas, and remain 
moderate nonattainment areas unless and until EPA reclassifies the area 
as a ``serious'' nonattainment area. Accordingly, EPA believes that it 
is appropriate to limit the evaluation of the potential impact of 
subpart 4 requirements to those that would be applicable to moderate 
nonattainment areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 4 apply to 
moderate nonattainment areas and include the following: (1) An approved 
permit program for construction of new and modified major stationary 
sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration 
(section 189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C)); 
and (4) quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by 
the applicable attainment date (section 189(c)).
    The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section 
189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions 
requirements of sections 172 and 173 to PM<INF>10</INF>, without adding 
to them. Consequently, EPA believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not 
itself impose for redesignation purposes any additional requirements 
for moderate areas beyond those contained in subpart

[[Page 62395]]

1.\5\ In any event, in the context of redesignation, EPA has long 
relied on the interpretation that a fully approved nonattainment NSR 
program is not considered an applicable requirement for redesignation, 
provided the area can maintain the standard with a prevention of 
significant deterioration (PSD) program after redesignation. A detailed 
rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, 
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 
entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation 
to Attainment.'' See also rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 
12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 
20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 
23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 
1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The potential effect of section 189(e) on section 
189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this redesignation is 
discussed in this rulemaking action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under 
subpart 4,\6\ when EPA evaluates a redesignation request under either 
subpart 1 or 4, any area that is attaining the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
is viewed as having satisfied the attainment planning requirements for 
these subparts. For redesignations, EPA has for many years interpreted 
attainment-linked requirements as not applicable for areas attaining 
the standard. In the General Preamble, EPA stated that: ``The 
requirements for RFP will not apply in evaluating a request for 
redesignation to attainment since, at a minimum, the air quality data 
for the area must show that the area has already attained. Showing that 
the State will make RFP towards attainment will, therefore, have no 
meaning at that point.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA refers to attainment demonstration, RFP, RACM, milestone 
requirements, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The General Preamble also explained that: ``[t]he section 172(c)(9) 
requirements are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the 
applicable date. These requirements no longer apply when an area has 
attained the standard and is eligible for redesignation. Furthermore, 
section 175A for maintenance plans . . . provides specific requirements 
for contingency measures that effectively supersede the requirements of 
section 172(c)(9) for these areas.'' Id. EPA similarly stated in its 
1992 Calcagni Memorandum that, ``The requirements for reasonable 
further progress and other measures needed for attainment will not 
apply for redesignations because they only have meaning for areas not 
attaining the standard.''
    It is evident that even if we were to consider the D.C. Circuit 
Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that 
attainment-related requirements specific to subpart 4 should be imposed 
retroactively \7\ or prior to December 31, 2014 and thus, were due 
prior to Pennsylvania's redesignation requests, those requirements do 
not apply to areas that are attaining the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, for the purpose of evaluating pending 
requests to redesignate the areas to attainment. EPA has consistently 
enunciated this interpretation of applicable requirements under section 
107(d)(3)(E) since the General Preamble was published more than twenty 
years ago. Courts have recognized the scope of EPA's authority to 
interpret ``applicable requirements'' in the redesignation context. See 
Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As EPA has explained above, we do not believe that the D.C. 
Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision should be interpreted so as 
to impose these requirements on the states retroactively. Sierra 
Club v. Whitman, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, even outside the context of redesignations, EPA has 
viewed the obligations to submit attainment-related SIP planning 
requirements of subpart 4 as inapplicable for areas that EPA determines 
are attaining the1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. 
EPA's prior ``Clean Data Policy'' rulemakings for the PM<INF>10</INF> 
NAAQS, also governed by the requirements of subpart 4, explain EPA's 
reasoning. They describe the effects of a determination of attainment 
on the attainment-related SIP planning requirements of subpart 4. See 
``Determination of Attainment for Coso Junction Nonattainment Area,'' 
(75 FR 27944, May 19, 2010). See also Coso Junction Proposed 
PM<INF>10</INF> Redesignation, (75 FR 36023, 36027, June 24, 2010); 
Proposed and Final Determinations of Attainment for San Joaquin 
Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 40954-55, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR 
63641, 63643-47, October 30, 2006). In short, EPA in this context has 
also long concluded that to require states to meet superfluous SIP 
planning requirements is not necessary and not required by the CAA, so 
long as those areas continue to attain the relevant NAAQS.
    Elsewhere in this document, EPA determined that the Areas have 
attained and continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Under its longstanding interpretation, EPA is 
proposing to determine here that the Areas meet the attainment-related 
plan requirements of subparts 1 and 4 for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude that 
the requirements to submit an attainment demonstration under 
189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination under section 172(c)(1) and section 
189(a)(1)(c), a RFP demonstration under 189(c)(1), and contingency 
measure requirements under section 172(c)(9) are satisfied for purposes 
of evaluating these redesignation requests.
c. Subpart 4 and Control of PM<INF>2.5</INF> Precursors
    The D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC v. EPA remanded to EPA the two rules 
at issue in the case with instructions to EPA to re-promulgate them 
consistent with the requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this section 
addresses the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion with respect to 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors. While past implementation of subpart 4 for 
PM<INF>10</INF> has allowed for control of PM<INF>10</INF> precursors 
such as NO<INF>X</INF> from major stationary, mobile, and area sources 
in order to attain the standard as expeditiously as practicable, 
section 189(e) of the CAA specifically provides that control 
requirements for major stationary sources of direct PM<INF>10</INF> 
shall also apply to PM<INF>10</INF> precursors from those sources, 
except where EPA determines that major stationary sources of such 
precursors ``do not contribute significantly to PM<INF>10</INF> levels 
which exceed the standard in the area.''
    EPA's 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Rule, remanded by the 
D.C. Circuit Court, contained rebuttable presumptions concerning 
certain PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors applicable to attainment plans and 
control measures related to those plans. Specifically, in 40 CFR 
51.1002, EPA provided, among other things, that a state was ``not 
required to address VOC [and NH<INF>3</INF>] as . . . PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
attainment plan precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and 
NH<INF>3</INF>] emissions in the State for control measures.'' EPA 
intended these to be rebuttable presumptions. EPA established these 
presumptions at the time because of uncertainties regarding the 
emission inventories for these pollutants and the effectiveness of 
specific control measures in various regions of the country in reducing 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations. EPA also left open the possibility for 
such regulation of VOC and NH<INF>3</INF> in specific areas where that 
was necessary.
    The D.C. Circuit Court in its January 4, 2013 decision made 
reference to both section 189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated that, 
``In light of our disposition, we need not address the petitioners' 
challenge to the presumptions in [40 CFR 51.1002] that VOCs and 
NH<INF>3</INF> are

[[Page 62396]]

not PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors, as subpart 4 expressly governs 
precursor presumptions.'' NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10.
    Elsewhere in the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion, however, the D.C. 
Circuit Court observed: ``NH<INF>3</INF> is a precursor to fine 
particulate matter, making it a precursor to both PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
PM<INF>10</INF>. For a PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment area governed by 
subpart 4, a precursor is presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C. 
7513a(e) [section 189(e)].'' Id. at 21, n.7.
    For a number of reasons, EPA believes that its proposed 
redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS are consistent with the D.C. Circuit Court's 
decision on this aspect of subpart 4. While the D.C. Circuit Court, 
citing section 189(e), stated that ``for a PM<INF>10</INF> area 
governed by subpart 4, a precursor is `presumptively' regulated,'' the 
D.C. Circuit Court expressly declined to decide the specific challenge 
to EPA's 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Rule provisions regarding 
NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC as precursors. The D.C. Circuit Court had no 
occasion to reach whether and how it was substantively necessary to 
regulate any specific precursor in a particular PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
nonattainment area, and did not address what might be necessary for 
purposes of acting upon a redesignation request.
    However, even if EPA takes the view that the requirements of 
subpart 4 were deemed applicable at the time the state submitted the 
redesignation request, and disregards the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
Implementation Rule's rebuttable presumptions regarding NH<INF>3</INF> 
and VOC as PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors, the regulatory consequence 
would be to consider the need for regulation of all precursors from any 
sources in the Areas to demonstrate attainment and to apply the section 
189(e) provisions to major stationary sources of precursors. In the 
case of the Areas, EPA believes that doing so is consistent with 
proposing redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The Areas have attained the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS without any specific 
additional controls of NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC emissions from any 
sources in the Areas.
    Precursors in subpart 4 are specifically regulated under the 
provisions of section 189(e), which requires, with important 
exceptions, control requirements for major stationary sources of 
PM<INF>10</INF> precursors.\8\ Under subpart 1 and EPA's prior 
implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
precursors were subject to regulation, with the exception of 
NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC. Thus EPA must address here whether additional 
controls of NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC from major stationary sources are 
required under section 189(e) of subpart 4 in order to redesignate the 
Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. 
As explained subsequently, EPA does not believe that any additional 
controls of NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC are required in the context of these 
redesignations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for purposes of 
demonstrating attainment as expeditiously as practicable, a state is 
required to evaluate all economically and technologically feasible 
control measures for direct PM emissions and precursor emissions, 
and adopt those measures that are deemed reasonably available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing 
section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538-13542. With regard to precursor 
regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble explicitly stated 
that control of VOC under other CAA requirements may suffice to relieve 
a state from the need to adopt precursor controls under section 189(e). 
See 57 FR 13542. EPA in this rulemaking action, proposes to determine 
that the Pennsylvania SIP revisions have met the provisions of section 
189(e) with respect to NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC as precursors. These 
proposed determinations are based on EPA's findings that: (1) The Areas 
contain no major stationary sources of NH<INF>3,</INF> and (2) existing 
major stationary sources of VOC are adequately controlled under other 
provisions of the CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS.\9\ In the 
alternative, EPA proposes to determine that, under the express 
exception provisions of section 189(e), and in the context of the 
redesignation of the Areas, which are attaining the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, at present NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC 
precursors from major stationary sources do not contribute 
significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the Areas. See 57 FR 13539-42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Areas have reduced VOC emissions through the 
implementation of various control programs including VOC Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations and various on-road 
and non-road motor vehicle control programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that its 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Rule 
provisions in 40 CFR 51.1002 were not directed at evaluation of 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in the context of redesignation, but at SIP 
plans and control measures required to bring a nonattainment area into 
attainment of the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. By contrast, 
redesignation to attainment primarily requires the nonattainment area 
to have already attained due to permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions, and to demonstrate that controls in place can continue to 
maintain the standard. Thus, even if we regard the D.C. Circuit Court's 
January 4, 2013 decision as calling for ``presumptive regulation'' of 
NH<INF>3</INF> and VOC for PM<INF>2.5</INF> under the attainment 
planning provisions of subpart 4, those provisions in and of themselves 
do not require additional controls of these precursors for an area that 
already qualifies for redesignation. Nor does EPA believe that 
requiring Pennsylvania to address precursors differently than it has 
already would result in a substantively different outcome.
    Although, as EPA has emphasized, its consideration here of 
precursor requirements under subpart 4 is in the context of a 
redesignation to attainment, EPA's existing interpretation of subpart 4 
requirements with respect to precursors in attainment plans for 
PM<INF>10</INF> contemplates that states may develop attainment plans 
that regulate only those precursors that are necessary for purposes of 
attainment in the area in question, i.e., states may determine that 
only certain precursors need be regulated for attainment and control 
purposes.\10\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of 
subpart 4 for PM<INF>10</INF>.\11\ EPA believes that application of 
this approach to PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors under subpart 4 is 
reasonable. Because the Areas have already attained the 1997 annual and 
the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS with its current approach to 
regulation of PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors, EPA believes that it is 
reasonable to conclude in the context of these redesignations that 
there is no need to revisit the attainment control strategy with 
respect to the treatment of precursors. Even if the D.C. Circuit 
Court's decision is construed to impose an obligation, in evaluating 
these redesignation requests, to consider additional precursors under 
subpart 4, it would not affect EPA's approval here of Pennsylvania's 
requests for redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. In the context of a redesignation, 
the Areas have shown that they have attained the standards. Moreover, 
Pennsylvania has shown and EPA has proposed to determine that

[[Page 62397]]

attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS in these Areas are due to permanent and enforceable emissions 
reductions on all precursors necessary to provide for continued 
attainment of the standards. See Section V.A.3 of this rulemaking 
notice. It follows logically that no further control of additional 
precursors is necessary. Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4, 
2013 decision of the D.C. Circuit Court as precluding redesignation of 
the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation 
Plans for California--San Joaquin Valley PM<INF>10</INF> 
Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-
Hour and Annual PM<INF>10</INF> Standards,'' (69 FR 30006, May 26, 
2004) (approving a PM<INF>10</INF> attainment plan that impose 
controls on direct PM<INF>10</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and 
did not impose controls on SO<INF>2</INF>, VOC, or NH<INF>3</INF> 
emissions).
    \11\ See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423 
F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, even if, prior to the date of the redesignation request 
submittal, Pennsylvania was required to address precursors for the 
Areas under subpart 4 rather than under subpart 1, as interpreted in 
EPA's remanded 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Rule, EPA would 
still conclude that the Areas had met all applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3(E)(ii) 
and (v) of the CAA.

V. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania's SIP Submittals

    EPA is proposing, contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court's lifting 
of the stay of CSAPR, several rulemaking actions for the Harrisburg-
Lebanon-Carlisle-York nonattainment areas: (1) To redesignate the 
Harrisburg and York Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, and to redesignate the Harrisburg-York Area to 
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS; (2) to approve 
into the Pennsylvania SIP, the associated maintenance plans for the 
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS; and (3) to 
approve the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory into the 
Pennsylvania SIP to satisfy section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requirement 
for the Areas, one of the criteria for redesignation. EPA's proposed 
approvals of the redesignation requests and maintenance plans for the 
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS are based upon 
EPA's determination that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, which EPA is proposing in 
this rulemaking action, and that all other redesignation criteria have 
been met for the Areas. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve the 
2017 and 2025 MVEBs for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and York Counties, 
Pennsylvania for transportation conformity purposes. The following is a 
description of how the Pennsylvania April 22, 2014 submittals satisfy 
the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

A. Redesignation Requests

1. Attainment
    As noted previously, in the final rulemaking action dated July 29, 
2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA determined that the Harrisburg and York 
nonattainment areas had attained the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
by its applicable attainment date. EPA based this determination of 
attainment upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air 
quality monitoring data for the period of 2007-2009 showing that the 
Areas had attained the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Further 
discussion of pertinent air quality issues underlying this 
determination was provided in the July 29, 2011 final rulemaking action 
for EPA's determination of attainment for these Areas.
    Also noted previously, in the final rulemaking action dated March 
29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA determined that the Harrisburg-York Area 
had clean data for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA based 
this determination upon complete, quality assured, quality controlled, 
and certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the Area has 
monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS based 
on the 2008-2010 data in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.
    EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
monitoring data in the Areas consistent with the requirements contained 
at 40 CFR part 50, and recorded in EPA's AQS database. To support the 
previous determination of attainment of the Areas, EPA has also 
reviewed more recent data in its AQS database, including certified, 
quality-assured data for the period from 2008-2010, 2009-2011, 2010-
2012 and 2011-2013. These data, shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3 show that 
the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. In addition, as discussed subsequently with 
respect to the maintenance plans, PADEP has committed to continue 
monitoring ambient PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations in accordance with 
40 CFR part 58. Thus, EPA is proposing to determine that the Areas 
continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, contingent upon the DC Circuit Court's lifting 
the stay of CSAPR.

Table 1--Design Values for the Harrisburg Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/m\3\) for 2008-2010, 2009-
                                 2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013 (15 [mu]g/m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Monitor ID #                       2008-2010       2009-2011       2010-2012       2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumberland 42-041-0101..........................            11.6            11.0            11.0            11.0
Dauphin 42-043-0401.............................            12.4            12.1            11.9            11.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 2--Design Values for the York Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/m\3\) for 2008-2010, 2009-2011,
                                    2010-2012, and 2011-2013 (15 [mu]g/m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Monitor ID #                       2008-2010       2009-2011       2010-2012       2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hill Street 42-133-0008.........................            12.2            11.5            11.7            11.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Table 3--Design Values for the Harrisburg/York Area for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/m\3\) for 2008-2010,
                               2009-2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013 (35 [mu]g/m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Monitor ID #                       2008-2010       2009-2011       2010-2012       2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumberland 42-041-0101..........................              32              31              30              32
Dauphin 42-043-0401.............................              33              32              31              31
York 42-133-0008................................              30              28              29              29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 62398]]

2. The Areas Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Subpart 1 of the CAA and Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) 
of the CAA
    In accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA, the SIP 
revisions for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS for the Areas must be fully approved under section 110(k) of the 
CAA and all the requirements applicable to the Areas under section 110 
of the CAA (general SIP requirements) and part D of Title I of the CAA 
(SIP requirements for nonattainment areas) must be met.
a. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general 
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations 
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the 
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect 
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. 
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 
110(a)(2) of the CAA include, but are not limited to the following: (1) 
Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable 
public notice and hearing; (2) provisions for establishment and 
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air 
quality; (3) implementation of a source permit program; provisions for 
the implementation of part C requirements (PSD); (4) provisions for the 
implementation of part D requirements for NSR permit programs; (5) 
provisions for air pollution modeling; and (6) provisions for public 
and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule 
development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain certain 
measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing 
to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, 
EPA has required certain states to establish programs to address the 
interstate transport of air pollutants in accordance with the 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call (63 FR 57356, October 27, 1998), amendments to 
the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call (64 FR 26298, May 14, 1999 and 65 FR 11222, 
March 2, 2000), and CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005). However, section 
110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requirements for a state are not linked with a 
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that 
state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant 
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The 
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to 
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular 
area in the state. Thus, EPA does not believe that these requirements 
are applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110(a)(2) elements 
of the CAA not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not 
linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements 
for purposes of redesignation. The Areas will still be subject to these 
requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that section 
110(a)(2) of the CAA and part D requirements which are linked with a 
particular area's designation and classification are the relevant 
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request, and that 
section 110(a)(2) elements of the CAA not linked in the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability 
of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels 
requirement. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings 
(61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-
Akron-Lorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and 
Tampa, Florida final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See 
also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation 
(65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000) and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 
redesignation (66 FR 53099, October 19, 2001).
    EPA has reviewed the Pennsylvania SIP and has concluded that it 
meets the general SIP requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA 
to the extent they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA 
has previously approved provisions of Pennsylvania's SIP addressing 
section 110(a)(2) requirements, including provisions addressing 
PM<INF>2.5</INF>. See 77 FR 58955 (September 25, 2012). These 
requirements are, however, statewide requirements that are not linked 
to the PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment status of the Areas. Therefore, 
EPA believes that these SIP elements are not applicable requirements 
for purposes of review of Pennsylvania's PM<INF>2.5</INF> redesignation 
requests.
b. Subpart 1 Requirements
    Subpart 1 sets forth the basic nonattainment plan requirements 
applicable to PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas. Under section 172 
of the CAA, states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing 
for timely attainment and meet a variety of other requirements. The 
General Preamble for Implementation of Title I discusses the evaluation 
of these requirements in the context of EPA's consideration of a 
redesignation request. The General Preamble sets forth EPA's view of 
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation 
requests when an area is attaining the standard. See 57 FR 13498 (April 
16, 1992).
    As noted previously, EPA has determined that the Areas have 
attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. 
Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.2004(c), the requirement for Pennsylvania to 
submit, for the Areas, attainment demonstrations and associated RACM, 
RFP plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to the 
attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS are suspended until the Areas are redesignated to attainment for 
the standards, or EPA determines that the Areas again violated the 
standards, at which time such plans are required to be submitted. Since 
attainment had been reached for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and the Areas continue to attain 
the standards, no additional measures are needed to provide for 
attainment. Therefore, the requirements of sections 172(c)(1), 
172(c)(2), 172(c)(6), and 172(c)(9) of the CAA are no longer considered 
to be applicable for purposes of redesignation of the Areas for the 
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    The requirement under section 172(c)(3) was not suspended by EPA's 
clean data determination for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and is the only remaining requirement under 
section 172 of the CAA to be considered for purposes of redesignation 
of the Areas.
    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires submission and approval of a 
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. As 
part of Pennsylvania's redesignation request submittals, Pennsylvania 
submitted a 2007 base year emissions inventory for the Areas for the 
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS which includes 
emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of point 
sources, nonroad mobile sources, area sources and on-road mobile 
sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are NO<INF>X</INF>, 
VOC, PM<INF>2.5</INF>, NH<INF>3</INF>, and SO<INF>2</INF>.

[[Page 62399]]

    In this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 
base year emissions inventory in accordance with section 172(c)(3) of 
the CAA for the Areas. Final approval of the 2007 base year emissions 
inventory will satisfy the emissions inventory requirement under 
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. For more information on the evaluation 
and EPA's analysis of the 2007 base year emissions inventory, see 
Appendices B and C of Pennsylvania's submittals and the emissions 
inventory technical support documents (TSDs) dated August 13, 2014 
available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-R03-
2014-0525. The summaries of the 2007 base year emissions inventory in 
tons per year (tpy) are shown in Tables 4, 5, and 6.

                                                Table 4--Harrisburg Area 2007 Emissions by Source Sector
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                                PM10            PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................           1,260             584           4,786           1,808              17             840
Area....................................................           8,944           3,059           2,194           3,216           6,935           8,768
Nonroad.................................................             369             346           4,443             188               4           4,489
Onroad..................................................           1,013             866          25,194             175             347           8,220
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................          11,586           4,855          36,617           5,388           7,302          22,317
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                   Table 5--York Area 2007 Emissions by Source Sector
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                                PM10            PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................           3,556           2,462          22,164         115,901              80           1,320
Area....................................................           8,093           2,394           1,680           1,684           3,316           5,956
Nonroad.................................................             214             202           2,660             135               2           1,833
Onroad..................................................             430             358          10,684              78             161           4,810
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................          12,292           5,417          37,189         117,798           3,559          13,920
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                              Table 6--Harrisburg-York Area 2007 Emissions by Source Sector
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                                PM10            PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................           4,815           3,046          26,950         117,709              96           2,160
Area....................................................          17,037           5,452           3,874           4,900          10,250          14,724
Nonroad.................................................             582             548           7,104             323               6           6,322
Onroad..................................................           1,443           1,225          35,878             254             509          13,030
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................          23,878          10,271          73,806         123,185          10,861          36,236
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and 
quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified 
stationary sources in an area, and section 172(c)(5) of the CAA 
requires source permits for the construction and operation of new and 
modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. 
EPA has determined that, since the PSD requirements will apply after 
redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the 
requirement that a nonattainment NSR program be approved prior to 
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the 
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is 
described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994 entitled, ``Part D NSR 
Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' 
Nevertheless, Pennsylvania currently has an approved NSR program, 
codified in the State's regulation at 25 Pa. Code 127.201. See 77 FR 
41276 (July 13, 2012) (approving NSR program into the SIP). See also 49 
FR 33127 (August 21, 1984) (approving Pennsylvania's PSD program). 
However, Pennsylvania's PSD program for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS will become effective in the Areas upon 
redesignation to attainment. See 49 FR 33128 (August 21, 1984) 
(approving PSD program into the SIP).
    Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires the SIP to meet the 
applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. As noted 
previously, EPA believes the Pennsylvania SIP revisions meet the 
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA that are applicable for 
purposes of redesignation.
    Section 175A of the CAA requires a state seeking redesignation to 
attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of 
the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10 years after the 
redesignation.'' In conjunction with its request to redesignate the 
Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions to 
provide for maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the Areas for at least 10 years after 
redesignation, through 2025. Pennsylvania is requesting that EPA 
approve these SIP revisions as meeting the requirement of section 175A 
of the CAA. Once approved, the maintenance plans for the Areas will 
ensure that the SIPs for Pennsylvania meet the requirements of the CAA 
regarding maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS for the Areas. EPA's analysis of the maintenance 
plan is provided in Section V.B. of today's proposed rulemaking action.
    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and 
procedures to ensure that Federally supported or funded projects 
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The 
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, 
programs, and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 of 
the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act

[[Page 62400]]

(transportation conformity) as well as to all other Federally supported 
or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation 
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity 
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability 
which EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA. EPA 
approved Pennsylvania's transportation conformity SIP requirements on 
April 29, 2009 (74 FR 19541).
    Thus, for purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, EPA determines 
that upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory 
as proposed in this rulemaking action, the Areas will meet all 
applicable SIP requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA for 
purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
c. Pennsylvania Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 
110(k) of the CAA
    Upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory 
proposed in this rulemaking action, EPA will have fully SIP-approved 
all applicable requirements of the Pennsylvania SIP revisions for the 
Areas for purposes of redesignaton to attainment for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in accordance with section 
110(k) of the CAA. As noted in this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing 
to approve the Areas' 2007 emissions inventory (submitted as part of 
the maintenance plans) as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) 
of the CAA for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. Therefore, upon approval of the 2007 emissions inventory, EPA 
will have satisfied all applicable requirements under part D of Title I 
of the CAA for the Areas.
3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
    As required by section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA, EPA is 
proposing to determine that Pennsylvania has demonstrated that the air 
quality improvement in the Areas is due to permanent and enforceable 
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and 
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other 
permanent and enforceable reductions.\12\ In making this demonstration, 
Pennsylvania has calculated the change in emissions between 2002 for 
the Harrisburg Area and 2005 for the York and Harrisburg-York Areas, 
which are years used to designate the Areas as nonattainment, and 2007, 
which is one of the years the Areas monitored attainment, as shown in 
Tables 7, 8, and 9. The reduction in emissions in tons per year, and 
the corresponding improvement in air quality from 2002 and 2005 to 2007 
in the Areas can be attributed to a number of regulatory control 
measures that have been implemented in the Areas and contributing areas 
in recent years. For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2002, 
2005, and 2007 emissions inventories, see EPA's emissions inventory 
TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available in the docket for this proposed 
rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov. Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-RO3-
2014-0525.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ It should be noted that the mobile source controls 
discussed in this section also provide reductions in VOC and/or 
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions. While those emissions may be reduced, the 
submitted maintenance plan and redesignation request do not rely on 
these emission reductions.

         Table 7--Emission Reductions From 2002 Base Year to 2007 Attainment Year in the Harrisburg Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Sector                2002            2007         Reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.................................  Stationary Point........             490             584             -94
                                        Area....................           3,935           3,059             876
                                        Highway Vehicle.........           1,053             866             187
                                        Nonroad.................             377             346              31
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................           5,855           4,855           1,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
NOX...................................  Stationary Point........           6,048           4,786           1,262
                                        Area....................           2,126           2,194             -68
                                        Highway Vehicle.........          33,823          25,194           8,630
                                        Nonroad.................           5,247           4,443             804
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          47,244          36,617          10,627
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
SO2...................................  Stationary Point........           1,875           1,808              67
                                        Area....................           2,983           3,216            -232
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             694             175             518
                                        Nonroad.................             414             188             226
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................           5,967           5,388             579
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
VOC...................................  Stationary Point........           1,082             840             242
                                        Area....................          10,633           8,768           1,866
                                        Highway Vehicle.........           9,940           8,220           1,720
                                        Nonroad.................           5,120           4,489             631
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          26,776          22,317           4,459
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
NH3...................................  Stationary Point........              11              17              -6
                                        Area....................           7,415           6,935             480
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             390             347              43
                                        Nonroad.................               3               4              -1
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------

[[Page 62401]]

 
                                           Total................           7,819           7,302             516
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


            Table 8--Emission Reductions From 2005 Base Year to 2007 Attainment Year in the York Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Sector                2005            2007         Reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.................................  Stationary Point........           4,804           2,462           2,342
                                        Area....................           3,254           2,394             860
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             131             358            -227
                                        Nonroad.................             221             202              18
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................           8,409           5,417           2,992
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
NOX...................................  Stationary Point........          14,054          22,164          -8,110
                                        Area....................           9,618           1,680           7,938
                                        Highway Vehicle.........           7,073          10,684          -3,612
                                        Nonroad.................           2,953           2,660             292
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          33,697          37,189          -3,492
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
SO2...................................  Stationary Point........         104,616         115,901         -11,285
                                        Area....................          13,937           1,684          12,253
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             170              78              91
                                        Nonroad.................             272             135             137
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................         118,995         117,798           1,198
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
VOC...................................  Stationary Point........               2           1,320          -1,318
                                        Area....................          11,148           5,956           5,192
                                        Highway Vehicle.........           4,849           4,810              39
                                        Nonroad.................           1,975           1,833             142
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          17,974          13,920           4,054
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
NH3...................................  Stationary Point........               1              80             -79
                                        Area....................           3,583           3,316             267
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             335             161             174
                                        Nonroad.................               2               2               0
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................           3,921           3,559             362
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


      Table 9--Emission Reductions From 2005 Base Year to 2007 Attainment Year in the Harrisburg-York Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Sector                2005            2007         Reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.................................  Stationary Point........           4,823           3,046           1,777
                                        Area....................           7,089           5,452           1,637
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             476           1,225            -749
                                        Nonroad.................             619             548              71
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          13,008          10,271           2,737
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
NOX...................................  Stationary Point........          14,169          26,950         -12,781
                                        Area....................          17,333           3,874          13,459
                                        Highway Vehicle.........          24,547          35,878         -11,331
                                        Nonroad.................           8,869           7,104           1,765
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          64,918          73,806          -8,888
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
SO2...................................  Stationary Point........         104,640         117,709         -13,069
                                        Area....................          18,443           4,900          13,543
                                        Highway Vehicle.........             590             254             336
                                        Nonroad.................             787             323             464
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................         124,459         123,185           1,274
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
VOC...................................  Stationary Point........              11           2,160          -2,149
                                        Area....................          23,688          14,724           8,964

[[Page 62402]]

 
                                        Highway Vehicle.........          15,072          13,030           2,042
                                        Nonroad.................           6,801           6,322             479
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          45,571          36,236           9,335
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
NH3...................................  Stationary Point........               1              96             -95
                                        Area....................          11,054          10,250             804
                                        Highway Vehicle.........           1,056             509             547
                                        Nonroad.................               6               6               0
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                           Total................          12,116          10,861           1,255
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Federal Measures Implemented
    Reductions in PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursor emissions have occurred 
statewide and in upwind states as a result of Federal emission control 
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the 
future.
Control of NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>
    PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations in the York and Harrisburg Areas 
are impacted by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, and the Areas' 
air quality is strongly affected by regulation of SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from power plants.
    NOX SIP Call--On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22 
states to reduce emissions of NO<INF>X</INF>, a precursor to ozone 
pollution.\13\ Affected states were required to comply with Phase I of 
the SIP Call beginning in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission 
reductions resulting from regulations developed in response to the 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call are permanent and enforceable. By imposing an 
emissions cap regionally, the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call reduced 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from large EGUs and large non-EGUs such as 
industrial boilers, internal combustion engines, and cement kilns. In 
response to the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted its 
NO<INF>X</INF> Budget Trading Program regulations for EGUs and large 
industrial boilers, with emission reductions starting in May 2003. 
Pennsylvania's NO<INF>X</INF> Budget Trading Program regulation was 
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795). To 
meet other requirements of the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, Pennsylvania 
adopted NO<INF>X</INF> control regulations for cement plants and 
internal combustion engines, with emission reductions starting in May 
2005. These regulations were approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on 
September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Although the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call was issued in order to 
address ozone pollution, reductions of NO<INF>X</INF> as a result of 
that program have also impacted PM<INF>2.5</INF> pollution, for 
which NO<INF>X</INF> is also a precursor emission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAIR--As previously noted, CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) created 
regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in 27 eastern states, including Pennsylvania. 
EPA approved the Commonwealth's CAIR regulation, codified in 25 Pa. 
Code Chapter 145, Subchapter D, into the Pennsylvania SIP on December 
10, 2009 (74 FR 65446). In 2009, the CAIR ozone season NO<INF>X</INF> 
trading program superseded the NO<INF>X</INF> Budget Trading Program, 
although the emission reduction obligations of the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP 
Call were not rescinded. See 40 CFR 51.121(r) and 51.123(aa). Data 
collected from EPA's long-term national air quality and deposition 
monitoring networks show that these regional cap-and-trade programs 
have been effective in reducing emissions of SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> nationwide.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Clean Air Interstate Rule, Acid Rain Program, and Former 
NO<INF>X</INF> Budget Trading Program, 2012 Progress Report 
(December 2013), available at http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/ARPCAIR_12_downloads/ARPCAIR12_01.pdf; Clean Air Interstate 
Rule, Acid Rain Program, and Former NO<INF>X</INF> Budget Trading 
Program, 2012 Progress Report (May 2014), available at http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/ARPCAIR_12_downloads/ARPCAIR12_02.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call and CAIR, SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from EGUs were significantly reduced statewide 
and in states upwind of the Harrisburg and York areas. Table 10 shows 
statewide EGU emissions data for 2002 and 2007 for the states that were 
determined to contribute significantly to air quality in the Harrisburg 
and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. See Air 
Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document included in the 
docket for this proposed rulemaking action. Table 10 also shows the 
level of emissions in the contributing states for 2013, the latest year 
for which annual data is available, which shows the continuing decline 
of SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in these states.

        Table 10--Comparison of 2002, 2007, and 2013 NOX and SO2 Emissions From EGUs for States That Contribute to the Harrisburg and York Areas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       NOX (tpy)                                           SO2 (tpy)
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      State                                                               Reductions                                          Reductions
                                                      2002         2007         2013      2002-2007       2002         2007         2013      2002-2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
District of Columbia \15\.......................          556          250           96          306        1,087          319  ...........          768
Illinois........................................      172,354      123,105       55,386       49,249      353,228      272,571      135,866       80,657
Indiana.........................................      281,146      198,501      103,120       82,645      778,868      714,529      268,217       64,339
Kentucky........................................      198,599      174,932       84,964       23,665      482,653      380,314      188,115      102,339
Maryland........................................       76,056       54,553       14,554       21,503      254,008      272,879       25,118       18,871
Michigan........................................      132,623      108,198       65,728       24,425      342,997      338,014      194,396        4,983
North Carolina..................................      145,706       64,770       49,059       89,936      462,993      370,827       48,154       92,166
New Jersey......................................       33,149       17,059        5,713       16,090       48,269       34,189        2,433       14,080
New York........................................       84,885       58,569       24,150       26,316      231,973      107,211       17,797      124,762

[[Page 62403]]

 
Ohio............................................      370,497      240,722       86,399      129,775    1,132,069      954,646      282,007      177,423
Virginia........................................       78,868       60,302       28,315       18,566      230,846      172,685       38,778       58,161
West Virginia...................................      225,371      153,514       60,111       71,857      507,110      371,996       86,201      135,114
                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................    1,799,808    1,254,475      577,595      554,027    4,826,101    3,990,180    1,287,082      835,921
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: EPA's Air Markets Program Data (AMPD). AMPD query results are included in the docket for this proposed rulemaking action.

    Table 10 shows that states impacting the York and Harrisburg Areas 
reduced NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from EGUs by 
554,027 tons and 835,921 tons, respectively, between 2002 and 2007. EPA 
has therefore determined that the significant reductions in 
NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> from upwind states and in 
Pennsylvania required under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call and CAIR have 
contributed to the air quality attainment in the Harrisburg and York 
areas. In addition, the NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions 
from these states further declined by 676,880 tons and 2,703,098 tons, 
respectively, from 2007 to 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The District of Columbia and Maryland were considered 
together in the contribution analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards

    These emission control requirements result in lower NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including sport utility 
vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in between 2004 and 2009. EPA 
estimated that, after phasing in the new requirements, the following 
vehicle NO<INF>X</INF> emission reductions will have occurred 
nationwide: Passenger cars (light duty vehicles) (77 percent); light 
duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 percent); and 
larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 95 
percent). Some of the emissions reductions resulting from new vehicle 
standards occurred during the 2008-2010 attainment period; however, 
additional reductions will continue to occur throughout the maintenance 
period as new vehicles replace older vehicles. EPA expects fleet wide 
average emissions to decline by similar percentages as new vehicles 
replace older vehicles.

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule

    EPA issued the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule in July 2000. This 
rule included standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel, 
which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007 
which reduced PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions from heavy-duty highway 
engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 
15 ppm. Standards for gasoline engines were phased in starting in 2008. 
The total program is estimated to achieve a 90 percent reduction in 
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and a 95 percent reduction in 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions for new engines using low sulfur diesel fuel.
Nonroad Diesel Rule
    On June 29, 2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA promulgated the Nonroad Diesel 
Rule for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in 
construction, agriculture, and mining, to be phased in between 2008 and 
2014. The rule phased in requirements for reducing the sulfur content 
of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The reduction in sulfur 
content prevents damage to the more advanced emission control systems 
needed to meet the engine standards. It will also reduce fine 
particulate emissions from diesel engines. The combined engine 
standards and the sulfur in fuel reductions will reduce NO<INF>X</INF> 
and PM emissions from large nonroad engines by over 90%, compared to 
current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel.
Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine Standards
    In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for groups of 
previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include large 
spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and airport 
ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-ignition 
engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, and 
snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission standards 
from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two tiers, with 
Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational vehicle 
emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012. Marine 
Diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009. With 
full implementation of all of the nonroad spark-ignition engine and 
recreational engine standards, an overall 80 percent reduction in 
NO<INF>X</INF> are expected by 2020. Some of these emission reductions 
occurred by the 2002-2007 attainment period and additional emission 
reductions will occur during the maintenance period as the fleet turns 
over.
Federal Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
    As required by the CAA, EPA developed Maximum Available Control 
Technology (MACT) Standards to regulate emissions of hazardous air 
pollutants from a published list of industrial sources referred to as 
``source categories.'' The MACT standards have been adopted and 
incorporated by reference in Section 6.6 of Pennsylvania's Air 
Pollution Control Act and implementing regulations in 25 Pa. Code Sec.  
127.35 and are also included in Federally enforceable permits issued by 
PADEP for affected sources. The Industrial/Commercial/Institutional 
(ICI) Boiler MACT standards (69 FR 55217, September 13, 2004, and 76 FR 
15554, February 21, 2011) are estimated to reduce emissions of PM, 
SO<INF>2</INF>, and VOCs from major source boilers and process heaters 
nationwide. Also, the Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) 
MACT will reduce NO<INF>X</INF> and PM emissions from engines located 
at facilities such as pipeline compressor stations, chemical and 
manufacturing plants, and power plants.
b. State Measures
Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program
    In 2002, Pennsylvania adopted the Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions 
Control Program for model years starting in May 2004. The program 
incorporates California standards by reference and required model year 
2005 and beyond heavy-duty diesel highway engines to be certified to 
the California standards, which were more stringent than the Federal 
standards for model years 2005

[[Page 62404]]

and 2006. After model year 2006, Pennsylvania required implementation 
of the Federal standards that applied to model years 2007 and beyond, 
discussed in the Federal measures section of this proposed rulemaking 
action. This program reduced emissions of NO<INF>X</INF> statewide.
Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program
    Pennsylvania's Vehicle Emission I/M program was expanded into the 
Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas in early 2004, and applies 
to model year 1975 and newer gasoline-powered vehicles that are 9,000 
pounds and under. The program, approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on 
October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313), consists of annual on-board diagnostics 
and gas cap test for model year 1996 vehicles and newer, and an annual 
visual inspection of pollution control devices and gas cap test for 
model year 1995 vehicles and older. This program reduces emissions of 
NO<INF>X</INF> from affected vehicles.
Consumer Products Regulation
    Pennsylvania regulation ``Chapter 130, Subchapter B. Consumer 
Products'' established, effective January 1, 2005, VOC emission limits 
for numerous categories of consumer product, and applies statewide to 
any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures such 
consumer products on or after January 1, 2005 for use in Pennsylvania. 
It was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on December 8, 2004 (69 FR 
70895).
    Based on the information summarized above, Pennsylvania has 
adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air quality in the 
Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas are due to permanent and 
enforceable emissions reductions. The reductions result from Federal 
and State requirements and regulation of precursors within Pennsylvania 
that affect the Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas.

B. Maintenance Plans

    On April 22, 2014, PADEP submitted maintenance plans for the 
Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, 
and a maintenance plan for the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as required by section 175A of the CAA. 
EPA's analysis for proposing approval of the maintenance plans is 
provided in this section.
1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    Section 172(c)(3) requires states to submit a comprehensive, 
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources in the 
nonattainment area. For a maintenance plan, states are required to 
submit an inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area 
which is sufficient to attain the NAAQS, referred to as the attainment 
inventory (or the maintenance plan base year inventory), and which 
should be based on actual emissions. PADEP submitted an attainment 
inventory for 2007, which is one of the years in the period during 
which the Harrisburg and York Areas monitored attainment of the 1997 
annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and Harrisburg-York Area monitored 
attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The inventory 
for 2007 is comprised of NO<INF>X</INF>, PM<INF>2.5</INF>, 
SO<INF>2</INF>, VOC, and NH<INF>3</INF> emissions from point sources, 
nonpoint sources, onroad mobile sources, and nonroad mobile sources.
    The 2007 point source inventory contained emissions for EGU and 
non-EGU sources in Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties that 
were directly reported by the facilities. Since the reported emissions 
did not include condensable emissions, the EGU inventory was augmented 
to account for condensable by application of emission factors developed 
by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) in 
2008. The nonpoint source emissions inventory for 2007 was developed 
using 2007 specific activity data along with EPA emission factors and 
the most recent available emission calculation methodologies. PADEP 
used the 2008 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data to fill in any 
missing categories in the 2007 inventory. For the 2007 nonroad mobile 
sources, PADEP generated emissions using EPA's National Mobile 
Inventory Model (NMIM) 2008 model. Since marine, air and rail/
locomotive (MAR) emissions are not part of the NONROAD model, they were 
calculated separately outside of the NONROAD model. The 2007 onroad 
mobile source inventory was developed using EPA's highway mobile source 
emissions model MOVES2010. PADEP used local activity to replace default 
inputs in the model where appropriate.
    EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and found the 
2007 emissions inventory acceptable for meeting the requirements under 
section 172(c)(3). For more information on the emissions inventory 
submitted by PADEP for the Areas and EPA's analysis of the emissions 
inventory, see Appendices B and C of the Pennsylvania submittals and 
the emissions inventory TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available on line 
at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-R03-2014-0525.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
    Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment 
to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in 
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has 
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten 
years following redesignation.'' Where the emissions inventory method 
of showing maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions 
during the maintenance period will not increase over the attainment 
year inventory. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum, pages 9-10.
    For a demonstration of maintenance, emissions inventories are 
required to be projected to future dates to assess the influence of 
future growth and controls; however, the maintenance demonstration need 
not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, 
supra. See also 66 FR 53099-53100; 68 FR 25430-32. PADEP uses 
projection inventories to show that the Areas will remain in attainment 
and developed projection inventories for an interim year of 2017 and a 
maintenance plan end year of 2025 to show that future emissions of 
NO<INF>X</INF>, SO<INF>2,</INF> VOC, and PM<INF>2.5</INF> will remain 
at or below the attainment year 2007 emissions levels throughout the 
Areas through the year 2025. Although emissions of NH<INF>3</INF> are 
projected to increase from 2007 to 2017 and from 2007 to 2025, the 
increase will not affect the Areas' ability to maintain the standard 
because it is more than compensated by the significant reductions of 
the other precursors in 2017 and 2025.
    The Federal and State measures described in Section V.A.3. of this 
proposed rulemaking action demonstrate that the reductions in emissions 
from point, area, and mobile sources in the Areas have occurred and 
will continue to occur through 2025. In addition, the following State 
and Federal regulations and programs ensure the continuing decline of 
SO<INF>2</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>, PM<INF>2.5</INF>, and VOC emissions in 
the Areas during the maintenance period and beyond:
Non-EGUs previously covered under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call
    Pennsylvania established NO<INF>X</INF> emission limits for the 
large industrial boilers that were previously subject to the 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, but were not subject to CAIR. For these units, 
Pennsylvania established an allowable ozone season NO<INF>X</INF> limit 
based on the unit's previous ozone season's heat input. A combined

[[Page 62405]]

NO<INF>X</INF> ozone season emissions cap of 3,418 tons applies for all 
of these units.
CSAPR (August 8, 2011, 76 FR 48208)
    If the CSAPR stay is lifted as requested by EPA, the implementation 
of CSAPR will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR.
Regulation of Cement Kilns
    On July 19, 2011 (76 FR 52558), EPA approved amendments to 25 Pa. 
Code Chapter 145 Subchapter C to further reduce NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions from cement kilns. The amendments established NO<INF>X</INF> 
emission rate limits for long wet kilns, long dry kilns, and preheater 
and precalciner kilns that are lower by 35% to 63% from the previous 
limit of 6 pounds of NO<INF>X</INF> per ton of clinker that applied to 
all kilns. The amendments were effective on April 15, 2011.
Stationary Source Regulations
    Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter D for 
Adhesives, Sealers, Primers, and Solvents was approved into the 
Pennsylvania SIP on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090). The regulation 
established VOC content limits for various categories of adhesives, 
sealants, primers, and solvent, and became applicable on January 1, 
2012.
    Amendments to Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, 
Subchapter B established, effective January 1, 2009, new or more 
stringent VOC standards for consumer products. The amendments were 
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63717).
Pennsylvania's Clean Vehicle Program
    The Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (formerly, New Motor 
Vehicle Control Program) incorporates by reference the California Low 
Emission Vehicle program (CA LEVII), although it allowed automakers to 
comply with the NLEV program as an alternative to this program until 
Model Year (MY) 2006. The Clean Vehicles Program, codified in 25 Pa. 
Code Chapter 126, Subchapter D, was modified to require CA LEVII to 
apply to MY 2008 and beyond, and was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP 
on January 24, 2012 (77 FR 3386). The Clean Vehicles Program 
incorporates by reference the emission control standards of CA LEVII, 
which, among other requirements, reduces emissions of NO<INF>X</INF> by 
requiring that passenger car emission standards and fleet average 
emission standards also apply to light duty vehicles. Model year 2008 
and newer passenger cars and light duty trucks are required to be 
certified for emissions by the California Air Resource Board (CARB), in 
order to be sold, leased, offered for sale or lease, imported, 
delivered, purchased, rented, acquired, received, titled or registered 
in Pennsylvania. In addition, manufacturers are required to demonstrate 
that the California fleet average standard is met based on the number 
of new light-duty vehicles delivered for sale in the Commonwealth. The 
Commonwealth's submittal for the January 24, 2012 rulemaking projected 
that, by 2025, the program will achieve 318 tons more NO<INF>X</INF> 
reductions than Tier II for the counties in the Harrisburg, York, and 
Harrisburg/York Areas.
Emission Limits on PPL Brunner Island
    In 2009, PPL installed a flue gas desulfurization system and 
electrostatic precipitators on Units 1, 2, and 3 at the PPL Brunner 
Island power plant located in York County, resulting in significant 
SO<INF>2</INF> reductions at the facility. The facility's Title V 
permit is Federally enforceable pursuant to section 502 of the CAA, and 
includes emission limits for PM, SO<INF>2</INF>, and NO<INF>X</INF> for 
Units 1, 2, and 3. Levels of SO<INF>2</INF> were significantly reduced 
from 106,148 tons in 2007 to 17,822 tons in 2010. EPA approved 
Pennsylvania's Title V program on July 30, 1996. 61 FR 39597.
    Two Pennsylvania regulations--its Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle 
Idling Act (August 1, 2011, 76 FR 45705) and its Outdoor Wood-Fired 
Boiler regulation (September 20, 2011, 76 FR 58114)--were not included 
in the projection inventories, but may also assist in maintaining the 
standard. Also, the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards 
(79 FR 23414, April 29, 2014) establishes more stringent vehicle 
emissions standards and will reduce the sulfur content of gasoline 
beginning in 2017. The fuel standard will achieve NO<INF>X</INF> 
reductions by further increasing the effectiveness of vehicle emission 
controls for both existing and new vehicles.
    The projection inventories for the 2017 and 2025 point, area, and 
nonroad sources were taken from regional inventories coordinated by 
MARAMA for the states in the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union 
and Virginia (MANE-VU+VA), which includes Pennsylvania. Detailed 
discussion of how 2017 and 2025 projections were developed are 
contained in Appendix C-2 and C-3, respectively, of Pennsylvania's 
submittals. EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and 
found the methodologies acceptable.
    EPA has determined that the 2017 and 2025 projected emissions 
inventories provided by PADEP are approvable. For more information on 
EPA's analysis of the emissions inventory, see EPA's TSDs dated August 
13, 2014, available on line at www.regulations.gov., Docket ID No. EPA-
OAR-R03-2014-0525. Tables 11, 12, and 13 provide a summary of the 
inventories for the 2007 attainment year, as compared to the projected 
inventories for the 2017 interim year and the 2025 maintenance plan end 
year for the Areas in tpy.

 Table 11--Comparison of 2007 Attainment Year and 2017 and 2025 Projected PM2.5 Emissions in the Harrisburg Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 (attainment)...............           4,855          36,617           5,388           7,302          22,317
2017 (interim)..................           4,240          22,862           4,598           7,819          16,393
2017 (projected decrease).......             615          13,755             790            -517           5,924
2025 (maintenance)..............           3,958          16,116           3,626           8,277          14,333
2025 (projected decrease).......             897          20,501           1,762            -975           7,984
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 12--Comparison of 2007 Attainment Year and 2017 and 2025 Projected PM2.5 Emissions in the York Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 (attainment)...............           5,417          37,189         117,798           3,559          13,920
2017 (interim)..................           4,915          28,859          16,441           3,663          10,886

[[Page 62406]]

 
2017 (projected decrease).......             502           8,330         101,357            -104           3,034
2025 (maintenance)..............           4,944          27,673          16,406           3,774           9,822
2025 (projected decrease).......             473           9,516          84,951            -215           4,098
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 13--Comparison of 2007 Attainment Year and 2017 and 2025 Projected PM2.5 Emissions in the Harrisburg-York
                                                      Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 (attainment)...............          10,271          73,806         123,185          10,861          36,236
2017 (interim)..................           9,155          51,721          21,038          11,483          27,279
2017 (projected decrease).......           1,116          22,085         102,147            -622           8,957
2025 (maintenance)..............           8,902          43,789          20,032          12,051          24,155
2025 (projected decrease).......           1,369          30,017         103,153          -1,189          12,081
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Tables 11, 12 and 13, the projected levels of 
PM<INF>2.5</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>, SO<INF>2</INF>, and VOC are well 
under the 2007 attainment year levels for each of these pollutants. 
While the emissions of NH<INF>3</INF> are projected to be higher than 
the 2007 inventory for this pollutant for both the interim year and the 
end-year, the significant decreases in the other precursors more than 
offset the increase, and thus EPA does not believe the increase in 
NH<INF>3</INF> will affect the Areas' ability to maintain the NAAQS. 
Pennsylvania has adequately demonstrated that the Areas will continue 
to maintain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
during the 10 year maintenance period.
3. Monitoring Network
    Pennsylvania's maintenance plans include a commitment to continue 
to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary to 
demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Pennsylvania currently 
operates a PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor in each of the counties in the 
Harrisburg Area, namely Cumberland, Dauphin, and Lebanon Counties, and 
a PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor on Hill Street in the York Area. In its 
April 22, 2014 submittals, Pennsylvania stated that it will consult 
with EPA prior to making any necessary changes to the network and will 
continue to quality assure the monitoring data in accordance with the 
requirements of 40 CFR part 58.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    To provide for tracking of the emission levels in the Areas, PADEP 
requires major point sources to submit air emissions information 
annually and prepares a new periodic inventory for all PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
precursors every three years in accordance with EPA's Air Emissions 
Reporting Requirements (AERR). Emissions information will be compared 
to the attainment year inventory (2007) to assure continued attainment 
with the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and 
will be used to assess emissions trends, as necessary. Also, as noted 
in the previous subsection, PADEP will continue to operate its 
monitoring system in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and remains 
obligated to quality-assure monitoring data and enter all data into the 
AQS in accordance with federal requirements. PADEP will use this data, 
supplemented with additional data, as necessary, to assure continuing 
attainment in the Areas.
5. Contingency Measures
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a 
violation of the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS that occurs in the 
Areas after redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a 
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to ensure that a state will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should 
identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and 
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s) 
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the 
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
    Pennsylvania's maintenance plans describe the procedures for the 
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to reduce emissions 
should a violation occur. Pennsylvania's contingency measures include a 
first level response and a second level response. A first level 
response is triggered for when the annual mean PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
concentration exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within 
the Areas, or if the periodic emissions inventory for the Areas exceed 
the attainment year inventory by more than ten percent. The first level 
response will consist of a study to determine if the emissions trends 
show increasing concentrations of PM<INF>2.5</INF>, and whether this 
trend is likely to continue. If it is determined through the study that 
action is necessary to reverse a trend of emissions increases, 
Pennsylvania will, as expeditiously as possible, implement necessary 
and appropriate control measures to reverse the trend.
    A second level response will be prompted if the two-year average of 
the annual mean concentration exceeds 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ within the Areas. 
This would trigger an evaluation of the conditions causing the 
exceedence, whether additional emission control measures should be 
implemented to prevent a violation of the standard, and analysis of 
potential measures that could be implemented to prevent a violation. 
Pennsylvania would then begin its adoption process to implement the 
measures as expeditiously as practicable.
    Pennsylvania's candidate contingency measures include the 
following: (1) A regulation based on the Ozone Transport Commission 
(OTC) Model Rule to update requirements for consumer products; (2) a 
regulation based on the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for 
industrial cleaning solvents; (3) voluntary diesel projects such as 
diesel retrofit for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets, 
idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives, and idling 
reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses, and 
other freight-handling facilities; (4) promotion of accelerated 
turnover of lawn and garden equipment, focusing on commercial 
equipment; and (5) promotion of

[[Page 62407]]

alternative fuels for fleets, home heating and agricultural use. 
Pennsylvania's rulemaking process and schedule for adoption and 
implementation of any necessary contingency measure is shown in the SIP 
submittals as being 18 months from PADEP's approval to initiate 
rulemaking. For all of the reasons discussed in this section, EPA is 
proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> maintenance plans for the Harrisburg, York, and 
Harrisburg-York Areas as meeting the requirements of section 175A of 
the CAA.

C. Transportation Conformity

    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires Federal actions in nonattainment 
and maintenance areas to ``conform to'' the goals of SIPs. This means 
that such actions will not cause or contribute to violations of a 
NAAQS, worsen the severity of an existing violation, or delay timely 
attainment of any NAAQS or any interim milestone. Actions involving 
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration 
(FTA) funding or approval are subject to the transportation conformity 
rule (40 CFR Part 93, subpart A). Under this rule, metropolitan 
planning organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas 
coordinate with state air quality and transportation agencies, EPA, and 
the FHWA and FTA to demonstrate that their long range transportation 
plans and transportation improvement programs (TIP) conform to 
applicable SIPs. This is typically determined by showing that estimated 
emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are 
less than or equal to the MVEBs contained in the SIP. On April 22, 
2014, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions that contain the 2017 and 
2025 PM<INF>2.5</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> onroad mobile source budgets 
for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties, Pennsylvania. 
Pennsylvania did not provide emission budgets for SO<INF>2</INF>, VOC, 
and NH<INF>3</INF> because it concluded, consistent with the 
presumptions regarding these precursors in the Transportation 
Conformity Rule at 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v), which predated and were not 
disturbed by the litigation on the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation 
Rule, that emissions of these precursors from motor vehicles are not 
significant contributors to the Area's PM<INF>2.5</INF> air quality 
problem. EPA issued conformity regulations to implement the 1997 annual 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in July 2004 and May 2005 (69 FR 40004, July 1, 
2004 and 70 FR 24280, May 6, 2005). Those actions were not part of the 
final rule recently remanded to EPA by the D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC 
v. EPA, No. 08-1250 (January 4, 2013), in which the D.C. Circuit Court 
remanded to EPA the 1997 PM<INF>2.5</INF> Implementation Rule because 
it concluded that EPA must implement that NAAQS pursuant to the PM-
specific implementation provisions of subpart 4, rather than solely 
under the general provisions of subpart 1. That decision does not 
affect EPA's proposed approval of the MVEBs for the Areas. The MVEBs in 
tpy are presented in Tables 14, 15, and 16.

 Table 14--MVEBs for Cumberland and Dauphin Counties for the 1997 PM2.5
                         and 2006 24-Hour NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                         PM2.5            NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017....................................             365           10287
2025....................................             275            7024
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Table 15--MVEBs for Lebanon County for the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 24-
                               Hour NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                         PM2.5            NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017....................................              76            2252
2025....................................              52            1446
------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Table 16--MVEBs for York County for the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 24-
                               Hour NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                         PM2.5            NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017....................................             192            5390
2025....................................             144            3398
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of MVEBs are 
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Additionally, to approve the MVEBs, EPA 
must complete a thorough review of the SIP, in this case the 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> maintenance plans, and conclude that with the 
projected level of motor vehicle and all other emissions, the SIPs will 
achieve its overall purpose, in this case providing for maintenance of 
the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA's 
process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of three basic 
steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2) 
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a 
public comment period; and (3) EPA taking action on the MVEB.
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA is initiating the process 
for determining whether or not the MVEBs are adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes. The publication of this document 
starts a 30-day public comment period on the adequacy of the submitted 
MVEBs. This comment period is concurrent with the comment period on 
this proposed action and comments should be submitted to the docket for 
this rulemaking. EPA may choose to make its determination on the 
adequacy of the budgets either in the final rulemaking on this 
maintenance plan and redesignation request or by informing Pennsylvania 
of the determination in writing, publishing a notice in the Federal 
Register and posting a notice on EPA's adequacy Web page (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm).\16\ However, 
EPA would not complete the adequacy process for these budgets in 
advance of the final rule approving the maintenance plan and 
redesignation request unless the D.C. Circuit Court lifts the stay on 
the implementation of CSAPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For additional information on the adequacy process, please 
refer to 40 CFR 93.118(f) and the discussion of the adequacy process 
in the preamble to the 2004 final transportation conformity rule. 
See 69 FR 40039-40043.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has reviewed the MVEBs and found them consistent with the 
maintenance plan and that the budgets meet the criteria for adequacy 
and approval. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> MVEBs for Cumberland, Dauphin, 
Lebanon, and York Counties for transportation conformity purposes 
provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA's motion to lift the 
stay of CSAPR, as discussed in detail in Section IV.B. of today's 
proposed rulemaking action. Additional information pertaining to the 
review of the MVEBs can be found in the TSDs dated September 3, 2014, 
available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0525.

VI. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve the redesignations of the Harrisburg-
Lebanon-Carlisle-York Areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA has evaluated 
Pennsylvania's redesignation requests and determined that the Areas 
meet the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA's motion to 
lift the stay of CSAPR. The monitoring data demonstrates that the Areas 
have attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS, and, for the reasons discussed previously, that they will 
continue to attain the NAAQS. Final approval of these redesignation 
requests would

[[Page 62408]]

change the designation of Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment 
to attainment for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, and the 
Harrisburg-York Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2006 24-
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the 
associated maintenance plans for the Areas as revisions to the 
Pennsylvania SIP because they meet the requirements of section 175A of 
the CAA as described previously in this proposed rulemaking notice. In 
addition, EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 base year emissions 
inventory as meeting the requirement of section 172(a)(3) of the CAA. 
Furthermore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for 
Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties for transportation 
conformity purposes. EPA is also initiating the process for determining 
whether the MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. 
EPA's proposed approval of Pennsylvania's redesignation requests, 
maintenance plans, and MVEBs in today's rulemaking action are 
contingent upon the lifting of the CSAPR stay. EPA is soliciting public 
comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will 
be considered before taking final action.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
    <bullet> Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
    <bullet> does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
    <bullet> is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
    <bullet> does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
    <bullet> does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
    <bullet> is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
    <bullet> is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
    <bullet> is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
    <bullet> does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 
redesignation requests, maintenance plans, 2007 base year emissions 
inventory, and MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes for the 
Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
and the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not 
approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes 
that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments 
or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 30, 2014.
Shawn M. Garvin,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2014-24596 Filed 10-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>