Document ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0533-0007
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-09-11T04:00Z

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0533; FRL-     ] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Centre County 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area’s
Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).   				

									

ACTION:  Proposed rule.

						

SUMMARY:  EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the Centre County ozone nonattainment area
(State College Area) be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).  EPA is proposing to
approve the ozone redesignation request for State College Area.  In
conjunction with its redesignation request, PADEP submitted a SIP
revision consisting of a maintenance plan for State College Area that
provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least
10 years after redesignation.  EPA is proposing to make a determination
that the State College Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based
upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality ozone
monitoring data for 2004-2006.  EPA’s proposed approval of the 8-hour
ozone redesignation request is based on its determination that the State
College Area has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment
specified in the Clean Air Act.  In addition, PADEP submitted a 2002
base year inventory for the State College Area which EPA is proposing to
approve as a SIP revision.  EPA is also providing information on the
status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the State College Area
maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, which EPA is
also proposing to approve.  EPA is proposing approval of the
redesignation request, and the maintenance plan and the 2002 base year
inventory SIP revisions in accordance with the requirements of the Clean
Air Act.

DATES:  Written comments must be received on or before [insert date 30
days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES:  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number
EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0533 by one of the following methods:

A.  	    HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov . 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

B.	E-mail:    HYPERLINK "mailto:powers.marilyn@epa.gov" 
powers.marilyn@epa.gov .

C.  	Mail:  EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0533, Marilyn Powers, Acting Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

 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-2007-0533.  EPA's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change, and may be made
available online at     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov" 
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 consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through     HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov  or e-mail.  The    
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov  website 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov" 
www.regulations.gov , your e-mail 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    
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  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     HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov" 
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, P.O. Box 8468,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by
e-mail at   HYPERLINK "mailto:quinto.rose@epa.gov"  quinto.rose@epa.gov
.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever “we”, “us”, or “our” is
used, we mean EPA.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.   	What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

II.   	What is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

III.  	What are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

IV.  	Why is EPA Taking These Actions?

V.  	What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

VI.  	What is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s Request?

VII.  	Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance 

	Plan for the State College Area Adequate and Approvable?

VIII.  	Proposed Action



Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

									

I.  What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

On June 12, 2007, PADEP formally submitted a request to redesignate the
State College Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS
for ozone.  Concurrently, on June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a
maintenance plan for the State College Area as a SIP revision to ensure
continued attainment for at least 10 years after redesignation.  PADEP
also submitted a 2002 base year inventory as a SIP revision on June 12,
2007.  The State College Area is currently designated as a basic 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area.  EPA is proposing to determine that the State
College Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that it has met the
requirements for redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
Clean Air Act.  EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the
redesignation request to change the designation of the State College
Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA
is also proposing to approve the State College Area maintenance plan as
a SIP revision, such approval being one of the Clean Air Act criteria
for redesignation to attainment status.  The maintenance plan is
designed to ensure continued attainment in the State College Area for
the next ten years.  EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base year
inventory for the State College Area as a SIP revision.  Additionally,
EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for the MVEBs
identified in the State College Area maintenance plan, and proposing to
approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
nitrogen oxides (NOx) for transportation conformity purposes.

							

II.  What is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A.  General

Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources.  Rather,
emissions of NOx and VOC react in the presence of sunlight to form
ground-level ozone.  The air pollutants NOx and VOC are referred to as
precursors of ozone.  The Clean Air Act establishes a process for air
quality management through the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of
0.08 parts per million (ppm).  This new standard is more stringent than
the previous 1-hour ozone standard.  EPA designated, as nonattainment,
any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data
for the three years of 2001-2003.  These were the most recent three
years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas.  The State
College Area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment status
in a Federal Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and published on
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of the 8-hour
health-based standard for ozone during the years 2001-2003.  

On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final rule (69 FR 23951, 23996) to
revoke the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the State College Area (as well as most
other areas of the country) effective June 15, 2005.  See, 40 CFR
50.9(b); 69 FR at 23966 (April 30, 2004); 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).

However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation Rule
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004).  South
Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.Cir. 2006).
 On June 8, 2007, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA,
Docket No. 04-1201, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the
D. C. Circuit clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with
regard to those parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged.
 Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for
areas currently classified under subpart 2 of  Title I,  Part D of the
Clean Air Act as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment dates
and the timing for emissions reductions needed for attainment of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS remain effective.  The June 8 decision left intact
the Court’s rejection of EPA’s reasons for implementing the 8-hour
standard in certain nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of
subpart 2.  By limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA’s
revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-backsliding provisions
of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been successfully challenged.  The June
8 decision reaffirmed the December 22, 2006 decision that EPA had
improperly failed to retain measures required for 1-hour nonattainment
areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1)
nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an
area’s 1-hour nonattainment classification; (2) Section 185 penalty
fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment areas; and (3) measures
to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the
Clean Air Act, on the contingency of an area not making reasonable
further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure
to attain that NAAQS. 

In addition, the June 8 decision clarified that the Court’s reference
to conformity requirements for anti-backsliding purposes was limited to
requiring the continued use of 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets
until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity
determinations, which is already required under EPA’s conformity
regulations.  The Court thus clarified that 1-hour conformity
determinations are not required for anti-backsliding purposes.  

The Court upheld EPA’s authority to revoke the 1-hour standard
provided there were adequate anti-backsliding provisions.  Elsewhere in
this document, mainly in section VI.B. “The State College Area Has Met
All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the Clean
Air Act and Has Fully Approved SIP under Section 110(k) of the Clean Air
Act,” EPA discusses its rationale why the decision in South Coast is
not an impediment to redesignating the State College Area to attainment
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

The Clean Air Act, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of provisions –
subpart 1 and subpart 2– that address planning and control
requirements for nonattainment areas.  Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as
“basic” nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive
requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant – including
ozone – governed by a NAAQS.  Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as
“classified” nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for
ozone nonattainment areas.  Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are
subject only to the provisions of subpart 1.  Other areas are also
subject to the provisions of subpart 2.  Under EPA’s 8-hour ozone
implementation rule, an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its
8-hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year average annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration), if it
had a 1-hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour
design value in the Clean Air Act for subpart 2 requirements).  All
other areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour design
values.  In 2004, State College Area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area based upon air quality monitoring data from
2001-2003, and therefore, is subject to the requirements of subpart 1 of
Part D.

 

Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08
ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered).  See 69 FR 23857,
(April 30, 2004) for further information.  Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements.  The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.  The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2004-2006 indicates that the
State College Area has a design value of 0.076 ppm.  Therefore, the
ambient ozone data for the State College Area indicates no violations of
the 8-hour ozone standard.

B.  The State College Area 

The State College Area consists of Centre County, Pennsylvania.  Prior
to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, State College
Area was an attainment/unclassifiable area for the 1-hour ozone
nonattainment NAAQS.  See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). 

On June 12, 2007, PADEP requested that the State College Area be
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured data
for the period of 2004-2006, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone
had been achieved in the State College Area.  The data satisfies the
Clean Air Act requirements when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration
(commonly referred to as the area’s design value) is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered).  Under
the Clean Air Act, a nonattainment area may be redesignated if
sufficient complete, quality-assured data is available to determine that
the area has attained the standard and the area meets the other Clean
Air Act redesignation requirements set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

III.  What are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

The Clean Air Act provides the requirements for redesignating a
nonattainment area to attainment.  Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act, 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); (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; and

(5) The State containing such area has met all requirements applicable
to the area under section 110 and Part D.

EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, on
April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April
28, 1992 (57 FR 18070).  EPA has provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following documents:



“Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations”, Memorandum
from Bill   Laxton, June 18, 1990;

“Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;

“Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,” Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;

“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992;

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to
Clean Air Act Deadlines,” Memorandum from John Calcagni Director, Air
Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;

“Technical Support Documents (TSD’s) for Redesignation Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 		

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993;

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management
Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, “Use of Actual
Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and CO Nonattainment
Areas,” dated November 30, 1993; 

“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; and 

“Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,” Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995. 

IV.  Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

On June 12, 2007, PADEP requested redesignation of the State College
Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  On June 12, 2007,
PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the State College Area as a SIP
revision to assure continued attainment at least 10 years after
redesignation.  EPA has determined that the State College Area has
attained the standard and has met the requirements for redesignation set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).  PADEP also submitted a 2002 base year
inventory concurrently with its maintenance plan as a SIP revision.

V.  What Would be the Effect of These Actions?

Approval of the redesignation request would change the designation of
the State College Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81.  It would also incorporate into the
Pennsylvania SIP a 2002 base year inventory and a maintenance plan
ensuring continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the State
College Area for the next 10 years.  The maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS
(should they occur), and identifies the MVEBs for NOx and VOC for
transportation conformity purposes for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018. 
These motor vehicle emissions (2004) and MVEBs (2009 and 2018) are
displayed in the following table:

Table 1: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in tons per day (tpd)

Year	NOx	VOC

2009	12.5	5.4

2018	  6.0	3.7

VI.  What is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s Request?   

EPA is proposing to determine that State College Area has attained the
8-hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation criteria have
been met.  The following is a description of how PADEP’s June 12, 2007
submittal satisfies the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
Clean Air Act.

A.  The State College Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

EPA is proposing to determine that the State College Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  For ozone, an area may be considered to be
attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50,
based on three complete and consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring data.  To attain this standard,
the design value, which is the 3-year average of the fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations, measured at each
monitor within the area over each year must not exceed the ozone
standard of 0.08 ppm.  Based on the rounding convention described in 40
CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value is
0.084 ppm or below.  The data must be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Air Quality System
(AQS).  The monitors generally should have remained at the same location
for the duration of the monitoring period required for demonstrating
attainment.

In the State College Area, there is one monitor that measures air
quality with respect to ozone.  As part of its redesignation request,
Pennsylvania submitted ozone monitoring data for the years 2004-2006
(the most recent three years of data available as of the time of the
redesignation request) for the State College Area.  This data has been
quality assured and is recorded in AQS.  The fourth-high 8-hour daily
maximum concentrations, along with the three-year average, are
summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: State College County Nonattainment Area Fourth Highest 8-hour
Average Values; State College County Monitor, AQS ID 42-027-0100        
                                     

Year	Annual 4th High Reading (ppm)

2004	0.069

2005	0.083

2006	0.078

The average for the 3-year period 2004 through 2006 is 0.076 ppm

The air quality data for 2004-2006 show that the State College Area has
attained the standard with a design value of 0.076 ppm.  The data
collected at the State College Area monitor satisfies the Clean Air Act
requirement that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08
ppm.  PADEP’s request for redesignation for the State College Area
indicates that the data was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58.  PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent database to maintain its
data and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy. 
In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan,
PADEP has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58.  In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by
Pennsylvania and taken from AQS indicates that State College Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

	

B.  The State College Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the Clean Air Act and Has a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act

EPA has determined that the State College Area has met all SIP
requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under section
110 of the Clean Air Act (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets
all applicable SIP requirements under Part D of Title I of the Clean Air
Act, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v).  In addition, EPA has
determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).  In making these proposed determinations, EPA
ascertained what requirements are applicable to the area and determined
that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are
fully approved under section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act.  We note that
SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable
requirements.

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (“Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992)
describes EPA’s interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) with respect to
the timing of applicable requirements.  Under this interpretation, to
qualify for redesignation, States requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant Clean Air Act requirements that come due
prior to the submittal of a complete redesignation request.  See also,
Michael Shapiro memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459,
12465-66, (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor). 
Applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act 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 Clean Air Act. 
Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).  See also, 68 FR
25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

This action also sets forth EPA’s views on the potential effect of the
Court’s rulings on this proposed redesignation action.  For the
reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court’s rulings
alter any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to
preclude redesignation, and do not prevent EPA from proposing or
ultimately finalizing this redesignation.  EPA believes that the
Court’s December 22, 2006 and June 8, 2007 decisions impose no
impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to
attainment, because even in light of the Court’s decisions,
redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions
of the Clean Air Act and longstanding policies regarding redesignation
requests.

1.  Section 110 General SIP Requirements

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the Clean Air Act 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)
include, but are not limited to, the following:

Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after reasonable
public notice and hearing; 

Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;

Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)); 

Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements for New Source
Review (NSR) permit programs;

Provisions for air pollution modeling; and 

Provisions for public and local agency participation in planning and
emission control rule development.

Section 110(a)(2)(D) 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 transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOx SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63
FR 57356), amendments to the NOx SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162).  However, the section 110(a)(2)(D)
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, we do not believe that these requirements are applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation.  In addition, EPA believes
that the other section 110 elements not connected with nonattainment
plan submissions and not linked with an area’s attainment status are
not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.  The State
College Area will still be subject to these requirements after it is
redesignated.  The section 110 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. 
This policy 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 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24816, 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
redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh
redesignation (66 FR at 50399, October 19, 2001).  Similarly, with
respect to the NOx SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule
to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOx SIP Call rules are not
“an ‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of section 110(l)
because the NOx rules apply regardless of an area’s attainment or
nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour) NAAQS.” 69 FR
23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).

     

EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request.  

Because the Pennsylvania SIP satisfies all of the applicable general SIP
elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2),  EPA concludes
that Pennsylvania has satisfied the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E)
regarding section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

2.  Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour and 8-Hour
Standards

The State College Area was designated a basic nonattainment area for the
8-hour ozone standard.  Sections 172-176 of the Clean Air Act, found in
subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements for
all nonattainment areas.  As discussed previously, because the State
College Area was designated unclassifiable/attainment under the 1-hour
standard, and was never designated nonattainment for the 1-hour
standard, there are no outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area
requirements it would be required to meet.  Thus, we find that the
Court’s ruling does not result in any additional 1-hour requirements
for purposes of redesignation.

With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA notes that the Court’s ruling
rejected EPA’s reasons for classifying areas under subpart 1 for the
8-hour standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency.  Consequently,
it is possible that this area could, during a remand to EPA, be
reclassified under subpart 2.  Although any future decision by EPA to
classify this under subpart 2 might trigger additional future
requirements for the area, EPA believes that this does not mean that
redesignation of the area cannot now go forward.  This belief is based
upon (1) EPA’s longstanding policy of evaluating requirements in
accordance with the requirements due at the time the request is
submitted; and (2) consideration of the inequity of applying
retroactively any requirements that might in the future be applied.

At the time the redesignation request was submitted, the State College
Area was classified under subpart 1 and was obligated to meet subpart 1
requirements.  Under EPA’s longstanding interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E) of Clean Air Act, to qualify for redesignation, states

requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete
redesignation request.  See September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum
(“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division).  See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) ( Redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor);  Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004)
(which upheld this interpretation);  68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12,
2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new SIP
requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was
submitted.  The D.C. Circuit recognized the inequity in such retroactive
rulemaking.  See, Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002),
in which the D.C. Circuit upheld a District Court’s ruling refusing to
make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past the
statutory due date.  Such a determination would have resulted in the
imposition of additional requirements on the area.  The Court stated: 
“Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment determination within
the statutory time frame, Sierra Club’s proposed solution only makes
the situation worse.  Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs
on the States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air
pollution prevention plan in 1997, even though they were not on notice
at the time.”  Id. at 68.  Similarly, here it would be unfair to
penalize the area by applying to it for purposes of resedignation
additional SIP requirements under subpart 2 that were not in effect at
the time it submitted its redesignation request. 

With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that
Pennsylvania’s SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D
of the Clean Air Act, because no 8-hour ozone standard Part D
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation became due prior
to submission of the redesignation request for the State College Area. 
Because the Commonwealth submitted a complete redesignation request for
the State College Area prior to the deadline for any submissions
required under the 8-hour standard, we have determined that the Part D
requirements do not apply to the State College Area for the purposes of
redesignation.

In addition to the fact that no Part D requirements applicable under the
8-hour standard became due prior to submission of the redesignation
request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the general
conformity and NSR requirements of Part D as not requiring approval
prior to redesignation.

With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 176(c) of
the Clean Air Act 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 U.S.C. and the
Federal Transit Act (“transportation conformity”) as well as to all
other Federally supported or funded projects (“general conformity”).
 State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
that the Clean Air Act required EPA to promulgate.

EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) since State conformity rules
are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules
apply where State rules have not been approved.  See, Wall v. EPA, 265
F. 3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation.  See
also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).

In the case of the State College Area, EPA has also determined that
before being redesignated, the State College Area need not comply with
the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation. 
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect.  The rationale for this position
is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, “Part D NSR
Requirements of Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.” 
Normally, State’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program will become effective in the area immediately upon redesignation
to attainment.  See the more detailed explanations in the following
redesignation rulemakings:  Detroit, MI (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7,
1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR 20458, 20469-70, May 7, 1996);
Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, 53669, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, MI
(61 FR 31831, 31836-31837, June 21, 1996).  In the case of the State
College Area, the Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations in the Pennsylvania
SIP (codified at 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1)) explicitly apply the requirements
for NSR in section 184 of the Clean Air Act to ozone attainment areas
within the ozone transport region (OTR).  The OTR NSR requirements are
more stringent than that required for a marginal or basic ozone
nonattainment area.  On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA fully
approved Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP revision consisting of
Pennsylvania’s Chapter 127 Part D NSR regulations that cover the State
College Area.

All areas in the OTR, both attainment and nonattainment, are subject to
additional control requirements under section 184 for the purpose of
reducing interstate transport of emissions that may contribute to
downwind ozone nonattainment.  The section 184 requirements include
reasonably Available control technology (RACT), NSR, enhanced vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M), and Stage II vapor recovery or a
comparable measure.

EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including the
NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation.  The
rationale for this is based on two considerations.  First, the
requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184 requirements
continues to apply to areas in the OTR after redesignation to
attainment.  Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as well
as RACT, and I/M programs even after redesignation.  Second, the section
184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to
the State College Area by virtue of the area’s designation and
classification.  See, 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62
FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997). 

In the case of the State College Area, which is located in the OTR,
nonattainment NSR will be applicable after redesignation.  As discussed
previously, EPA fully approved Pennsylvania’s NSR SIP revision which
applies the requirements for NSR of section 184 of the Clean Air Act to
attainment areas within the OTR.

3.  The State College Area Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of
Redesignation

EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of
redesignation.  EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request.  Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action.  See also, 68 FR
at 25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.  

The State College Area was a 1-hour attainment/unclassifiable area at
the time of its designation as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857).  Because the State College Area was a
1-hour attainment/unclassifiable area, there are no previous Part D SIP
submittal requirements.  Also, no Part D submittal requirements have
come due prior to the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for the
area.  Therefore, all Part D submittal requirements have been fulfilled.
 Because there are no outstanding SIP submission requirements applicable
for the purposes of redesignation of the State College Area, the
applicable implementation plan satisfies all pertinent SIP requirements.
 As indicated previously, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not
connected with Part D nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to
the area’s nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation.  EPA also believes that no 8-hour Part D
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation have yet become
due for the State College Area, and therefore they need not be approved
into the SIP prior to redesignation.

C.  The Air Quality Improvement in the State College Area 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

EPA believes that the Commonwealth has demonstrated that the observed
air quality improvement in the State College Area is due to permanent
and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of
the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted measures.  Emissions
reductions attributable to these rules are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Total VOC and NOx Emissions for 2002 and 2004 in tons per day
(tpd)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Year	Point	Area 	Nonroad	Mobile	Total 

Year 2002	0.1	6.8	3.1	8.1	18.1

Year 2004	0.1	6.7	3.1	7.0	16.9

Diff. (02-04)	0.0	-0.1	0.0	-1.1	-1.2

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Year	Point	Area 	Nonroad	Mobile	Total 

Year 2002	5.8	0.8	4.0	18.8	29.4

Year 2004	3.8	0.9	3.8	16.8	25.3

Diff. (02-04)	-2.0	0.1	-0.2	-2.0	-4.1

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions were reduced by 1.2 tpd, and NOx
emissions were reduced by 4.1 tpd.  These reductions and anticipated
future reductions are due to the following permanent and enforceable
measures implemented or in the process of being implemented in the State
College Area:

Stationary Point Sources 

Federal NOx SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)

Stationary Area Sources

Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003)

Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004)

     3.	Highway Vehicle Sources

	Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP)

		- Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991)

		- Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)

Heavy Duty Engines and Vehicles Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21, 1997
and 65 FR                           59896, October 6, 2000)

National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) (64 FR 72564, December 28, 1999)

	Vehicle Safety Inspection Program (70 FR 58313, October 6, 2005)

      4.   Nonroad Sources

	Nonroad Diesel Engine and Fuel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)	

EPA believes that permanent and enforceable emissions reductions are the
cause of the long-term improvement in ozone levels and are the cause of
the area achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.						

D.  The State College Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the Clean Air Act		

In conjunction with its request to redesignate the State College Area to
attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to provide for
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the State College Area for at
least 10 years after redesignation.  Pennsylvania is requesting that EPA
approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirement of section 175A of
the Clean Air Act.  Once approved, the maintenance plan for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the State College Area meets
the requirements of the Clean Air Act regarding maintenance of the
applicable 8-hour ozone standard.  

What is required in a maintenance plan?	 

Section 175A of the Clean Air Act sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment.  Under section 175A, 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
next 10-year period 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 8-hour
ozone violations.  Section 175A of the Clean Air Act sets forth the
elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment.  The Calcagni memo provides additional
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan.  An ozone maintenance
plan should address the following provisions:  

(1) an attainment emissions inventory;

(2) a maintenance demonstration;

(3) a monitoring network;

(4) verification of continued attainment; and

(5) a contingency plan.

Analysis of the State College Area Maintenance Plan

(a)  Attainment Inventory - An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment.  An attainment year of 2004 was used for the State
College Area since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year block of
2002-2004 and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of
the Clean Air Act requirements to date.  The 2004 inventory is
consistent with EPA guidance and is based on actual “typical summer
day” emissions of VOC and NOx during 2004 and consists of a list of
sources and their associated emissions.  

PADEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOx emissions inventories for the
State College Area, including point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile
non-road sources for a base year of 2002.

   

To develop the NOx and VOC base year emissions inventories, PADEP used
the following approaches and sources of data:

(i) Point source emissions – Pennsylvania requires owners and
operators of larger facilities to submit annual production figures and
emission calculations each year.  Throughput data are multiplied by
emission factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data System
and EPA’s publication series AP-42 and are based on Source
Classification Code (SCC).  Each process has at least one SCC assigned
to it.  If the owners and operators of facilities provide more accurate
emission data based upon other factors, these emission estimates
supersede those calculated using SCC codes.

(ii) Area source emissions – Area source emissions are generally
estimated by multiplying an emission factor by some known indicator or
collective activity for each area source category at the county level. 
Pennsylvania estimates emissions from area sources using emission
factors and SCC codes in a method similar to that used for stationary
point sources.  Emission factors may also be derived from research and
guidance documents if those documents are more accurate than FIRE and
AP-42 factors.  Throughput estimates are derived from county-level
activity data, by apportioning national and statewide activity data to
counties, from census numbers, and from county employee numbers.  County
employee numbers are based upon North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes to establish that those numbers are specific to the
industry covered.

(iii) On-road mobile sources - PADEP employs an emissions estimation
methodology that uses current EPA-approved highway vehicle emission
model, MOBILE 6.2, to estimate highway vehicle emissions.  The State
College Area highway vehicle emissions in 2004 were estimated using
MOBILE 6.2 and PENNDOT estimates of vehicles miles traveled (VMT) by
vehicle type and roadway type.

(iv) Mobile nonroad emissions – The 2002 emissions for the majority of
nonroad emission source categories were estimated using the EPA NONROAD
2005 model.  The NONROAD model estimates emissions for diesel, gasoline,
liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-fueled nonroad
equipment types and includes growth factors.  The NONROAD model does not
estimate emissions from aircraft or locomotives.  For 2002 locomotive
emissions, PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey using national
fuel information and EPA emission and conversion factors.  There are no
commercial aircraft operations in the State College Area.  For 2002
aircraft emissions, PADEP estimated emissions using small aircraft
operation statistics from   HYPERLINK "http://www.airnav.com" 
www.airnav.com , and emission factors and operational characteristics in
the EPA-approved model, Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS).

The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOx emissions for the State College
Area are summarized along with the 2009 and 2018 projected emissions for
this area in Tables 4 and 5, which cover the demonstration of
maintenance for this area.  EPA has concluded that Pennsylvania has
adequately derived and documented the 2004 attainment year VOC and NOx
emissions for this area.

(b)  Maintenance Demonstration - On June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a SIP
revision to supplement its June 12, 2007 redesignation request.  The
submittal by PADEP consists of the maintenance plan as required by
section 175A of the Clean Air Act.  The State College Area plan shows
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and
future emissions of VOC and NOx remain at or below the attainment year
2004 emissions levels throughout the State College Area through the year
2018.  A maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling.  See,
Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra.  See also, 66 FR at
53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-32.

Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOx emissions for the State College
Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018.  PADEP chose 2009 as an interim year in
the 10-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate that the VOC
and NOx emissions are not projected to increase above the 2004
attainment level during the time of the 10-year maintenance period.

Table 4: Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)

Source Category 	2004 VOC Emissions   	2009 VOC Emissions	2018 VOC
Emissions      

Mobile*	7.0	5.4	3.7

Nonroad	3.1	2.7	2.1

Area	6.7	6.4	6.7

Point	0.1	0.1	0.1

Total 	16.9	14.6	12.6

* Includes safety margin identified in the motor vehicle emission
budgets for transportation conformity.

Table 5: Total NOx Emissions 2004-2018 (tpd)

Source Category 	2004 NOx Emissions    	2009 NOx Emissions	2018 NOx
Emissions      

Mobile*	16.8	12.5	6.0

Nonroad	3.8	3.2	1.9

Area	0.9	0.9	0.9

Point	3.8	6.7	7.7

Total 	25.3	23.3	16.5

* Includes safety margin identified in the motor vehicle emission
budgets for transportation conformity.

	

The following programs are either effective or due to become effective
and will further contribute to the maintenance demonstration of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS:   

Pennsylvania’s Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8,
2004)

Pennsylvania’s Consumer Products (69 FR 70895, December 8, 2004)

Pennsylvania’s Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
(69 FR 68080, November 23, 2004)

Federal NOx SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001)

Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (71 FR 25328, April 28, 2006)

FMVCP for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks and cleaner gasoline
(2009 and 2018 fleet) – Tier 1 and Tier 2 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991
and 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000)

NLEV Program, which includes the Pennsylvania’s Clean Vehicle Program
for passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks (69 FR 72564, December 28,
1999) - proposed amendments to move the implementation to model year
(MY) 2008

Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006) (66
FR 5002, January 18, 2001)

Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel fuel (2007/2010)
(69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)

Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the attainment
year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA concludes that
PADEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour ozone standard
should be maintained in the State College Area.

							

(c)  Monitoring Network - There is currently one monitor measuring ozone
in the State College Area.  Pennsylvania will continue to operate its
current air quality monitor in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. 							

(d)  Verification of Continued Attainment - The Commonwealth will track
the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the State College Area by
reviewing air quality and emissions during the maintenance period.  The
Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of two key factors,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data and emissions reported from stationary
sources, and compare them to the assumptions about these factors used in
the maintenance plan.  The Commonwealth will also evaluate the periodic
(every three years) emission inventories prepared under EPA’s
Consolidated Emission Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51 Subpart A) to see
if the area exceeds the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10
percent.  Based on these evaluations, the Commonwealth will consider
whether any further emission control measures should be implemented.

(e) The Maintenance Plan’s Contingency Measures - The contingency plan
provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS
that occurs after redesignation.  Section 175A of the Clean Air Act
requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to ensure that the 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).

The ability of the State College Area to stay in compliance with the
8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOx
emissions in the area remaining at or below 2004 levels.  The
Commonwealth’s maintenance plan projects VOC and NOx emissions to
decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018.  The
Commonwealth’s maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce
emissions should a violation occur.

Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive years the
fourth highest eight-hour ozone concentrations at the State College Area
monitor are above 84 ppb.  If this trigger point occurs, the
Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional local emission control
measures should be implemented in order to prevent a violation of the
air quality standard.  PADEP will analyze the conditions leading to the
excessive ozone levels and evaluate what measures might be most
effective in correcting the excessive ozone levels.  PADEP will also
analyze the potential emissions effect of Federal, state and local
measure that have been adopted but no yet implemented at the time of
excessive ozone levels occurred.  PADEP will then begin the process of
implementing any selected measures.

Contingency measures will be considered in the event that a violation of
the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at the State College County,
Pennsylvania monitor.  In the event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone
standard, contingency measures will be adopted in order to return the
area to attainment with the standard.  Contingency measures to be
considered for the State College Area will include, but not limited to
the following:

Non-regulatory measures:

Voluntary diesel engine “chip reflash” – installation software to
correct the defeat device option on certain heavy duty diesel engines.

Diesel retrofit, including replacement, repowering or alternative fuel
use, for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets.

Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.

Idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses
and other freight-handling facilities.

Accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, especially commercial
equipment, including promotion of electric equipment.

Additional promotion of alternative fuel (e.g., biodiesel) for home
heating and agricultural use.

Regulatory measures:

Additional controls on consumer products

Additional control on portable fuel containers

The plan lays out a process to have any regulatory contingency measures
in effect within 19 months of the trigger.  The plan also lays out a
process to implement the non-regulatory contingency measures within
12-24 months of the trigger.

VII.  Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the State College Area Adequate
and Approvable?

A.  What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

Under the Clean Air Act, States are required to submit, at various
times, control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. 
These control strategy SIPs (i.e. RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration
SIPs) and maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from
on-road mobile sources.  Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs
must be established in an ozone maintenance plan.  A MVEB is the portion
of the total allowable emissions that is allocated to highway and
transit vehicle use and emissions.  A MVEB serves as a ceiling on
emissions from an area’s planned transportation system.  The MVEB
concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188).  The preamble also
describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy SIPs
and maintenance plans.  

Under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, new transportation projects,
such as the construction

of new highways, must “conform” to (i.e., be consistent with) the
part of the State’s air

quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. 
“Conformity” to the SIP means

that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing

violations, or delay timely attainment of or reasonable progress towards
the NAAQS.  If a transportation plan does not “conform,” most new
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and ensuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a SIP.

When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs or maintenance
plans containing

MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget contained therein
“adequate” for

use in determining transportation conformity.  After EPA affirmatively
finds the submitted

MVEB is adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can
be used by State

and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation
projects “conform” to

the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act.  EPA’s
substantive criteria for determining “adequacy” of a MVEB are set
out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).

EPA’s process for determining “adequacy” consists of three basic
steps:  public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA’s adequacy finding.  This process for determining the
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA’s May
14, 1999 guidance, “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2,
1999, Conformity Court Decision.”  This guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the “New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments
- Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change” on July 1,
2004 (69 FR 40004).  EPA consults this guidance and follows this
rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.

The MVEBs for the State College Area are listed in Table 1 of this
document for the 2004, 2009, and 2018 years and are the projected
emissions for the on-road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety
margin allocated to the MVEBs.  These emission budgets, when approved by
EPA, must be used for transportation conformity determinations.

B.  What Is a Safety Margin?

A “safety margin” is the difference between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from
all sources) in the maintenance plan.  The attainment level of emissions
is the level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met
the NAAQS.  The following example is for the 2018 safety margin:  the
State College Area first attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the 2002
to 2004 time period.  The Commonwealth used 2004 as the year to
determine attainment levels of emissions for the State College Area.  

The total emissions from point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile
non-road sources in 2004 equaled 16.9 tpd of VOC and 25.3 tpd of NOx. 
PADEP projected emissions out to the year 2018 and projected a total of
12.6 tpd of VOC and 16.5 tpd of NOx from all sources in the State
College Area.  The safety margin for the State College Area for 2018
would be the difference between these amounts, or 4.3 tpd of VOC and 8.8
tpd of NOx.  The emissions up to the level of the attainment year
including the safety margins are projected to maintain the area's air
quality consistent with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  The safety margin is
the extra emissions reduction below the attainment levels that can be
allocated for emissions by various sources as long as the total emission
levels are maintained at or below the attainment levels.  Table 6 shows
the safety margins for the 2009 and 2018 years.

Table 6:  2009 and 2018 Safety Margins for the State College Area 

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpd)	NOx Emissions (tpd)

2004 Attainment	16.9	25.3

2009 Interim	14.6	23.3

2009 Safety Margin	2.3	2.0

2004 Attainment	16.9	25.3

2018 Final	12.6	16.5

2018 Safety Margin	4.3	8.8

PADEP allocated 0.4 tpd NOx and 0.3 tpd VOC to the 2009 interim VOC
projected on-road mobile source emissions projection and the 2009
interim NOx projected on-road mobile source emissions projection to
arrive at the 2009 MVEBs.  For the 2018 MVEBs the PADEP allocated 0.5
tpd NOx and 0.4 tpd VOC from the 2018 safety margins to arrive at the
2018 MVEBs.  Once allocated to the mobile source budgets these portions
of the safety margins are no longer available, and may no longer be
allocated to any other source category.  Table 7 shows the final 2009
and 2018 MVEBs for the State College Area.

Table 7:  2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for the State College Area 

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpd)	NOx Emissions (tpd)

2009 projected on-road mobile source projected emissions	5.1	12.1

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.3	0.4

2009 MVEBs	5.4	12.5

2018 projected on-road mobile source projected emissions	3.3	5.5

2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.4	0.5

2018 MVEBs	3.7	6.0

			

C.  Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

The 2004, 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the State College Area are approvable
because the MVEBs for NOx and VOC, including the allocated safety
margins, continue to maintain the total emissions at or below the
attainment year inventory levels as required by the transportation
conformity regulations.

								

D.  What Is the Adequacy and Approval Process for the MVEBs in the State
College Area Maintenance Plan?

The MVEBs for the State College Area maintenance plan are being posted
to EPA's conformity website concurrent with this proposal.  The public
comment period will end at the same time as the public comment period
for this proposed rule.  In this case, EPA is concurrently processing
the action on the maintenance plan and the adequacy process for the
MVEBs contained therein.  In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to
find the MVEBs adequate and also proposing to approve the MVEBs as part
of the maintenance plan.  The MVEBs cannot be used for transportation
conformity until the maintenance plan update and associated MVEBs are
approved in a final Federal Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds the
budgets adequate in a separate action following the comment period.

If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the State College Area MVEBs, or any other aspect of our
proposed approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will respond to
the comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with the
adequacy process as a separate action.  Our action on the State College
Area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web site:

  HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov.otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm"
 http://www.epa.gov.otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm  (once
there, click on “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions”).

VIII.   Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to determine that the State College Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the
Commonwealth’s June 12, 2007 request for the State College Area to be
redesignated to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone.  EPA has
evaluated Pennsylvania’s redesignation request and determined that it
meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act.  EPA believes that the redesignation request and
monitoring data demonstrate that the area has attained the 8-hour ozone
standard.  The final approval of this redesignation request would change
the designation of the State College Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance plan and the 2002 base year inventory
for State College Area, submitted on June 12, 2007, as revisions to the
Pennsylvania SIP.  EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance plan for
the State College Area because it meets the requirements of section 175A
as described previously in this notice.  EPA is also proposing to
approve the MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for the State College Area
in conjunction with its redesignation request.  EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this document.  These comments will
be considered before taking final action.

IX.  Statutory and Executive Order Reviews   

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore
is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For
this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
"Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use"  (66 Fed. Reg. 28355 (May 22, 2001)).  This action
merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the
Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements on small entities. 
Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. 
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements on small entities. 
Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 
Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under
state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).  Because this
action affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any
new requirements on sources, or allows the state to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements, this proposed rule also does not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely proposes to approve a
state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act.  This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because
it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.  

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.  In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS.  It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act.  Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new requirements on sources.  Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of
1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.  As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this
proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct.  EPA has complied with Executive
Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings
implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General’s
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order.  

This rule proposing to approve the redesignation of the State College
Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated
maintenance plan, the 2002 base year inventory, and the MVEBs identified
in the maintenance plan, does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects    

40 CFR Part 52 

				

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen Oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. 

			

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National Parks, Wilderness Areas.

							

										

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

August 30, 2007					/s/

                                                                       
__________________      

Dated:                                 		            Donald S. Welsh,

						Regional Administrator, 				

						Region III.						

  PAGE   4 

  PAGE   11 

  PAGE   37 

  PAGE   46