Document ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605-0011
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-09-27T04:00Z

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

	[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605; FRL-      ] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 8-hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the 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) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre ozone nonattainment
area (“Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area” or “Area”) be redesignated as
attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS).  The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is comprised of Lackawanna,
Luzerne, Monroe and Wyoming Counties.  EPA is proposing to approve the
ozone redesignation request for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.  In
conjunction with its redesignation request, the Commonwealth submitted a
SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based upon three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring data for 2004-2006. 
EPA’s proposed approval of the 8-hour ozone redesignation request is
based on its determination that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has met
the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in the Clean Air
Act.  In addition, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has also submitted a
2002 base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, and EPA is
proposing to approve that inventory for the Area 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 maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
for purposes of transportation conformity, and is proposing to approve
those MVEBs.  EPA is proposing approval of the redesignation request,
the maintenance plan, and 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-2007-0605 by one of the following methods:

A.  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-2007-0605, Marilyn Powers, Acting Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, 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-2007-0605.  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
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or
e-mail.  The 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
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
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:  Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by e-

mail at   HYPERLINK "mailto:rehn.brian@epa.gov"  rehn.brian@epa.gov .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

What Are the Clean Air Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

 What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

 Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

 What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

 What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Commonwealth’s Request?

 Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified in
the Maintenance Plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Adequate and
Approvable? 

Proposed Actions

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

What Are the Clean Air Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?

On June 12, 2007, the PADEP formally submitted a request to redesignate
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to attainment of the
8-hour NAAQS for ozone.  Concurrently, Pennsylvania submitted a
maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision to
ensure continued attainment in the Area over the next 11 years.  PADEP
also submitted a 2002 base-year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area as a SIP revision.  The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is comprised of
Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, and Wyoming Counties.  It is currently
designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.  EPA is proposing to
determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre maintenance plan as a SIP revision for the
Area (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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the
next 11 years.  EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision. 
Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for
the MVEBs identified in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre maintenance plan, and
proposing to approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) for the Area 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 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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area (as well
as most other areas of the country), effective June 15, 2005.  See 40
CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (April 30, 2004); 70 FR 44470 (August 3,
2005). 

However, o  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 n 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) (hereafter “South Coast”).  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.  
Elsewhere in this document, mainly in section VI. B. “The
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 discusses its
rationale why the decision in South Coast is not an impediment to
redesignating the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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.  In 2004, the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was classified a basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003. 
Therefore, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area 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 indicates that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has a
design value of 0.075 ppm for the 3-year period of 2004-2006, using
complete, quality-assured data.  Therefore, the ambient ozone data for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour
ozone standard.  

 The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area

The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area consists of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe,
and Wyoming Counties in Pennsylvania.  Prior to its designation as an
8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was a
marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment Area (which included Columbia
County, in addition to those counties comprising the 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area).  Therefore, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was
subject to requirements for marginal nonattainment areas pursuant to
section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act.  See 56 FR 56694 (November 6,
1991).  EPA determined that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 1-hour ozone
nonattainment Area had attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the November
15, 1993 attainment date (60 FR 3349, January 17, 1995).  

On June 12, 2007, the PADEP requested that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area be redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  The
redesignation request included three 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.  The data
satisfies the Clean Air Act requirements that 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), must be 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 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)
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 redesignations in the General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act, 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 (Act) Deadlines,” Memorandum from John Calcagni
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;

“Technical Support Documents (TSDs) 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, the PADEP requested redesignation of the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. 
On June 12, 2007, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area as a SIP revision, to ensure continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the next 11 years, until 2018.
 PADEP also submitted a 2002 base-year inventory concurrently with its
maintenance plan as a SIP revision.  EPA has determined that the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and
has met the requirements for redesignation set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E).  

V.  What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

Approval of the redesignation request would change the official
designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the next 11 years, until
2018.  The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy any
future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), and
identifies the NOx and VOC MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes
for the years 2009 and 2018.  These MVEBs are displayed in the following
table: 

Table 1:  Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets, in Tons
per Summer Day (tpsd)

Year	VOC	NOx

2009 	25.2	48.3

2018	16.9	23.7

VI.  What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Commonwealth’s Request?

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

A.  The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has Attained the 8-Hour NAAQS

EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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, 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 Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Area, there were four ozone monitors that
measured ambient ozone air quality between 2004 and 2006.  Two of these
monitors are located in Lackawanna County and two are in Luzerne County.
 As part of its redesignation request, Pennsylvania referenced ozone
monitoring data for the years 2004-2006 for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area.  This data has been quality assured and is recorded in the AQS. 
The PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent database to maintain its data
and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy.  The
fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum concentrations for the period from
2004-2006, along with the three-year average, are summarized in Table 2.
  

Table 2:  Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Fourth Highest 8-hour Average
Values (2004-2006)

Monitor / County / AIRS ID	Annual 4th Highest Reading (ppm)

	2004	2005	2006

Wilson Fire Company Monitor, Lackawanna County, 

AQS ID 42-069-0101	0.071	0.080	0.071

City of Scranton Monitor, 

Luzerne County

AQS ID 42-069-2006	0.073	0.080	0.070

Nanticoke Monitor, 

Luzerne County

AQS ID 42-079-1100	0.068	0.074	0.064

Wilkes-Barre Monitor, 

Luzerne County

AQS ID 42-079-1101	0.073	0.081	0.073

The Area design value for the 3-year period 2004-2006 is 0.075 ppm 

(based on Wilkes-Barre Monitor/AQS ID 42-079-1101)

The air quality data for 2004-2006 show that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area has attained the standard with a design value of 0.075 ppm.  The
data collected at the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area monitors 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.  The PADEP’s request for redesignation for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area indicates that the data is complete and
was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.  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
data taken from AQS indicate that the Area has attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.  

B.  The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 which requirements are applicable to the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 came 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 at
25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

This section 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
alters 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 includes 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 requirements (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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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, 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 redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at 53099, 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(1) 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. 
As we explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area prior to submission of the redesignation
request

 2.  Part D Nonattainment Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard 

Pursuant to an April 30, 2004, final rule (69 FR 23951), the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a basic nonattainment area
under subpart 1 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 applicable to all nonattainment areas. 
Section 182 of the Clean Air Act, found in subpart 2 of Part D,
establishes additional specific requirements depending on the area’s
nonattainment classification.  

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 With respect to the 8- hour standard, 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 area 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
redesignation requests 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.

First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was classified under subpart 1 and was
obligated to meet only subpart 1 requirements.  Under EPA’s
longstanding interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 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.  See 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 has recognized the inequity in such
retroactive rulemaking, 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 plans 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 redesignation additional SIP requirements under subpart 2
that were not in effect at the time it submitted its redesignation
request.   

With respect to 8-hour subpart 2 requirements, if the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area initially had been classified under subpart
2, the first two Part D subpart 2 requirements applicable to the Area
under section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act would be: a base-year
inventory requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air
Act, and, the emissions statement requirement pursuant to section
182(a)(3)(B).

As stated previously, these requirements are not yet due for purposes of
redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, but nevertheless,
Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP, an emissions statement
rule for the 1-hour standard that covers all portions of the designated
8-hour nonattainment area and, that satisfies the emissions statement
requirement for the 8-hour standard.  See, 25 Pa. Code 135.21(a)(1),
codified at 40 CFR 52.2020; 60 FR 2881, January 12, 1995.  With respect
to the base-year inventory requirement, in this notice of proposed
rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base-year inventory for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which was submitted on June 12, 2007,
concurrently with its maintenance plan SIP revision.  EPA is proposing
to approve the 2002 base-year inventory as fulfilling the requirements
of both section 182(a)(1) and section 172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act.  A
detailed evaluation of Pennsylvania’s 2002 base-year inventory for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area can be found in a Technical Support Document
(TSD) prepared by EPA for this rulemaking.  EPA has determined that the
emission inventory and emissions statement requirements for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area have been satisfied.  

In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the
redesignation request, EPA believes that the general conformity and NSR
requirements do not require 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 the 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, EPA has also determined
that before being redesignated, the Area need not comply with the
requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation.  EPA
has 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
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.''  Normally, a
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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.  

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 reasonably available control technology (RACT), and Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance programs even after redesignation. Second,
the section 184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not
apply to the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area solely 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). 

Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard

In its June 8, 2007 decision, the Court limited its vacatur so as to
uphold those provisions of the anti-backsliding requirements that were
not successfully challenged.  Therefore the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area
must meet the federal anti-backsliding requirements.  See 40 CFR 51.900,
et seq.; 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005), which apply by virtue of the
Area's classification for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.  As set forth in more
detail below, the Area must also address four additional
anti-backsliding provisions identified by the Court in its decisions.  	
								

The anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR 51.905(a)(1) prescribe 1-hour
ozone NAAQS requirements that continue to apply after revocation of the
1-hour ozone NAAQS to former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas.  Section
51.905(a)(1)(i) provides that:  

“The area remains subject to the obligation to adopt and implement the
applicable requirements as defined in section 51.900(f), except as
provided in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of paragraph (b) of this section.” 

Section 51.900(f), as amended by 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005),
states that: 

“Applicable requirements means for an area the following requirements
to the extent such requirements applied to the area for the area's
classification under section 181(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act for the
1-hour NAAQS at the time of designation for the 8-hour NAAQS.

		(1)  Reasonably available control technology (RACT).

		(2)  Inspection and maintenance programs (I/M).

		(3)  Major source applicability cut-offs for purposes of RACT.

		(4)  Rate of Progress (ROP) reductions.

		(5)  Stage II vapor recovery.

		(6)  Clean fuels fleet program under section 183(c)(4) of the Clean
Air Act.

		(7)  Clean fuels for boilers under section 182(e)(3) of the Clean Air
Act.

		(8)  Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) during heavy traffic hours
as

required by section 182(e)(4) of the Clean Air Act.

		(9)  Enhanced (ambient) monitoring under section 182(c)(1) of the
Clean Air Act.

		(10)  Transportation control measures (TCMs) under section 

182(c)(5) of the Clean Air Act.

(11)  Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) provisions of section 182(d)(1) of
the Clean Air Act.

		(12)  NOx requirements under section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act.

		(13)  Attainment demonstration or alternative as provided under
section				51.905(a)(1)(ii).”

Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.905(c), the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is subject
to the obligations set forth in 51.905(a) and 51.900(f).  

Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area was designated a marginal nonattainment area
for the 1-hour standard.  With respect to the 1-hour standard, the
applicable requirements under the anti-backsliding provisions at 40 CFR
51.905(a)(1) for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are limited to RACT and
I/M programs specified in section 182(a) of the Clean Air Act and are
discussed in the following paragraphs:  

Section 182(a)(2)(A) required SIP revisions to correct or amend RACT for
sources in marginal areas, such as the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, that
were subject to control technique guidelines (CTGs) issued before
November 15, 1990 pursuant to Clean Air Act section 108.  On December
22, 1994, EPA fully approved into the Pennsylvania SIP all corrections
required under section 182(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act (59 FR 65971,
December 22, 1994).  EPA believes that this requirement applies only to
marginal and higher classified areas under the 1-hour NAAQS pursuant to
the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act; therefore, this is a one-time
requirement.  After an area has fulfilled the section 182(a)(2)(A)
requirement for the 1-hour NAAQS, there is no requirement under the
8-hour NAAQS. 

Section 182(a)(2)(B) relates to the savings clause for vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M). It requires marginal areas to adopt
vehicle I/M programs.  This provision was not applicable to the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area because this area did not have, and was not
required to have, an I/M program before November 15, 1990.

In addition the Court held that EPA should have retained four additional
measures in its anti-backsliding provisions: (1) nonattainment area NSR
; (2) Section 185 penalty fees; (3) contingency measures under section
172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act; and (4) 1-hour motor
vehicle emission budgets that were yet not replaced by 8-hour emissions
budgets.  These requirements are addressed below:

With respect to NSR, EPA has determined that areas being redesignated
need not have an approved nonattainment New Source Review program, for
the same reasons discussed previously with respect to the applicable
Part D requirement for the 8-hour standard.  

The section 185 penalty fee requirement was not applicable in the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 1-hour marginal nonattainment area.  

With respect to the requirement for submission of contingency measures
for the 1-hour standard, section 182(a) does not require contingency
measures for marginal areas

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The conformity portion of the Court’s ruling
does not impact the redesignation request for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area except to the extent that the Court in its June 8 decision
clarified that for those areas with 1-hour MVEBs, anti-backsliding
requires that those 1-hour budgets must be used for 8-hour conformity
determinations until replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet this
requirement, conformity determinations in such areas must comply with
the applicable requirements of EPA’s conformity regulations at 40 CFR
Part 93.  The court clarified that 1-hour conformity determinations are
not required for anti-backsliding purposes.

Thus EPA has concluded that the area has met all requirements applicable
for redesignation under the 1-hour standard.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 4.  Transport Region
Requirements

All areas in the Ozone Transport Region (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 RACT, NSR, enhanced vehicle inspection
and maintenance (I/M), and Stage II vapor recovery or a comparable
measure.   

In the case of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which is located in the
OTR, nonattainment NSR will continue to be applicable after
redesignation.  On October 19, 2001, EPA approved the 1-hour NSR SIP
revision for the Area.  See 66 FR 53094 (October 19, 2001).   

EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including
NSR, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation.  Reading, PA
Redesignation, 61 FR 53174, (October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24826 (May 7,
1997).  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 Commonwealth remains obligated to have NSR,
as well as RACT, and I/M even after redesignation.  Second, the section
184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to
the area by virtue of the area’s nonattainment designation and
classification, and thus are properly considered not relevant to an
action changing an area’s designation.  See 61 FR 53174, 53175-6
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997).  

5.  Scranton/Wilkes-Barre has a Fully Approved SIP for Purposes of
Redesignation  

EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of this
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, 68 FR at
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein. 

C.  The Air Quality Improvement in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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
summer day (tpsd)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Year	Point*	Area	Nonroad Mobile	Highway 

Mobile	Total

2002	4.6	36.0	36.6	19.0	96.2

2004	3.8	35.3	31.6	18.9	89.6

Difference (2002-04)	-0.8	-0.7	-5.0	-0.1	 -6.6

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Year	Point*	Area	Nonroad Mobile	Highway Mobile	Total

2002	8.4	3.8	74.4	11.3	97.9

2004	7.0	3.9	66.1	10.9	87.9

Difference (2002-04)	-1.4	+0.1	-8.3	-0.4	 -10.0

* The stationary point source emissions shown do not include banked
emissions reduction credits (ERCs) for sources listed in Technical
Appendix A-4 to Pennsylvania’s SIP submission.  

The banked ERCs include the following:

MACtac, Scranton Facility - 0.20 tpsd VOC

Proctor & Gamble, Hehoopany - 1.70 tpsd VOC and 0.73 tpsd NOx

TECHNEGLAS, Pittston – 2.11 tpsd VOC and 0.09tpsd NOx

Thomson No. 1, Dunmore – 0.15 tpsd VOC and 0.02 tpsd NOx

Williams Generation, Hazelton Cogeneration – 2.61 tpsd NOx

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions decreased by 6.6 tpsd from 96.2
tpsd to 89.6 tpsd.  NOx emissions decreased over the same period by 10.0
tpsd from 97.9 tpsd to 87.9 tpsd.  

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.  These
reductions, as well as anticipated future reductions, are due to the
following permanent and enforceable measures. 

  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 Engine and Vehicle Standards (62 FR 54694, October 21,
1997, and 	  65FR 59896, October 6, 2000)

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

PA Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program & Changes to Vehicle
Safety Inspection Program in non-I/M Counties (70 FR 58313, October 6,
2005)

4.  Non-Road Sources

Non-road Diesel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004)

D.  The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Has a Fully Approvable Maintenance
Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the Clean Air Act

In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
ozone nonattainment Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a
SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Area for at least 11 years after redesignation.  The Commonwealth is
requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirement
of Clean Air Act section 175A.  Once approved, the maintenance plan for
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 175 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 Commonwealth 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 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 memorandum dated September 4, 1992,
provides additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan.  An
ozone maintenance plan should address the following provisions:

(a)  an attainment emissions inventory;

(b)  a maintenance demonstration;

(c)  a monitoring network;

(d)  verification of continued attainment; and

(e)  a contingency plan.

Analysis of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Maintenance Plan

(a) Attainment inventory – An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment.  PADEP determined that the appropriate attainment
inventory year is 2004.  That year establishes a reasonable year within
the three-year block of 2004-2006 as a baseline 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.  

The 2002 and 2004 point source data was compiled from actual sources. 
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 Systems and EPA’s publication series
AP-42, and are based on Source Classification Codes (SCC).  The 2002
area source data was compiled using county-level activity data, from
census numbers, from county numbers, etc.  The 2004 area source data was
projected from the 2002 inventory using temporal allocations provided by
the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA).

The on-road mobile source inventories for 2002 and 2004 were compiled
using MOBILE6.2 and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PENNDOT)
estimates for VMT.  The PADEP has provided detailed data summaries to
document the calculations of mobile on-road VOC and NOx emissions for
2002, as well as for the projection years of 2004, 2009, and 2018 (shown
in Tables 5 and 6 below).  

The 2002 and 2004 emissions for the majority of non-road emission source
categories were estimated using the EPA NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD
model calculates emissions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum
gasoline, and compressed natural gas-fueled non-road equipment types and
includes growth factors.  The NONROAD model does not estimate emissions
from locomotives or aircraft.  For 2002 and 2004 locomotive emissions,
the PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey using national fuel
consumption information and EPA emission and conversion factors.  . 
Emissions from commercial aircraft for 2002 and 2004 are estimated using
EPA-approved Emissions & Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) 4.20, the
latest version available at the time the inventory was prepared.  The
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre International Airport (AVP) accounts for all
commercial air traffic in the area.  Small aircraft emissions were
calculated using small airport statistics from the Federal Aviation
Administration’s APO Terminal Area Forecast Report and the website  
HYPERLINK "http://www.airnav.com"  www.airnav.com .  

More detailed information on the compilation of the 2002, 2004, 2009,
and 2018 inventories can found in the Technical Appendices, which are
part of the June 12, 2007 state submittal.

Maintenance Demonstration - On June 12, 2007, the PADEP submitted a
maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act.  The
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance 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 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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018.  The PADEP chose
2009 as an interim year in the 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 maintenance
period.

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

Source Category	2004	2009	2018

Point	3.8	4.6	5.9

Area	35.3	33.7	36.3

Highway Mobile	31.6	2.2	16.9

Nonroad Mobile	18.9	16.5	13.2

Total	89.6	80.0	72.3

				

Table 5:  Total NOx Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpsd)

Source Category	2004 	2009 	2018 

Point	7.0	9.3	10.4

Area	3.9	4.1	4.4

Highway Mobile	66.1	48.3	23.7

Nonroad Mobile	10.9	8.9	5.6

Total	87.9	70.6	44.1

Additionally, 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:

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

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

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

Consumer Products Rule (69 FR 70895, December 8, 2004) 

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings (69 FR 68080,
November 23, 2004).

Federal Light-duty Highway Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) -Tier 1/Tier
2 Emissions Standards (Model Year 1994/2004); (Tier 1 -- 56 FR 25724,
June 5, 1991); (Tier 2 --65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000).

Federal Heavy-duty Diesel Highway Engine Standards (Model Year
2004/2007) / Low-Sulfur Highway Diesel Fuel Standards (2006); (66 FR
5002, January 18, 2001).

Federal Nonroad Engine Emission Standards (Model Year 2008) and Nonroad
Diesel Fuel 2007); (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).

NLEV/PA Clean Vehicle Program (54 FR 72564, December 28, 1999).

PA Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program and Changes to
Vehicle Safety Inspection Program for Non-I/M Counties  (70 FR 58313,
October 6, 2005).	

Based on 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area.

(c)  Monitoring Network – There are four ozone monitors (located in
Lackawanna and Luzerne Counties) that were used to support the
Commonwealth’s ozone maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes/Barre
area.  The Commonwealth has committed to continue to operate its
monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, with no reduction
in the number of sites.

(d) Verification of Continued Attainment – In addition to maintaining
the key elements of its regulatory program, the Commonwealth will track
the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the Area by reviewing air
quality and emissions data during the maintenance period.  The
Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of 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 they exceed the
attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10 percent.  The PADEP
will also continue to operate the existing ozone monitoring station in
the Area pursuant to 40 CFR part 58 throughout the maintenance period
and submit quality-assured ozone data to EPA through the AQS system. 
Section 175A(b) of the Clean Air Act states that eight years following
redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, PADEP will be required
to submit a second maintenance plan that will ensure attainment through
2028.  PADEP has made that commitment to meet the requirement section
175A(b).    

(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 Commonwealth 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 8-hour ozone concentration at any Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area monitor is 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 also analyze the conditions leading to
the excessive ozone levels and evaluate which measures might be most
effective in correcting the excessive ozone levels.  PADEP will also
analyze the potential emissions effect of Federal, state and local
measures that have been adopted but not yet implemented at the time the
excessive ozone levels occurred.  PADEP will then begin the process of
implementing any selected measures.

Contingency measures will also be considered in the event that a
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard occurs at any
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area monitor.  In the event of a violation of the
8-hour ozone standard, PADEP will adopt additional emissions reduction
measures as expeditiously as practicable in accordance with the
implementation schedule listed later in this notice and in the
Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act in order to return the Area to
attainment with the standard.  Contingency measures to be considered for
the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area will include, but not be limited to the
following:

Regulatory measures:

- Additional controls on consumer products.

- Additional controls on portable fuel containers.

 Non-Regulatory measures:

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

- Diesel retrofits, including replacement, repowering or alternative
fuel use, for 	public or private local on-road or off-road 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.

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

VII.  Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified
in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Maintenance Plan 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., reasonable further progress 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.  In the maintenance
plan, the MVEBs are termed “on-road mobile source emission budgets.”
 Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must be established in an
ozone maintenance plan.  An MVEB is the portion of the total allowable
emissions that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and
emissions.  An 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 a 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 contained
therein “adequate” for use in determining transportation conformity.
 After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, the 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are listed in Table 1 for
2009 and 2018.  

Table 1 presents the projected emissions for the on-road mobile sources
plus any portion of the safety margin allocated to the MVEBs (safety
margin allocation for 2009 and 2018 only).  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
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area.  The total emissions from point, area, on-road mobile, and nonroad
mobile sources in 2004 equaled 89.6 tpsd of VOC and 87.9 tpsd of NOx. 
The PADEP projects total emissions for the year 2018 to be 72.3 tpsd of
VOC and 44.1 tpsd of NOx from all sources in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
area.  The safety margin for 2018 would be the difference between these
amounts, or 17.3 tpsd of VOC and 43.8 tpsd 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:  Safety Margins for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (2009 & 2018)

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpsd)	NOx Emissions (tpsd)

2004 Attainment	89.6	87.9

2009 Interim	80.0	70.6

2009 Safety Margin	9.6	17.3

2004 Attainment	89.6	87.9

2018 Final	72.3	44.1

2018 Safety Margin	17.3	43.8

The PADEP allocated 1.85 tpsd VOC and 1.4 tpsd NOx of the 2009 safety
margin 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 2.6 tpsd VOC and 2.1 tpsd NOx 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area MVEBs.

Table 7:  Final Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area* 

(2009 & 2018)

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpsd)	NOx Emissions (tpsd)

2009 Projected On road Emissions	23.3	46.9

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	1.85	1.40

2009 MVEBs	25.2	48.3

2018 Projected On road Emissions	14.3	21.6

2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	2.6	2.1

2018 MVEBs	16.9	23.7

* PA DEP calculates MVEBS using kilograms per summer day, and also lists
the values in tons per summer day, rounded to 3 significant digits. 
This appears to make the totals in the table incorrect, but is merely
the result of the rounded tpsd values.  

C.  Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area are
approvable because the MVEBs for VOCs and NOx 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 MVEBs in the
Maintenance Plan?

The MVEBs for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance plan are being
posted to EPA’s conformity website concurrently 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 Clean Air 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 EPA is proposing
to approve the MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan.  The MVEBs cannot
be used for transportation conformity until the maintenance plan 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 Area’s 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre
Area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA’s conformity Website:   
HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm" 
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm  

(from there, click on “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions”).

VIII.  Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to determine that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA is also proposing to approve the
redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.  EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance plan for the Area, submitted on June
12, 2007, as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP.  EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area because
it meets the requirements of section 175A as described previously in
this notice.  EPA is also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, and the MVEBs submitted by
Pennsylvania for the 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 or allows the state to
avoid adopting or implementing other requirements and because this
action does not impose any new requirements on sources, 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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.

___________________________           	____________/s/________________

Dated:   September 14, 2007                           	Donald S. Welsh,

Regional Administrator,

                                                                 	Region
III.

 PAGE   

 PAGE  48