Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area's Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory, 40749-40752 [07-3632]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
40749
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 25, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
3. Section 52.2037 is amended by
adding paragraph (m) to read:
I
§ 52.2037 Control strategy plans for
attainment and rate-of-progress: Ozone.
*
*
*
*
*
(m) Determination—EPA has
determined that, as of July 25, 2007, the
Franklin County ozone nonattainment
area has attained the 1-hour ozone
standard and that the following
requirements of section 172(c)(2) of the
Clean Air Act do not apply to this area
for so long as the area does not monitor
any violations of the 1-hour ozone
standard of 40 CFR 50.9: the attainment
demonstration and reasonably available
control measure requirements of section
172(b)(1), the reasonable further
progress requirement of section
172(b)(2), and the related contingency
requirements of section 172(c)(9). If a
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS is
monitored in the Franklin County 1hour ozone nonattainment area, these
determinations shall no longer apply.
PART 81—[AMENDED]
4. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
5. In § 81.339, the table entitled
‘‘Pennsylvania-Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)’’ is amended by revising the
entry for the Franklin County, PA Area
to read as follows:
I
§ 81.339
*
*
Pennsylvania
*
*
*
PENNSYLVANIA—OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD)
Designation a
Category/classification
Designated area
Date 1
*
*
Franklin Co., PA:
Franklin County ..............................
*
*
*
*
Type
*
*
*
*
*
July 25, 2007 .................................
*
Date 1
Type
Attainment .................
*
*
a Includes
Indian County located in each county or area, except otherwise noted.
1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 07–3631 Filed 7–24–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0323; FRL–8445–7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and
Approval of the Area’s Maintenance
Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) is requesting that the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle ozone
nonattainment area (‘‘Harrisburg Area’’)
be redesignated as attainment for the 8hour ozone ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). EPA is approving the ozone
redesignation request for the Harrisburg
Area. In conjunction with its
redesignation request, PADEP submitted
a SIP revision consisting of a
maintenance plan for the Harrisburg
Area that provides for continued
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:01 Jul 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for at least 10 years after redesignation.
EPA is approving the 8-hour
maintenance plan. PADEP also
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory
for the Harrisburg Area which EPA is
approving. In addition, EPA is
approving the adequacy determination
for the motor vehicle emission budgets
(MVEBs) that are identified in the
Harrisburg Area maintenance plan for
purposes of transportation conformity,
and is approving those MVEBs. EPA is
approving the redesignation request,
and the maintenance plan and the 2002
base-year emissions inventory as
revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in
accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is
effective on July 25, 2007 pursuant to
the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0323. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the electronic docket,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., confidential business
information (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 through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
public inspection 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 Resources
Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box
8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania 17105.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen Wentworth (215) 814–2034, or by
e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On June 1, 2007 (72 FR 30521), EPA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The
NPR proposed approval of
Pennsylvania’s redesignation request, a
SIP revision that establishes a
maintenance plan for the Harrisburg
Area that provides for continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for at least 10 years after redesignation,
and a 2002 base-year emissions
inventory. The formal SIP revision was
submitted by PADEP on March 27,
2007. Other specific requirements of
Pennsylvania’s redesignation request,
the SIP revision for the maintenance
plan, and the rationale for EPA’s
proposed actions are explained in the
NPR and will not be restated here. No
public comments were received on the
NPR.
E:\FR\FM\25JYR1.SGM
25JYR1
40750
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 25, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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 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 four 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 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.
For the reasons set forth in the
proposal, 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 finalizing this
redesignation. EPA believes that the
Court’s December 22, 2006 and June 8,
2007 decisions impose no impediment
to moving forward with the
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 Act and longstanding
policies regarding redesignation
requests.
In its proposal, EPA proposed to find
that the Area had satisfied the
requirements under the 1-hour standard
whether the 1-hour standard was
deemed to be reinstated or whether the
Court’s decision on the petition for
rehearing was modified to require
something less than compliance with all
applicable 1-hour requirements.
Because EPA proposed to find that the
Area satisfied the requirements under
either scenario, EPA is proceeding to
finalize the redesignation and to
conclude that the Area has met the
requirements under the 1-hour standard
applicable for purposes of redesignation
under the 8-hour standard. These
include the provisions of EPA’s antibacksliding rules, as well as the
additional anti-backsliding provisions
identified by the Court in its rulings. 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, EPA finds that
the Area has met the 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 well as the four additional
anti-backsliding provisions identified by
the Court, or that such requirements are
not applicable for purposes of
redesignation. In addition, with respect
to the requirement for transportation
conformity under the 1-hour standard,
the Court in its June 8 decision clarified
that for those areas with 1-hour motor
vehicle emissions budgets, antibacksliding requires only that those 1hour 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 antibacksliding purposes.
II. Final Action
EPA is approving the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request,
maintenance plan, and the 2002 baseyear emissions inventory because the
requirements for approval have been
satisfied. EPA has evaluated
Pennsylvania’s redesignation request
that was submitted on March 27, 2007
and determined that it meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes
that the redesignation request and
monitoring data demonstrate that the
Harrisburg Area has attained the 8-hour
ozone standard. The final approval of
this redesignation request will change
the designation of the Harrisburg Area
from nonattainment to attainment for
the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is
approving the maintenance plan for the
Harrisburg Area submitted on March 27,
2007 as a revision to the Pennsylvania
SIP. EPA is also approving the MVEBs
submitted by PADEP in conjunction
with its redesignation request. In
addition, EPA is approving the 2002
base-year emissions inventory as a
revision to the Pennsylvania SIP
submitted by PADEP on March 27,
2007. In this final rulemaking, EPA is
notifying the public that we have found
that the MVEBs for NOX and VOCs in
the Harrisburg Area for the 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan are adequate and
approved for conformity purposes. As a
result of our finding, the Harrisburg
Area must use the MVEBs from the
submitted 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan for future conformity
determinations. The adequate and
approved MVEBs are provided in the
following table:
TABLE 1.—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS IN KILOGRAMS PER DAY (TONS PER DAY—ROUNDED)
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Year
VOC
NOX
Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS)—Cumberland, Dauphin, and Perry Counties
2009 .............................................................................................................................................................
2018 .............................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:01 Jul 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25JYR1.SGM
23,014 (25.4)
16,136 (17.8)
25JYR1
41,917 (46.2)
18,409 (20.3)
40751
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 25, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS IN KILOGRAMS PER DAY (TONS PER DAY—ROUNDED)—Continued
Year
VOC
NOX
Lebanon County MPO (LEBCO)
2009 .............................................................................................................................................................
2018 .............................................................................................................................................................
4,301 (4.7)
2,512 (2.8)
8,928 (9.8)
3,684 (4.1)
*Note: Tons per day are informational only. Differences occur due to rounding.
The Harrisburg Area is subject to the
CAA’s requirement for the basic
nonattainment areas until and unless it
is redesignated to attainment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this 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 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely approves
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. Accordingly,
the Administrator certifies that this final
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 approves preexisting 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 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This final rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will 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).
Because this action affects the status of
a geographical area, does not impose
any new requirements on sources, or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:01 Jul 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
allows the state to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements, this
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not 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). This action merely
approves 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 rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (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. This rule does
not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
USC. 3501 et seq.).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. This rule is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by September 24,
2007. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action.
This action, approving the
redesignation of the Harrisburg Area to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, the 2002 base-year emissions
inventory, and the MVEBs identified in
the maintenance plan, may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: July 16, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
I
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
E:\FR\FM\25JYR1.SGM
25JYR1
40752
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 25, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
PART 52—[AMENDED]
Subpart NN–Pennsylvania
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph
(e)(1) is amended by adding an entry for
the 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and
2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory for
the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle,
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Applicable geographic area
*
*
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan
and 2002 Base Year Emissions
Inventory.
*
*
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle,
PA:
Cumberland County, Dauphin
County, Lebanon County, Perry
County.
*
03/27/07
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
*
*
Additional
explanation
*
07/25/07 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
4. In § 81.339, the table entitled
‘‘Pennsylvania-Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)’’ is amended by revising the
entry for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-
3. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
*
EPA approval date
I
I
§ 52.2020
State submittal
date
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
PART 81—[AMENDED]
Pennsylvania Area at the end of the
table to read as follows:
*
Carlisle, Pennsylvania Area to read as
follows:
§ 81.339
*
*
Pennsylvania
*
*
*
PENNSYLVANIA—OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD)
Designation a
Category/Classification
Designated area
Date 1
*
*
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle PA:
Cumberland
County,
Dauphin
County, Lebanon County, Perry
County.
*
*
*
*
Type
*
*
*
*
*
07/25/07 .........................................
*
Date 1
Type
Attainment .................
*
*
a Includes
1 This
Indian County located in each county or area, except otherwise noted.
date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Vip3Aa19 in cotton. This technical
amendment is being issued to clarify the
status and the wording of the tolerance
exemption for Bacillus thuringeniensis
Vip3Aa19 in cotton.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
DATES:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 07–3632 Filed 7–24–07; 8:45 am]
This final rule is effective July
25, 2007.
40 CFR Part 174
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0913; FRL–8134–3]
Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa19
Protein in Cotton; Exemption from the
Requirements of a Tolerance;
Technical Amendment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendment.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA issued a direct final rule
in the Federal Register of April 25, 2007
(72 FR 20431), concerning plantincorporated protectant tolerance
exemptions. On May 9, 2007 EPA issued
a final rule revising the tolerance
exemption for Bacillus thuringeniensis
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:55 Jul 24, 2007
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0913. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced
Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert
the docket ID number where indicated
and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow
the instructions on the regulations.gov
web site to view the docket index or
access available documents. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the docket index available in
regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
ADDRESSES:
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 in the electronic docket
at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive Arlington, VA. The hours
of operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number
is (703) 305–5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alan Reynolds, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 605–0515, e-mail address:
reynolds.alan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\25JYR1.SGM
25JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 25, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40749-40752]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3632]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0323; FRL-8445-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area's Maintenance
Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) is requesting that the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle ozone nonattainment area (``Harrisburg
Area'') be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS). EPA is approving the ozone redesignation
request for the Harrisburg Area. In conjunction with its redesignation
request, PADEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance
plan for the Harrisburg Area that provides for continued attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. EPA
is approving the 8-hour maintenance plan. PADEP also submitted a 2002
base-year inventory for the Harrisburg Area which EPA is approving. In
addition, EPA is approving the adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Harrisburg
Area maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, and is
approving those MVEBs. EPA is approving the redesignation request, and
the maintenance plan and the 2002 base-year emissions inventory as
revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on July 25, 2007 pursuant
to the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0323. All documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential
business information (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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection 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
Resources Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Wentworth (215) 814-2034, or by
e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On June 1, 2007 (72 FR 30521), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The NPR proposed
approval of Pennsylvania's redesignation request, a SIP revision that
establishes a maintenance plan for the Harrisburg Area that provides
for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10
years after redesignation, and a 2002 base-year emissions inventory.
The formal SIP revision was submitted by PADEP on March 27, 2007. Other
specific requirements of Pennsylvania's redesignation request, the SIP
revision for the maintenance plan, and the rationale for EPA's proposed
actions are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No
public comments were received on the NPR.
[[Page 40750]]
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
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 four 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
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.
For the reasons set forth in the proposal, 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 finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the
Court's December 22, 2006 and June 8, 2007 decisions impose no
impediment to moving forward with the 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 Act and longstanding policies regarding redesignation
requests.
In its proposal, EPA proposed to find that the Area had satisfied
the requirements under the 1-hour standard whether the 1-hour standard
was deemed to be reinstated or whether the Court's decision on the
petition for rehearing was modified to require something less than
compliance with all applicable 1-hour requirements. Because EPA
proposed to find that the Area satisfied the requirements under either
scenario, EPA is proceeding to finalize the redesignation and to
conclude that the Area has met the requirements under the 1-hour
standard applicable for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour
standard. These include the provisions of EPA's anti-backsliding rules,
as well as the additional anti-backsliding provisions identified by the
Court in its rulings. 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, EPA
finds that the Area has met the 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 well
as the four additional anti-backsliding provisions identified by the
Court, or that such requirements are not applicable for purposes of
redesignation. In addition, with respect to the requirement for
transportation conformity under the 1-hour standard, the Court in its
June 8 decision clarified that for those areas with 1-hour motor
vehicle emissions budgets, anti-backsliding requires only 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.
II. Final Action
EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's redesignation
request, maintenance plan, and the 2002 base-year emissions inventory
because the requirements for approval have been satisfied. EPA has
evaluated Pennsylvania's redesignation request that was submitted on
March 27, 2007 and determined that it meets the redesignation criteria
set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the
redesignation request and monitoring data demonstrate that the
Harrisburg Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The final
approval of this redesignation request will change the designation of
the Harrisburg Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the
Harrisburg Area submitted on March 27, 2007 as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is also approving the MVEBs submitted by PADEP in
conjunction with its redesignation request. In addition, EPA is
approving the 2002 base-year emissions inventory as a revision to the
Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP on March 27, 2007. In this final
rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the
MVEBs for NOX and VOCs in the Harrisburg Area for the 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan are adequate and approved for conformity
purposes. As a result of our finding, the Harrisburg Area must use the
MVEBs from the submitted 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for future
conformity determinations. The adequate and approved MVEBs are provided
in the following table:
Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Kilograms per day (Tons per
Day--Rounded)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS)--Cumberland, Dauphin, and
Perry Counties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009.............................. 23,014 (25.4) 41,917 (46.2)
2018.............................. 16,136 (17.8) 18,409 (20.3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40751]]
Lebanon County MPO (LEBCO)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009.............................. 4,301 (4.7) 8,928 (9.8)
2018.............................. 2,512 (2.8) 3,684 (4.1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: Tons per day are informational only. Differences occur due to
rounding.
The Harrisburg Area is subject to the CAA's requirement for the
basic nonattainment areas until and unless it is redesignated to
attainment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
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 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves 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. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this final
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 approves 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This final rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
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). 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 action also does not have Federalism implications
because it does not 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). This action merely approves 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 rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (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. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 USC. 3501 et seq.).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 24, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action.
This action, approving the redesignation of the Harrisburg Area to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated maintenance plan,
the 2002 base-year emissions inventory, and the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce
its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: July 16, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
[[Page 40752]]
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart NN-Pennsylvania
0
2. In Sec. 52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding
an entry for the 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year
Emissions Inventory for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, Pennsylvania
Area at the end of the table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2020 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of non-regulatory SIP Applicable State Additional
revision geographic area submittal date EPA approval date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and Harrisburg-Lebanon- 03/27/07 07/25/07 [Insert
2002 Base Year Emissions Carlisle, PA: page number where
Inventory. Cumberland County, the document
Dauphin County, begins].
Lebanon County,
Perry County.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 81--[AMENDED]
0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
4. In Sec. 81.339, the table entitled ``Pennsylvania-Ozone (8-Hour
Standard)'' is amended by revising the entry for the Harrisburg-
Lebanon-Carlisle, Pennsylvania Area to read as follows:
Sec. 81.339 Pennsylvania
* * * * *
Pennsylvania--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\ Category/Classification
Designated area --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle
PA:
Cumberland County, 07/25/07.................................. Attainment.................
Dauphin County, Lebanon
County, Perry County.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian County located in each county or area, except otherwise noted.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 07-3632 Filed 7-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
