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 Area's Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory, 64948-64951 [E7-22446]

Download as PDF 64948 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 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. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 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 January 18, 2008. 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 may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: November 2, 2007. Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: I PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(153)(vii)(C) and (278)(i)(A)(3) to read as follows: yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES I § 52.220 * Identification of plan. * * (c) * * * (153) * * * (vii) * * * VerDate Aug<31>2005 * * 15:24 Nov 16, 2007 Jkt 214001 (C) Previously approved on March 14, 1984 in paragraph (c)(153)(vii)(B) of this section and now deleted without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Rule 1158. * * * * * (278) * * * (i) * * * (A) * * * (3) Previously approved on January 21, 2000 in paragraph (c)(278)(i)(A)(2) of this section and now deleted without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District Rule 1186. * * * * * [FR Doc. E7–22447 Filed 11–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 and 81 [EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0605; FRL–8497–1] 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 Area’s Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Inventory Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. 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 Scranton/ Wilkes-Barre ozone nonattainment Area (or ‘‘Area’’) be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is composed of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, and Wyoming Counties. EPA is approving the ozone redesignation request for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area. In conjunction with its redesignation request, PADEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes- PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Barre 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). DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on December 19, 2007. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0605. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov website. 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 Environment 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 email at rehn.brian@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On September 25, 2007 (72 FR 54390), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The NPR proposed approval of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP revisions for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area that provide for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. The NPR also proposed approval of a 2002 base year emissions inventory for the Area. The formal SIP revisions were submitted by PADEP on June 12, 2007. Other specific requirements of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP revisions, and the rationales 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\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23591, 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 measures required for 1hour 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 the 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 CAA, on the contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain 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 the 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 the 1-hour conformity determinations are not required for antibacksliding 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:24 Nov 16, 2007 Jkt 214001 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 redesignation of this area to attainment, because even in the light of the Court’s decisions, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests. II. Final Action EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request, maintenance plan, and 2002 base year emissions inventory SIP revisions because they satisfy the requirements for approval. EPA has evaluated Pennsylvania’s redesignation request that was submitted on June 12, 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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The final approval of this redesignation request will change the designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the Scranton/ Wilkes-Barre Area submitted on June 12, 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 submitted by PADEP on June 12, 2007 as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. In this final rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the MVEBs for NOX and VOCs in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the 8hour ozone maintenance plan are adequate and approved for conformity purposes. As a result of our finding, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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: SCRANTON/WILKES-BARRE AREA ADEQUATE AND APPROVED MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS IN TONS PER DAY (TPD) Budget year VOC 2009 ...................................... 2018 ...................................... 25.2 16.9 NOX 48.3 23.7 The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is subject to the CAA’s requirement for the PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 64949 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 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 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 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 CAA. This rule also is not subject E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 64950 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 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 CAA. 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 CAA. 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 U.S.C. 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 Name of non-regulatory SIP revision 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). not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) C. Petitions for Judicial Review Dated: November 8, 2007. Donald S. Welsh, Regional Administrator, Region III. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 18, 2008. 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 Scranton/WilkesBarre Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated maintenance plan, the 2002 base year emission inventory, and the MVEBs identified in the maintenance plan, may Applicable geographic area State submittal date * * * 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Area: Plan and 2002 Base Year Lackawanna, Luzerne, Emissions Inventory. Monroe and Wyoming Counties. * 06/12/07 * * * * 4. In § 81.339, the table entitled ‘‘Pennsylvania-Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is amended by revising the entry for the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA, 3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: I Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. 40 CFR Part 81 Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas. 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows: I PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart NN—Pennsylvania 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding an entry at the end of the table to read as follows: I § 52.2020 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * (1) * * * * * Additional explanation * * 11/19/07 [Insert page number where the document begins]. I PART 81—[AMENDED] 40 CFR Part 52 EPA approval date Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. * List of Subjects * Lackawanna County, Luzerne County, Monroe County, Wyoming County to read as follows: § 81.339 * * Pennsylvania. * * * PENNSYLVANIA—OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD) Designation a Category/classification Designated area yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES Date1 * * * * Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA: Lackawanna County, Luzerne County, Monroe County, Wyoming County. * * * * * 12/19/07 * 15:24 Nov 16, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 * * * Indian Country located in each county or area, except otherwise noted. date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. VerDate Aug<31>2005 Type * Attainment. a Includes 1 This Date 1 Type E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 222 / Monday, November 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations * * * * * [FR Doc. E7–22446 Filed 11–16–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 721 [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2006–0898; FRL–8340–8] RIN 2070–AB27 Certain Chemical Substances; Withdrawal of Significant New Use Rules Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Withdrawal of final rules. yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is withdrawing two significant new use rules (SNURs) promulgated under section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs), i.e., dodecandioic acid, 1, 12-dihydrazide (CAS No. 4080–98–2; PMNs P–01–759 and P–05–555) and thiophene, 2,5– dibromo-3-hexyl- (CAS No. 116971–11– 0; PMN P–07–283). EPA published the SNURs using direct final rulemaking procedures. EPA received notices of intent to submit adverse comments on these rules. Therefore, the Agency is withdrawing these SNURs, as required under the expedited SNUR rulemaking process. EPA also intends to publish in the Federal Register, under separate notice and comment rulemaking procedures, proposed SNURs for these two substances. DATES: This final rule is effective November 19, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov. For technical information contact: Karen Chu, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 564–8773; e-mail address:chu.karen@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Does this Action Apply to Me? A list of potentially affected entities is provided in the Federal Register of September 19, 2007 (72 FR 53470) VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:24 Nov 16, 2007 Jkt 214001 (FRL–8135–8). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. II. What Rule is being Withdrawn? In the Federal Register of September 19, 2007 (72 FR 53470), EPA issued several direct final Significant New Use Rules (SNURs), including SNURs for the two chemical substances that are the subject of this withdrawal. These direct final rules were issued pursuant to the procedures in 40 CFR part 721, subpart D. In accordance with 40 CFR 721.170(d)(4)(i)(B), EPA is withdrawing the rules issued for dodecandioic acid, 1, 12-dihydrazide (CAS No. 4080–98–2; PMNs P–01–759 and P–05–555) and thiophene, 2, 5-dibromo-3-hexyl- (CAS No. 116971–11–0; PMN P–07–283) (see § 721.10057 and § 721.10088, respectively) because the Agency received a notice to submit adverse comments. EPA intends to propose SNURs for these two substances via notice and comment rulemaking in a future Federal Register document. For further information regarding EPA’s expedited process for issuing SNURs, interested parties are directed to 40 CFR part 721, subpart D and theFederal Register of July 27, 1989 (54 FR 31314). The record for the direct final SNUR for these substances which is being withdrawn was established at EPA–HQ–OPPT–2006–0898. That record includes information considered by the Agency in developing this rule and one of the notices of intent to submit adverse comments. The other notice of intent to submit adverse comments was claimed as Confidential Business Information by the commenter and therefore is not in the public docket. III. How Do I Access the Docket? To access the electronic docket, please go tohttp://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions to access Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT– 2006–0898. Additional information about the docket facility is provided underADDRESSES in the Federal Register document of September 19, 2007 (72 FR 53470). If you have questions, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. or otherwise. The statutory and executive order review requirements applicable to the direct final rule were discussed in the Federal Register document of September 19, 2007 (72 FR 53470). Those review requirements do not apply to this action because it is a withdrawal and does not contain any new or amended requirements. V. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and 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). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721 Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: November 14, 2007. Oscar Hernandez, Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Therefore, 40 CFR part 721 is amended as follows: I PART 721—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c). § 721.10057 I 2. By removing § 721.10057. § 721.10088 I [Removed] [Removed] 3. By removing § 721.10088. [FR Doc. E7–22614 Filed 11–16–07 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–S IV. What Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Apply to this Action? This final rule revokes or eliminates an existing regulatory requirement and does not contain any new or amended requirements. As such, the Agency has determined that this withdrawal will not have any adverse impacts, economic PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 64951 E:\FR\FM\19NOR1.SGM 19NOR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 222 (Monday, November 19, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64948-64951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-22446]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605; FRL-8497-1]


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 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 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre ozone nonattainment Area (or ``Area'') be 
redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone ambient air quality 
standard (NAAQS). The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is composed of 
Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, and Wyoming Counties. EPA is approving the 
ozone redesignation request for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area. In 
conjunction with its redesignation request, PADEP submitted a SIP 
revision consisting of a maintenance plan for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 
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 Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre 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).

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on December 19, 
2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605. All documents in the docket are listed in 
the www.regulations.gov website. 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 Environment 
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 rehn.brian@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On September 25, 2007 (72 FR 54390), EPA published a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The NPR 
proposed approval of Pennsylvania's redesignation request and 
maintenance plan SIP revisions for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area that 
provide for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 
10 years after redesignation. The NPR also proposed approval of a 2002 
base year emissions inventory for the Area. The formal SIP revisions 
were submitted by PADEP on June 12, 2007. Other specific requirements 
of Pennsylvania's redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP 
revisions, and the rationales 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 64949]]

    However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule 
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23591, 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 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 the 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 CAA, on the 
contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress toward 
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain 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 the 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 the 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 redesignation of this area to 
attainment, because even in the light of the Court's decisions, 
redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation 
provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation 
requests.

II. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's redesignation 
request, maintenance plan, and 2002 base year emissions inventory SIP 
revisions because they satisfy the requirements for approval. EPA has 
evaluated Pennsylvania's redesignation request that was submitted on 
June 12, 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 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The 
final approval of this redesignation request will change the 
designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is approving the 
maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area submitted on June 
12, 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 submitted by PADEP on June 12, 2007 as a revision to the 
Pennsylvania SIP. In this final rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public 
that we have found that the MVEBs for NOX and VOCs in the 
Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan are 
adequate and approved for conformity purposes. As a result of our 
finding, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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:

Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area Adequate and Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions
                      Budgets in Tons per Day (TPD)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Budget year                          VOC     NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009....................................................    25.2    48.3
2018....................................................    16.9    23.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre 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 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 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 CAA. This rule also is not subject

[[Page 64950]]

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 CAA. 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 CAA. 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 
U.S.C. 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by January 18, 2008. 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 Scranton/Wilkes-
Barre Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated 
maintenance plan, the 2002 base year emission 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

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Dated: November 8, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

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 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     Scranton-Wilkes-           06/12/07  11/19/07 [Insert
 and 2002 Base Year Emissions      Barre Area:                          page number where
 Inventory.                        Lackawanna,                          the document
                                   Luzerne, Monroe                      begins].
                                   and Wyoming
                                   Counties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

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 Scranton-Wilkes-
Barre, PA, Lackawanna County, Luzerne County, Monroe County, Wyoming 
County 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA:                12/19/07  Attainment.
 Lackawanna County, Luzerne
 County, Monroe County, Wyoming
 County.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except otherwise noted.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.


[[Page 64951]]

* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E7-22446 Filed 11-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P