Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York Nonattainment Areas to Attainment for the 1997 Annual and the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard, 62389-62408 [2014-24596]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • 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); • does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • is not subject to the requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and • does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land in Washington except as specifically noted below and is also not approved to apply in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Washington’s SIP is approved to apply on non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area. Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA nonetheless provided a consultation opportunity to the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated September 3, 2013. The EPA did not receive a request for consultation. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: October 8, 2014. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, Region 10. [FR Doc. 2014–24742 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0525; FRL–9917–83– Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation of the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York Nonattainment Areas to Attainment for the 1997 Annual and the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s requests to redesignate to attainment the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York nonattainment areas (hereafter ‘‘the Areas’’) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This proposed approval is contingent upon the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit Court) granting EPA’s motion to lift the stay of the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) that the D.C. Circuit Court issued on December 30, 2011. EPA is proposing to find that the attainment of the Areas is in part due to the emissions reductions resulting from the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in Pennsylvania and in the states upwind of Pennsylvania. Thus, if the D.C. Circuit Court lifts the stay of CSAPR and grants EPA’s motion to begin implementation of CSAPR on January 1, 2015, those emission reductions originally required under CAIR will be made permanent and enforceable through the implementation of CSAPR. In addition to the SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62389 redesignation requests, EPA is also proposing to determine that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, EPA is proposing to approve as revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP), the associated maintenance plans to show maintenance of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025 for the Areas. The maintenance plans include the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX) mobile vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for transportation conformity purposes. EPA is also initiating the process to determine if these budgets are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP, the 2007 base year emissions inventory for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s proposed approvals of the maintenance plans and MVEBs for the Areas are also contingent upon the lifting of the CSAPR stay by the D.C. Circuit Court. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 17, 2014. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2014–0525 by one of the following methods: A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0525, Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014– 0525. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62390 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 814–2182, or by email at quinto.rose@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Table of Contents I. Background II. EPA’s Requirements A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan III. Summary of Proposed Actions IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions A. Effects of EME Homer City Decision B. Effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Court Decision Regarding the PM2.5 Implementation Under Subpart 4 of Part D of Title I of the CAA VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 V. EPA’s Analysis of Pennsylvania’s SIP Submittals A. Redesignation Requests B. Maintenance Plans C. Transportation Conformity VI. Proposed Actions VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were established on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652). EPA promulgated an annual standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), based on a three-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations (the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard). In the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 mg/m3 based on a threeyear average of the 98th percentile of 24hour concentrations. On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944, 1014), EPA published air quality area designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In that rulemaking action, EPA designated the Harrisburg-LebanonCarlisle (Harrisburg) and York Areas as nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The Harrisburg Area is comprised of Cumberland, Dauphin and Lebanon Counties; and the York Area is comprised of York County in Pennsylvania. See 40 CFR 81.339. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA retained the annual average standard at 15 mg/m3, but revised the 24hour standard to 35 mg/m3 based again on the three-year average of the 98th percentile of the 24-hour concentrations (the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard). On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA published designations for the 2006 24hour PM2.5 standard, which became effective on December 14, 2009. In that rulemaking action, EPA designated the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York (Harrisburg-York) Area as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.339. Today’s proposed rulemaking actions address the redesignations to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Harrisburg and York Areas, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards for the Harrisburg-York Area. On August 25, 2008 (73 FR 49949) and on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863), EPA determined that the Harrisburg and the York Areas, respectively, had clean data and monitored attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On March 29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean data and monitored attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the requirements for the Areas to submit attainment PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 demonstrations and associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP) plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related to the attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended until such time as: The Area is redesignated to attainment for the standard, at which time the section 51.1004(c) requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that the Area has again violated the standard, at which time such plans are required to be submitted. On July 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA also determined that the Harrisburg and York Areas had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. EPA’s review of the most recent certified monitoring data for the Areas show that the Areas continue to attain the standard. On April 22, 2014, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), formally submitted requests to redesignate the Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. PADEP also formally submitted on April 22, 2014, a request to redesignate the Harrisburg-York Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, PADEP submitted maintenance plans for the Areas as SIP revisions to ensure continued attainment throughout the Areas over the next 10 years. The maintenance plans include the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for transportation conformity purposes. PADEP also submitted a 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory for the 1997 annual and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for PM2.5, NOX, sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and ammonia (NH3). EPA is proposing to approve as SIP revisions the maintenance plans for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve as SIP revisions the 2007 emissions inventory for both standards to meet the emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA’s proposed approvals are contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court granting EPA’s motion to lift the stay of CSAPR. E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules II. EPA’s Requirements mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for redesignation providing that: (1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) the state containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA. Each of these requirements are discussed in Section V. of today’s proposed rulemaking action. EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the ‘‘SIPs; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990,’’ (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992) (the ‘‘General Preamble’’) and has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests in the following documents: (1) ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘1992 Calcagni Memorandum’’); (2) ‘‘SIP Actions Submitted in Response to CAA Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; and (3) ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994. B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under section 175A of the CAA, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 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 PM2.5 violations. The 1992 Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states that a maintenance plan should address the following provisions: (1) An attainment emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for 10 years; (3) a commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network; (4) verification of continued attainment; and (5) a contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS. Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, control strategy SIP revisions and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas and for areas seeking redesignation to attainment for a given NAAQS. These emission control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., RFP and attainment demonstration SIP revisions) and maintenance plans create MVEBs based on onroad mobile source emissions for the relevant criteria pollutants and/or their precursors, where appropriate, to address pollution from onroad transportation sources. The MVEBs are the portions of the total allowable emissions that are allocated to onroad vehicle use that, together with emissions from all other sources in the area, will provide attainment, RFP, or maintenance, as applicable. The budget serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area’s planned transportation system. Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an area seeking a redesignation to attainment is established for the last year of the maintenance plan. The maintenance plans for the Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties in Pennsylvania, includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes. The transportation conformity determinations for the Areas are further discussed in Section V.C. of today’s proposed rulemaking actions and technical support documents (TSDs) dated September 3, 2014, available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA–OAR–R03–2014–0525. III. Summary of Proposed Actions EPA is proposing to take several rulemaking actions related to the redesignations of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62391 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA’s motion to lift the December 30, 2011 stay of CSAPR and tolls CSAPR’s compliance deadlines in order to begin Phase 1 of CSAPR on January 1, 2015, EPA is proposing to find that the Areas meet the requirements for redesignation for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve Pennsylvania’s requests to change the legal definition for the Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the associated maintenance plans for the Areas as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, including the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Areas. The approval of the maintenance plans is one of the CAA criteria for redesignation of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Pennsylvania’s maintenance plans are designed to ensure continued attainment in the Areas for 10 years after redesignation for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA previously determined that the Harrisburg and York Areas have attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing to find that the Harrisburg and York Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 45424, July 29, 2011. EPA also previously determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean data showing monitored attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 77 FR 18922, March 29, 2012. Therefore, EPA is proposing to find that the HarrisburgYork Area continues to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory that includes PM2.5, SO2, NOX, VOC, and NH3 for the Areas as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in order to meet the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA’s analysis of the proposed actions is provided in Section V. of today’s proposed rulemaking action. EPA’s proposed rulemaking actions are contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court granting EPA’s motion to lift the stay of CSAPR. If the D.C. Circuit Court does not lift the stay of CSAPR, EPA will reevaluate the basis for approval of these proposed redesignations and repropose actions if necessary before issuing the final rule. E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62392 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS A. Effects of EME Homer City Decision 1. Background In 2008, the D.C. Circuit Court initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit Court’s remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR, to address interstate transport of emissions and resulting secondary air pollutants and to replace CAIR.1 CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions from electric generating units (EGUs) in 28 states in the Eastern United States. Implementation of CSAPR was scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR’s capand-trade programs would have superseded the CAIR cap-and-trade programs. Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and on December 30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an order staying CSAPR pending resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to administer CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11–1302 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 30, 2011), Order at 2. On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court issued its ruling, vacating and remanding CSAPR to EPA and once again ordering continued implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit Court subsequently denied EPA’s petition for rehearing en banc. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11–1302, 2013 WL 656247 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013), at *1. EPA and other parties then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, and the Supreme Court granted the petitions on June 24, 2013. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013). On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court vacated and reversed the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision regarding CSAPR, and remanded that decision to the D.C. Circuit Court to resolve remaining issues in accordance with its ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). Though CSAPR remains presently stayed by the 1 CAIR addressed the 1997 PM 2.5 annual NAAQS and the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. CSAPR addresses contributions from upwind states to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as well as the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS addressed by CAIR. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 D.C. Circuit Court, EPA has moved to have that stay lifted in light of the Supreme Court decision. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, Case No. 11–1302, Document No. 1499505 (D.C. Cir. filed June 26, 2014). In its motion, EPA asks the D.C. Circuit Court to toll CSAPR’s compliance deadlines by three years, so that the Phase 1 emissions budgets apply in 2015 and 2016 (instead of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 emissions budgets apply in 2017 and beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond). 2. Proposal on This Issue EPA promulgated CAIR on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), creating regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions. CAIR applies to 27 eastern states, including Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia. EPA approved Pennsylvania’s SIP on December 10, 2009 (74 FR 65446) that addressed the requirements of CAIR for the purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX emissions and Pennsylvania’s SIP redesignation requests list CAIR as a control measure. CAIR was thus in place and getting emission reductions in Pennsylvania and in states upwind of Pennsylvania when the Areas began monitoring attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The quality-assured, certified monitoring data used to demonstrate attainment of the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 5, 2010 attainment deadline was impacted by CAIR. The HarrisburgYork Area that has monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS was also impacted by CAIR. Under the tolled compliance deadline schedule proposed by EPA in its motion to lift the CSAPR stay, CAIR would sunset at the end of 2014 and be replaced by CSAPR beginning January 1, 2015. Provided that the stay is lifted and EPA’s tolled compliance deadlines are put in place, the emission reductions associated with CAIR that helped the Areas achieve attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS would be permanent and enforceable for purposes of redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA, because CSAPR requires similar or greater emission reductions from relevant upwind areas starting in 2015 and beyond. PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 B. Effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Court Decision Regarding PM2.5 Implementation Under Subpart 4 of Part D of Title I of the CAA 1. Background On January 4, 2013, in NRDC v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit Court remanded to EPA the ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule’’ (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and the ‘‘Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for PM2.5’’ final rule (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, ‘‘1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule’’). 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The D.C. Circuit Court found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA (subpart 1), rather than the particulate-matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of Part D of Title I (subpart 4). Prior to the January 4, 2013 decision, the states had worked towards meeting the air quality goals of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with EPA regulations and guidance derived from subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA. In response to the D.C. Circuit Court’s remand, EPA took this history into account by setting a new deadline for any remaining submissions that may be required for moderate nonattainment areas as a result of the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision regarding the applicability of subpart 4 of Part D of Title I of the CAA. On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), EPA issued a final rule, ‘‘Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of SIP Provisions for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS’’ (the PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule), which identifies the classification under subpart 4 for areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual and/ or 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards. The final rule sets a deadline for states to submit attainment plans and meet other subpart 4 requirements. The final rules specifies December 31, 2014 as the deadline for states to submit any additional attainment-related SIP elements that may be needed to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4 for areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 and/ or 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and to submit SIPs addressing the nonattainment new source review (NSR) requirements in subpart 4. Therefore, as explained in detail in the following section, any additional attainment-related SIP elements that may be needed for the Areas to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4 E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules were not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation requests for the Areas. Pennsylvania submitted its requests for redesignation for the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and the Harrisburg-York Areas for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on April 22, 2014. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 2. Proposal on This Issue In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA addresses the effect of the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision ruling and the June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the Areas redesignation requests. EPA is proposing to determine that the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision does not prevent EPA from redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Even in light of the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision, redesignation for these Areas is appropriate under the CAA and EPA’s longstanding interpretations of the CAA’s provisions regarding redesignation. EPA first explains its longstanding interpretation that requirements that are imposed, or that become due, after a complete redesignation request is submitted for an area that is attaining the standard, are not applicable for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request. Second, EPA then shows that, even if EPA applies the subpart 4 requirements to the redesignation requests of the Areas and disregards the provisions of its 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule recently remanded by the D.C. Circuit Court, Pennsylvania’s request for redesignation of the Areas still qualifies for approval. EPA’s discussion takes into account the effect of the D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling and the June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the maintenance plans of the Areas, which EPA views as approvable when subpart 4 requirements are considered. a. Applicable Requirements Under Subpart 4 for Purposes of Evaluating the Redesignation Requests of the Areas With respect to the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 ruling rejected EPA’s reasons for implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS solely in accordance with the provisions of subpart 1, and remanded that matter to EPA, so that it could address implementation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 of Part D of the CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For the purposes of evaluating Pennsylvania’s redesignation requests for the Areas, to the extent that implementation under VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 subpart 4 would impose additional requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA believes that those requirements are not ‘‘applicable’’ for the purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, and thus EPA is not required to consider subpart 4 requirements with respect to the redesignation of the Areas. Under its longstanding interpretation of the CAA, EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a threshold matter, that the part D provisions which are ‘‘applicable’’ and which must be approved in order for EPA to redesignate an area include only those which came due prior to a state’s submittal of a complete redesignation request. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum. See also ‘‘SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS on or after November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 (Shapiro memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459, 12465–66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri, (68 FR 25418, 25424–27, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA’s redesignation rulemaking applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra Club’s view that the meaning of ‘‘applicable’’ under the statute is ‘‘whatever should have been in the plan at the time of attainment rather than whatever actually was in the plan and already implemented or due at the time of attainment’’).2 In this case, at the time that Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation requests for the 1997 and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the requirements under subpart 4 were not due. EPA’s view that, for purposes of evaluating the redesignation of the Areas, the subpart 4 requirements were not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted the redesignation requests is in keeping with the EPA’s interpretation of subpart 2 requirements for subpart 1 ozone areas redesignated subsequent to the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision in South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). In South Coast, the D.C. Circuit Court found that EPA was not permitted to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standard solely under subpart 1, and 2 Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the area’s submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the CAA. PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62393 held that EPA was required under the statute to implement the standard under the ozone-specific requirements of subpart 2 as well. Subsequent to the South Coast decision, in evaluating and acting upon redesignation requests for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard that were submitted to EPA for areas under subpart 1, EPA applied its longstanding interpretation of the CAA that ‘‘applicable requirements,’’ for purposes of evaluating a redesignation, are those that had been due at the time the redesignation request was submitted. See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation of Manitowoc County and Door County Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047, 22050, April 27, 2010). In those rulemaking actions, EPA therefore, did not consider subpart 2 requirements to be ‘‘applicable’’ for the purposes of evaluating whether the area should be redesignated under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA’s interpretation derives from the provisions of section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an area to be redesignated, a state must meet ‘‘all requirements ‘applicable’ to the area under section 110 and part D.’’ Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) provides that EPA must have fully approved the ‘‘applicable’’ SIP for the area seeking redesignation. These two sections read together support EPA’s interpretation of ‘‘applicable’’ as only those requirements that came due prior to submission of a complete redesignation request. First, holding states to an ongoing obligation to adopt new CAA requirements that arose after the state submitted its redesignation request, in order to be redesignated, would make it problematic or impossible for EPA to act on redesignation requests in accordance with the 18-month deadline Congress set for EPA action in section 107(d)(3)(D). If ‘‘applicable requirements’’ were interpreted to be a continuing flow of requirements with no reasonable limitation, states, after submitting a redesignation request, would be forced continuously to make additional SIP submissions that in turn would require EPA to undertake further notice-and-comment rulemaking actions to act on those submissions. This would create a regime of unceasing rulemaking that would delay action on the redesignation request beyond the 18month timeframe provided by the CAA for this purpose. Second, a fundamental premise for redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment is that the area has attained the relevant NAAQS due to emission reductions from existing controls. Thus, an area for which a redesignation E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 62394 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules request has been submitted would have already attained the NAAQS as a result of satisfying statutory requirements that came due prior to the submission of the request. Absent a showing that unadopted and unimplemented requirements are necessary for future maintenance, it is reasonable to view the requirements applicable for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request as including only those SIP requirements that have already come due. These are the requirements that led to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, for redesignation approval, that a state also satisfy additional SIP requirements coming due after the state submits its complete redesignation request, and while EPA is reviewing it, would compel the state to do more than is necessary to attain the NAAQS, without a showing that the additional requirements are necessary for maintenance. In the context of this redesignation, the timing and nature of the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA and EPA’s June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule, compound the consequences of imposing requirements that come due after the redesignation request is submitted. Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation requests for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on April 22, 2014 for the Areas, which is prior to the deadline by which the Areas are required to meet the attainment plan and other requirements pursuant to subpart 4. To require Pennsylvania’s fullycompleted and pending redesignation requests for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to comply now with requirements of subpart 4 that the D.C. Circuit Court announced only in January 2013 and for which the deadline to comply has not yet come, would be to give retroactive effect to such requirements and provide Pennsylvania a unique and earlier deadline for compliance solely on the basis of submitting its redesignation requests for the Areas. The D.C. Circuit Court recognized the inequity of this type of retroactive impact in Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002),3 where it upheld the D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling refusing to make retroactive EPA’s determination that the 3 Sierra Club v. Whitman was discussed and distinguished in a recent D.C. Circuit Court decision that addressed retroactivity in a quite different context, where, unlike the situation here, EPA sought to give its regulations retroactive effect. National Petrochemical and Refiners Ass’n v. EPA. 630 F.3d 145, 163 (D.C. Cir. 2010), rehearing denied 643 F.3d 958 (D.C. Cir. 2011), cert denied 132 S. Ct. 571 (2011). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 Areas did not meet their attainment deadlines. In that case, petitioners urged the D.C. Circuit Court to make EPA’s nonattainment determination effective as of the date that the statute required, rather than the later date on which EPA actually made the determination. The D.C. Circuit Court rejected this view, stating that applying it ‘‘would likely impose large costs on States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution prevention plans . . . even though they were not on notice at the time.’’ Id. at 68. Similarly, it would be unreasonable to penalize Pennsylvania by rejecting its redesignation requests for areas that are already attaining the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and that met all applicable requirements known to be in effect at the time of the requests. For EPA now to reject the redesignation requests solely because Pennsylvania did not expressly address subpart 4 requirements which have not yet come due and for which it had little to no notice, would inflict the same unfairness condemned by the D.C. Circuit Court in Sierra Club v. Whitman. b. Subpart 4 Requirements and Pennsylvania’s Redesignation Requests Even if EPA were to take the view that the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision requires that, in the context of pending redesignations for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, subpart 4 requirements were due and in effect at the time Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation requests, EPA proposes to determine that the Areas still qualify for redesignation to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As explained subsequently, EPA believes that the redesignation request for the Areas, though not expressed in terms of subpart 4 requirements, substantively meet the requirements of that subpart for purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. With respect to evaluating the relevant substantive requirements of subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating the Areas, EPA notes that subpart 4 incorporates components of subpart 1 of part D, which contains general air quality planning requirements for areas designated as nonattainment. See section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains specific planning and scheduling requirements for coarse particulate matter (PM10) 4 nonattainment areas, and under the D.C. Circuit Court’s 4 PM 10 refers to particulates nominally 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller. PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same statutory requirements also apply for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA has longstanding general guidance that interprets the 1990 amendments to the CAA, making recommendations to states for meeting the statutory requirements for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, the General Preamble. In the General Preamble, EPA discussed the relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP requirements, and pointed out that subpart 1 requirements were to an extent ‘‘subsumed by, or integrally related to, the more specific PM10 requirements’’ (57 FR 13538, April 16, 1992). The subpart 1 requirements include, among other things, provisions for attainment demonstrations, RACM, RFP, emissions inventories, and contingency measures. For the purposes of these redesignation requests, in order to identify any additional requirements which would apply under subpart 4, consistent with EPA’s June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule, EPA is considering the Areas to be ‘‘moderate’’ PM2.5 nonattainment areas. As EPA explained in its June 2, 2014 rule, section 188 of the CAA provides that all areas designated nonattainment areas under subpart 4 are initially classified by operation of law as ‘‘moderate’’ nonattainment areas, and remain moderate nonattainment areas unless and until EPA reclassifies the area as a ‘‘serious’’ nonattainment area. Accordingly, EPA believes that it is appropriate to limit the evaluation of the potential impact of subpart 4 requirements to those that would be applicable to moderate nonattainment areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 4 apply to moderate nonattainment areas and include the following: (1) An approved permit program for construction of new and modified major stationary sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration (section 189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C)); and (4) quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by the applicable attainment date (section 189(c)). The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section 189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions requirements of sections 172 and 173 to PM10, without adding to them. Consequently, EPA believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not itself impose for redesignation purposes any additional requirements for moderate areas beyond those contained in subpart E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 1.5 In any event, in the context of redesignation, EPA has long relied on the interpretation that a fully approved nonattainment NSR program is not considered an applicable requirement for redesignation, provided the area can maintain the standard with a prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program after redesignation. A detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ‘‘Part D NSR Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.’’ See also rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-AkronLorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469– 20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, June 21, 1996). With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under subpart 4,6 when EPA evaluates a redesignation request under either subpart 1 or 4, any area that is attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS is viewed as having satisfied the attainment planning requirements for these subparts. For redesignations, EPA has for many years interpreted attainment-linked requirements as not applicable for areas attaining the standard. In the General Preamble, EPA stated that: ‘‘The requirements for RFP will not apply in evaluating a request for redesignation to attainment since, at a minimum, the air quality data for the area must show that the area has already attained. Showing that the State will make RFP towards attainment will, therefore, have no meaning at that point.’’ The General Preamble also explained that: ‘‘[t]he section 172(c)(9) requirements are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the applicable date. These requirements no longer apply when an area has attained the standard and is eligible for redesignation. Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance plans . . . provides specific requirements for contingency measures that effectively supersede the requirements of section 172(c)(9) for these areas.’’ Id. EPA similarly stated in its 1992 Calcagni Memorandum that, ‘‘The requirements for reasonable further progress and other measures needed for attainment will not apply for redesignations because they 5 The potential effect of section 189(e) on section 189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this redesignation is discussed in this rulemaking action. 6 EPA refers to attainment demonstration, RFP, RACM, milestone requirements, and contingency measures. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 only have meaning for areas not attaining the standard.’’ It is evident that even if we were to consider the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that attainment-related requirements specific to subpart 4 should be imposed retroactively 7 or prior to December 31, 2014 and thus, were due prior to Pennsylvania’s redesignation requests, those requirements do not apply to areas that are attaining the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, for the purpose of evaluating pending requests to redesignate the areas to attainment. EPA has consistently enunciated this interpretation of applicable requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E) since the General Preamble was published more than twenty years ago. Courts have recognized the scope of EPA’s authority to interpret ‘‘applicable requirements’’ in the redesignation context. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). Moreover, even outside the context of redesignations, EPA has viewed the obligations to submit attainment-related SIP planning requirements of subpart 4 as inapplicable for areas that EPA determines are attaining the1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s prior ‘‘Clean Data Policy’’ rulemakings for the PM10 NAAQS, also governed by the requirements of subpart 4, explain EPA’s reasoning. They describe the effects of a determination of attainment on the attainment-related SIP planning requirements of subpart 4. See ‘‘Determination of Attainment for Coso Junction Nonattainment Area,’’ (75 FR 27944, May 19, 2010). See also Coso Junction Proposed PM10 Redesignation, (75 FR 36023, 36027, June 24, 2010); Proposed and Final Determinations of Attainment for San Joaquin Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 40954–55, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR 63641, 63643–47, October 30, 2006). In short, EPA in this context has also long concluded that to require states to meet superfluous SIP planning requirements is not necessary and not required by the CAA, so long as those areas continue to attain the relevant NAAQS. Elsewhere in this document, EPA determined that the Areas have attained and continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Under its longstanding interpretation, EPA is proposing to determine here that the Areas meet the attainment-related plan requirements of subparts 1 and 4 7 As EPA has explained above, we do not believe that the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision should be interpreted so as to impose these requirements on the states retroactively. Sierra Club v. Whitman, supra. PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62395 for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude that the requirements to submit an attainment demonstration under 189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination under section 172(c)(1) and section 189(a)(1)(c), a RFP demonstration under 189(c)(1), and contingency measure requirements under section 172(c)(9) are satisfied for purposes of evaluating these redesignation requests. c. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5 Precursors The D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC v. EPA remanded to EPA the two rules at issue in the case with instructions to EPA to re-promulgate them consistent with the requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this section addresses the D.C. Circuit Court’s opinion with respect to PM2.5 precursors. While past implementation of subpart 4 for PM10 has allowed for control of PM10 precursors such as NOX from major stationary, mobile, and area sources in order to attain the standard as expeditiously as practicable, section 189(e) of the CAA specifically provides that control requirements for major stationary sources of direct PM10 shall also apply to PM10 precursors from those sources, except where EPA determines that major stationary sources of such precursors ‘‘do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the standard in the area.’’ EPA’s 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, remanded by the D.C. Circuit Court, contained rebuttable presumptions concerning certain PM2.5 precursors applicable to attainment plans and control measures related to those plans. Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002, EPA provided, among other things, that a state was ‘‘not required to address VOC [and NH3] as . . . PM2.5 attainment plan precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and NH3] emissions in the State for control measures.’’ EPA intended these to be rebuttable presumptions. EPA established these presumptions at the time because of uncertainties regarding the emission inventories for these pollutants and the effectiveness of specific control measures in various regions of the country in reducing PM2.5 concentrations. EPA also left open the possibility for such regulation of VOC and NH3 in specific areas where that was necessary. The D.C. Circuit Court in its January 4, 2013 decision made reference to both section 189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated that, ‘‘In light of our disposition, we need not address the petitioners’ challenge to the presumptions in [40 CFR 51.1002] that VOCs and NH3 are E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 62396 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules not PM2.5 precursors, as subpart 4 expressly governs precursor presumptions.’’ NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10. Elsewhere in the D.C. Circuit Court’s opinion, however, the D.C. Circuit Court observed: ‘‘NH3 is a precursor to fine particulate matter, making it a precursor to both PM2.5 and PM10. For a PM10 nonattainment area governed by subpart 4, a precursor is presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C. 7513a(e) [section 189(e)].’’ Id. at 21, n.7. For a number of reasons, EPA believes that its proposed redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are consistent with the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision on this aspect of subpart 4. While the D.C. Circuit Court, citing section 189(e), stated that ‘‘for a PM10 area governed by subpart 4, a precursor is ‘presumptively’ regulated,’’ the D.C. Circuit Court expressly declined to decide the specific challenge to EPA’s 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule provisions regarding NH3 and VOC as precursors. The D.C. Circuit Court had no occasion to reach whether and how it was substantively necessary to regulate any specific precursor in a particular PM2.5 nonattainment area, and did not address what might be necessary for purposes of acting upon a redesignation request. However, even if EPA takes the view that the requirements of subpart 4 were deemed applicable at the time the state submitted the redesignation request, and disregards the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule’s rebuttable presumptions regarding NH3 and VOC as PM2.5 precursors, the regulatory consequence would be to consider the need for regulation of all precursors from any sources in the Areas to demonstrate attainment and to apply the section 189(e) provisions to major stationary sources of precursors. In the case of the Areas, EPA believes that doing so is consistent with proposing redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The Areas have attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS without any specific additional controls of NH3 and VOC emissions from any sources in the Areas. Precursors in subpart 4 are specifically regulated under the provisions of section 189(e), which requires, with important exceptions, control requirements for major stationary sources of PM10 precursors.8 8 Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for purposes of demonstrating attainment as expeditiously as practicable, a state is required to evaluate all economically and technologically feasible control measures for direct PM emissions VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 Under subpart 1 and EPA’s prior implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors were subject to regulation, with the exception of NH3 and VOC. Thus EPA must address here whether additional controls of NH3 and VOC from major stationary sources are required under section 189(e) of subpart 4 in order to redesignate the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As explained subsequently, EPA does not believe that any additional controls of NH3 and VOC are required in the context of these redesignations. In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538–13542. With regard to precursor regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble explicitly stated that control of VOC under other CAA requirements may suffice to relieve a state from the need to adopt precursor controls under section 189(e). See 57 FR 13542. EPA in this rulemaking action, proposes to determine that the Pennsylvania SIP revisions have met the provisions of section 189(e) with respect to NH3 and VOC as precursors. These proposed determinations are based on EPA’s findings that: (1) The Areas contain no major stationary sources of NH3, and (2) existing major stationary sources of VOC are adequately controlled under other provisions of the CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS.9 In the alternative, EPA proposes to determine that, under the express exception provisions of section 189(e), and in the context of the redesignation of the Areas, which are attaining the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, at present NH3 and VOC precursors from major stationary sources do not contribute significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Areas. See 57 FR 13539– 42. EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule provisions in 40 CFR 51.1002 were not directed at evaluation of PM2.5 precursors in the context of redesignation, but at SIP plans and control measures required to bring a nonattainment area into attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. By contrast, redesignation to attainment primarily requires the nonattainment area to have already attained due to permanent and and precursor emissions, and adopt those measures that are deemed reasonably available. 9 The Areas have reduced VOC emissions through the implementation of various control programs including VOC Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations and various on-road and non-road motor vehicle control programs. PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 enforceable emission reductions, and to demonstrate that controls in place can continue to maintain the standard. Thus, even if we regard the D.C. Circuit Court’s January 4, 2013 decision as calling for ‘‘presumptive regulation’’ of NH3 and VOC for PM2.5 under the attainment planning provisions of subpart 4, those provisions in and of themselves do not require additional controls of these precursors for an area that already qualifies for redesignation. Nor does EPA believe that requiring Pennsylvania to address precursors differently than it has already would result in a substantively different outcome. Although, as EPA has emphasized, its consideration here of precursor requirements under subpart 4 is in the context of a redesignation to attainment, EPA’s existing interpretation of subpart 4 requirements with respect to precursors in attainment plans for PM10 contemplates that states may develop attainment plans that regulate only those precursors that are necessary for purposes of attainment in the area in question, i.e., states may determine that only certain precursors need be regulated for attainment and control purposes.10 Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of subpart 4 for PM10.11 EPA believes that application of this approach to PM2.5 precursors under subpart 4 is reasonable. Because the Areas have already attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with its current approach to regulation of PM2.5 precursors, EPA believes that it is reasonable to conclude in the context of these redesignations that there is no need to revisit the attainment control strategy with respect to the treatment of precursors. Even if the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision is construed to impose an obligation, in evaluating these redesignation requests, to consider additional precursors under subpart 4, it would not affect EPA’s approval here of Pennsylvania’s requests for redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In the context of a redesignation, the Areas have shown that they have attained the standards. Moreover, Pennsylvania has shown and EPA has proposed to determine that 10 See, e.g., ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans for California—San Joaquin Valley PM10 Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-Hour and Annual PM10 Standards,’’ (69 FR 30006, May 26, 2004) (approving a PM10 attainment plan that impose controls on direct PM10 and NOX emissions and did not impose controls on SO2, VOC, or NH3 emissions). 11 See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005). E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62397 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in these Areas are due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions on all precursors necessary to provide for continued attainment of the standards. See Section V.A.3 of this rulemaking notice. It follows logically that no further control of additional precursors is necessary. Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4, 2013 decision of the D.C. Circuit Court as precluding redesignation of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS at this time. In summary, even if, prior to the date of the redesignation request submittal, Pennsylvania was required to address precursors for the Areas under subpart 4 rather than under subpart 1, as interpreted in EPA’s remanded 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, EPA would still conclude that the Areas had met all applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3(E)(ii) and (v) of the CAA. NAAQS; and (3) to approve the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory into the Pennsylvania SIP to satisfy section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requirement for the Areas, one of the criteria for redesignation. EPA’s proposed approvals of the redesignation requests and maintenance plans for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are based upon EPA’s determination that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which EPA is proposing in this rulemaking action, and that all other redesignation criteria have been met for the Areas. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 MVEBs for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and York Counties, Pennsylvania for transportation conformity purposes. The following is a description of how the Pennsylvania April 22, 2014 submittals satisfy the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. V. EPA’s Analysis of Pennsylvania’s SIP Submittals A. Redesignation Requests EPA is proposing, contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court’s lifting of the stay of CSAPR, several rulemaking actions for the Harrisburg-LebanonCarlisle-York nonattainment areas: (1) To redesignate the Harrisburg and York Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and to redesignate the Harrisburg-York Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) to approve into the Pennsylvania SIP, the associated maintenance plans for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 1. Attainment As noted previously, in the final rulemaking action dated July 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA determined that the Harrisburg and York nonattainment areas had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its applicable attainment date. EPA based this determination of attainment upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for the period of 2007–2009 showing that the Areas had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further discussion of pertinent air quality issues underlying this determination was provided in the July 29, 2011 final rulemaking action for EPA’s determination of attainment for these Areas. Also noted previously, in the final rulemaking action dated March 29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean data for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA based this determination upon complete, quality assured, quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the Area has monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 2008–2010 data in EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) database. EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality PM2.5 monitoring data in the Areas consistent with the requirements contained at 40 CFR part 50, and recorded in EPA’s AQS database. To support the previous determination of attainment of the Areas, EPA has also reviewed more recent data in its AQS database, including certified, qualityassured data for the period from 2008– 2010, 2009–2011, 2010–2012 and 2011– 2013. These data, shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3 show that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, as discussed subsequently with respect to the maintenance plans, PADEP has committed to continue monitoring ambient PM2.5 concentrations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Thus, EPA is proposing to determine that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, contingent upon the DC Circuit Court’s lifting the stay of CSAPR. TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUES FOR THE HARRISBURG AREA FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS (μG/M3) FOR 2008–2010, 2009–2011, 2010–2012, AND 2011–2013 (15 μG/M3) Monitor ID # 2008–2010 Cumberland 42–041–0101 .............................................................................. Dauphin 42–043–0401 .................................................................................... 2009–2011 11.6 12.4 11.0 12.1 2010–2012 11.0 11.9 2011–2013 11.0 11.9 TABLE 2—DESIGN VALUES FOR THE YORK AREA FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS (μG/M3) FOR 2008–2010, 2009– 2011, 2010–2012, AND 2011–2013 (15 μG/M3) Monitor ID # 2008–2010 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Hill Street 42–133–0008 .................................................................................. 2009–2011 12.2 11.5 2010–2012 11.7 2011–2013 11.3 TABLE 3—DESIGN VALUES FOR THE HARRISBURG/YORK AREA FOR THE 2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS (μG/M3) FOR 2008–2010, 2009–2011, 2010–2012, AND 2011–2013 (35 μG/M3) Monitor ID # 2008–2010 Cumberland 42–041–0101 .............................................................................. Dauphin 42–043–0401 .................................................................................... York 42–133–0008 .......................................................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2009–2011 32 33 30 E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 31 32 28 17OCP1 2010–2012 30 31 29 2011–2013 32 31 29 62398 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 2. The Areas Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Subpart 1 of the CAA and Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA In accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA, the SIP revisions for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the Areas must be fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA and all the requirements applicable to the Areas under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements) and part D of Title I of the CAA (SIP requirements for nonattainment areas) must be met. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS a. Section 110 Requirements General SIP Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2) of the CAA include, but are not limited to the following: (1) Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing; (2) provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality; (3) implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the implementation of part C requirements (PSD); (4) provisions for the implementation of part D requirements for NSR permit programs; (5) provisions for air pollution modeling; and (6) provisions for public and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule development. Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain certain measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate transport of air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call (63 FR 57356, October 27, 1998), amendments to the NOX SIP Call (64 FR 26298, May 14, 1999 and 65 FR 11222, March 2, 2000), and CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005). However, section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requirements for a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area’s designation and classification in that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 nonattainment area’s designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the state. Thus, EPA does not believe that these requirements are applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110(a)(2) elements of the CAA not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an area’s attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. The Areas will still be subject to these requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that section 110(a)(2) of the CAA and part D requirements which are linked with a particular area’s designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request, and that section 110(a)(2) elements of the CAA not linked in the area’s nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. This approach is consistent with EPA’s existing policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000) and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR 53099, October 19, 2001). EPA has reviewed the Pennsylvania SIP and has concluded that it meets the general SIP requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA to the extent they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has previously approved provisions of Pennsylvania’s SIP addressing section 110(a)(2) requirements, including provisions addressing PM2.5. See 77 FR 58955 (September 25, 2012). These requirements are, however, statewide requirements that are not linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Areas. Therefore, EPA believes that these SIP elements are not applicable requirements for purposes of review of Pennsylvania’s PM2.5 redesignation requests. b. Subpart 1 Requirements Subpart 1 sets forth the basic nonattainment plan requirements PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 applicable to PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Under section 172 of the CAA, states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely attainment and meet a variety of other requirements. The General Preamble for Implementation of Title I discusses the evaluation of these requirements in the context of EPA’s consideration of a redesignation request. The General Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an area is attaining the standard. See 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992). As noted previously, EPA has determined that the Areas have attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.2004(c), the requirement for Pennsylvania to submit, for the Areas, attainment demonstrations and associated RACM, RFP plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to the attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended until the Areas are redesignated to attainment for the standards, or EPA determines that the Areas again violated the standards, at which time such plans are required to be submitted. Since attainment had been reached for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and the Areas continue to attain the standards, no additional measures are needed to provide for attainment. Therefore, the requirements of sections 172(c)(1), 172(c)(2), 172(c)(6), and 172(c)(9) of the CAA are no longer considered to be applicable for purposes of redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement under section 172(c)(3) was not suspended by EPA’s clean data determination for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is the only remaining requirement under section 172 of the CAA to be considered for purposes of redesignation of the Areas. Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. As part of Pennsylvania’s redesignation request submittals, Pennsylvania submitted a 2007 base year emissions inventory for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS which includes emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of point sources, nonroad mobile sources, area sources and on-road mobile sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are NOX, VOC, PM2.5, NH3, and SO2. E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules In this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 base year emissions inventory in accordance with section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the Areas. Final approval of the 2007 base year emissions inventory will satisfy the emissions inventory requirement under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. For more information on the evaluation and EPA’s analysis of the 2007 base year emissions inventory, see Appendices B and C of Pennsylvania’s submittals and the emissions inventory technical support documents (TSDs) dated August 62399 13, 2014 available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA–OAR–R03–2014–0525. The summaries of the 2007 base year emissions inventory in tons per year (tpy) are shown in Tables 4, 5, and 6. TABLE 4—HARRISBURG AREA 2007 EMISSIONS BY SOURCE SECTOR Sector PM10 PM2.5 NOX SO2 NH3 VOC Point ......................................................... Area .......................................................... Nonroad ................................................... Onroad ..................................................... 1,260 8,944 369 1,013 584 3,059 346 866 4,786 2,194 4,443 25,194 1,808 3,216 188 175 17 6,935 4 347 840 8,768 4,489 8,220 Total .................................................. 11,586 4,855 36,617 5,388 7,302 22,317 TABLE 5—YORK AREA 2007 EMISSIONS BY SOURCE SECTOR Sector PM10 PM2.5 NOX SO2 NH3 VOC Point ......................................................... Area .......................................................... Nonroad ................................................... Onroad ..................................................... 3,556 8,093 214 430 2,462 2,394 202 358 22,164 1,680 2,660 10,684 115,901 1,684 135 78 80 3,316 2 161 1,320 5,956 1,833 4,810 Total .................................................. 12,292 5,417 37,189 117,798 3,559 13,920 TABLE 6—HARRISBURG-YORK AREA 2007 EMISSIONS BY SOURCE SECTOR Sector PM10 PM2.5 NOX SO2 NH3 VOC 4,815 17,037 582 1,443 3,046 5,452 548 1,225 26,950 3,874 7,104 35,878 117,709 4,900 323 254 96 10,250 6 509 2,160 14,724 6,322 13,030 Total .................................................. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Point ......................................................... Area .......................................................... Nonroad ................................................... Onroad ..................................................... 23,878 10,271 73,806 123,185 10,861 36,236 Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an area, and section 172(c)(5) of the CAA requires source permits for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that, since the PSD requirements will apply after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a nonattainment NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994 entitled, ‘‘Part D NSR Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.’’ Nevertheless, Pennsylvania currently has an approved NSR program, codified in the State’s VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 regulation at 25 Pa. Code 127.201. See 77 FR 41276 (July 13, 2012) (approving NSR program into the SIP). See also 49 FR 33127 (August 21, 1984) (approving Pennsylvania’s PSD program). However, Pennsylvania’s PSD program for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS will become effective in the Areas upon redesignation to attainment. See 49 FR 33128 (August 21, 1984) (approving PSD program into the SIP). Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires the SIP to meet the applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. As noted previously, EPA believes the Pennsylvania SIP revisions meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA that are applicable for purposes of redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area ‘‘for at least 10 years after the redesignation.’’ In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions to provide for PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Areas for at least 10 years after redesignation, through 2025. Pennsylvania is requesting that EPA approve these SIP revisions as meeting the requirement of section 175A of the CAA. Once approved, the maintenance plans for the Areas will ensure that the SIPs for Pennsylvania meet the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the Areas. EPA’s analysis of the maintenance plan is provided in Section V.B. of today’s proposed rulemaking action. Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that Federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62400 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules (transportation conformity) as well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability which EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA. EPA approved Pennsylvania’s transportation conformity SIP requirements on April 29, 2009 (74 FR 19541). Thus, for purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA determines that upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory as proposed in this rulemaking action, the Areas will meet all applicable SIP requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA for purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. c. Pennsylvania Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA Upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory proposed in this rulemaking action, EPA will have fully SIP-approved all applicable requirements of the Pennsylvania SIP revisions for the Areas for purposes of redesignaton to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with section 110(k) of the CAA. As noted in this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve the Areas’ 2007 emissions inventory (submitted as part of the maintenance plans) as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, upon approval of the 2007 emissions inventory, EPA will have satisfied all applicable requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA for the Areas. 3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions As required by section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA, EPA is proposing to determine that Pennsylvania has demonstrated that the air quality improvement in the Areas is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions.12 In making this demonstration, Pennsylvania has calculated the change in emissions between 2002 for the Harrisburg Area and 2005 for the York and HarrisburgYork Areas, which are years used to designate the Areas as nonattainment, and 2007, which is one of the years the Areas monitored attainment, as shown in Tables 7, 8, and 9. The reduction in emissions in tons per year, and the corresponding improvement in air quality from 2002 and 2005 to 2007 in the Areas can be attributed to a number of regulatory control measures that have been implemented in the Areas and contributing areas in recent years. For more information on EPA’s analysis of the 2002, 2005, and 2007 emissions inventories, see EPA’s emissions inventory TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov. Docket ID No. EPA–OAR–RO3–2014–0525. TABLE 7—EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM 2002 BASE YEAR TO 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR IN THE HARRISBURG AREA Sector 2002 2007 Reductions mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS NH3 ................................................. ¥94 876 187 31 5,855 4,855 1,000 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 6,048 2,126 33,823 5,247 4,786 2,194 25,194 4,443 1,262 ¥68 8,630 804 47,244 36,617 10,627 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 1,875 2,983 694 414 1,808 3,216 175 188 67 ¥232 518 226 5,967 5,388 579 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 1,082 10,633 9,940 5,120 840 8,768 8,220 4,489 242 1,866 1,720 631 Total ......................................................................... VOC ............................................... 584 3,059 866 346 Total ......................................................................... SO2 ................................................. 490 3,935 1,053 377 Total ......................................................................... NOX ................................................ Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... Total ......................................................................... PM2.5 .............................................. 26,776 22,317 4,459 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 11 7,415 390 3 17 6,935 347 4 ¥6 480 43 ¥1 12 It should be noted that the mobile source controls discussed in this section also provide VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 reductions in VOC and/or SO2 emissions. While those emissions may be reduced, the submitted PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 maintenance plan and redesignation request do not rely on these emission reductions. E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62401 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules TABLE 7—EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM 2002 BASE YEAR TO 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR IN THE HARRISBURG AREA— Continued Sector 2002 Total ......................................................................... 2007 7,819 Reductions 7,302 516 TABLE 8—EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM 2005 BASE YEAR TO 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR IN THE YORK AREA Sector PM2.5 .............................................. 2005 2007 Reductions 8,409 5,417 2,992 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 14,054 9,618 7,073 2,953 22,164 1,680 10,684 2,660 ¥8,110 7,938 ¥3,612 292 33,697 37,189 ¥3,492 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 104,616 13,937 170 272 115,901 1,684 78 135 ¥11,285 12,253 91 137 118,995 117,798 1,198 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 2 11,148 4,849 1,975 1,320 5,956 4,810 1,833 ¥1,318 5,192 39 142 Total ......................................................................... 17,974 13,920 4,054 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 1 3,583 335 2 80 3,316 161 2 ¥79 267 174 0 Total ......................................................................... NH3 ................................................. 2,342 860 ¥227 18 Total ......................................................................... VOC ............................................... 2,462 2,394 358 202 Total ......................................................................... SO2 ................................................. 4,804 3,254 131 221 Total ......................................................................... NOX ................................................ Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 3,921 3,559 362 TABLE 9—EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM 2005 BASE YEAR TO 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR IN THE HARRISBURG-YORK AREA Sector PM2.5 .............................................. 2005 2007 Reductions mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 1,777 1,637 ¥749 71 13,008 10,271 2,737 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 14,169 17,333 24,547 8,869 26,950 3,874 35,878 7,104 ¥12,781 13,459 ¥11,331 1,765 64,918 73,806 ¥8,888 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 104,640 18,443 590 787 117,709 4,900 254 323 ¥13,069 13,543 336 464 Total ......................................................................... VOC ............................................... 3,046 5,452 1,225 548 Total ......................................................................... SO2 ................................................. 4,823 7,089 476 619 Total ......................................................................... NOX ................................................ Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 124,459 123,185 1,274 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. 11 23,688 2,160 14,724 ¥2,149 8,964 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62402 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules TABLE 9—EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM 2005 BASE YEAR TO 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR IN THE HARRISBURG-YORK AREA—Continued Sector 2005 2007 Reductions Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 13,030 6,322 2,042 479 Total ......................................................................... 45,571 36,236 9,335 Stationary Point ............................................................... Area ................................................................................. Highway Vehicle .............................................................. Nonroad ........................................................................... 1 11,054 1,056 6 96 10,250 509 6 ¥95 804 547 0 Total ......................................................................... NH3 ................................................. 15,072 6,801 12,116 10,861 1,255 a. Federal Measures Implemented Reductions in PM2.5 precursor emissions have occurred statewide and in upwind states as a result of Federal emission control measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the future. Control of NOX and SO2 PM2.5 concentrations in the York and Harrisburg Areas are impacted by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, and the Areas’ air quality is strongly affected by regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions from power plants. NOX SIP Call—On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22 states to reduce emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone pollution.13 Affected states were required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission reductions resulting from regulations developed in response to the NOX SIP Call are permanent and enforceable. By imposing an emissions cap regionally, the NOX SIP Call reduced NOX emissions from large EGUs and large non-EGUs such as industrial boilers, internal combustion engines, and cement kilns. In response to the NOX SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted its NOX Budget Trading Program regulations for EGUs and large industrial boilers, with emission reductions starting in May 2003. Pennsylvania’s NOX Budget Trading Program regulation was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795). To meet other requirements of the NOX SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted NOX control regulations for cement plants and internal combustion engines, with emission reductions starting in May 2005. These regulations were approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428). CAIR—As previously noted, CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) created regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states, including Pennsylvania. EPA approved the Commonwealth’s CAIR regulation, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapter D, into the Pennsylvania SIP on December 10, 2009 (74 FR 65446). In 2009, the CAIR ozone season NOX trading program superseded the NOX Budget Trading Program, although the emission reduction obligations of the NOX SIP Call were not rescinded. See 40 CFR 51.121(r) and 51.123(aa). Data collected from EPA’s long-term national air quality and deposition monitoring networks show that these regional cap-and-trade programs have been effective in reducing emissions of SO2 and NOX nationwide.14 Under the NOX SIP Call and CAIR, SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs were significantly reduced statewide and in states upwind of the Harrisburg and York areas. Table 10 shows statewide EGU emissions data for 2002 and 2007 for the states that were determined to contribute significantly to air quality in the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document included in the docket for this proposed rulemaking action. Table 10 also shows the level of emissions in the contributing states for 2013, the latest year for which annual data is available, which shows the continuing decline of SO2 and NOX emissions in these states. TABLE 10—COMPARISON OF 2002, 2007, AND 2013 NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS FROM EGUS FOR STATES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE HARRISBURG AND YORK AREAS NOX (tpy) SO2 (tpy) State mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 2002 District of Columbia 15 ...... Illinois ............................... Indiana ............................. Kentucky .......................... Maryland .......................... Michigan ........................... North Carolina .................. New Jersey ...................... New York ......................... 2007 2013 556 172,354 281,146 198,599 76,056 132,623 145,706 33,149 84,885 250 123,105 198,501 174,932 54,553 108,198 64,770 17,059 58,569 96 55,386 103,120 84,964 14,554 65,728 49,059 5,713 24,150 13 Although the NO SIP Call was issued in order X to address ozone pollution, reductions of NOX as a result of that program have also impacted PM2.5 pollution, for which NOX is also a precursor emission. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 Reductions 2002–2007 306 49,249 82,645 23,665 21,503 24,425 89,936 16,090 26,316 2002 2007 1,087 353,228 778,868 482,653 254,008 342,997 462,993 48,269 231,973 319 272,571 714,529 380,314 272,879 338,014 370,827 34,189 107,211 14 Clean Air Interstate Rule, Acid Rain Program, and Former NOX Budget Trading Program, 2012 Progress Report (December 2013), available at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/ARPCAIR_ 12_downloads/ARPCAIR12_01.pdf; Clean Air PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2013 .................... 135,866 268,217 188,115 25,118 194,396 48,154 2,433 17,797 Reductions 2002–2007 768 80,657 64,339 102,339 18,871 4,983 92,166 14,080 124,762 Interstate Rule, Acid Rain Program, and Former NOX Budget Trading Program, 2012 Progress Report (May 2014), available at https://www.epa.gov/ airmarkets/progress/ARPCAIR_12_downloads/ ARPCAIR12_02.pdf. E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62403 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules TABLE 10—COMPARISON OF 2002, 2007, AND 2013 NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS FROM EGUS FOR STATES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE HARRISBURG AND YORK AREAS—Continued NOX (tpy) SO2 (tpy) State 2013 Reductions 2002–2007 2002 2007 Ohio .................................. Virginia ............................. West Virginia .................... 370,497 78,868 225,371 240,722 60,302 153,514 86,399 28,315 60,111 129,775 18,566 71,857 Total .......................... 1,799,808 1,254,475 577,595 554,027 2002 Reductions 2002–2007 2007 2013 1,132,069 230,846 507,110 954,646 172,685 371,996 282,007 38,778 86,201 177,423 58,161 135,114 4,826,101 3,990,180 1,287,082 835,921 Source: EPA’s Air Markets Program Data (AMPD). AMPD query results are included in the docket for this proposed rulemaking action. Table 10 shows that states impacting the York and Harrisburg Areas reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by 554,027 tons and 835,921 tons, respectively, between 2002 and 2007. EPA has therefore determined that the significant reductions in NOX and SO2 from upwind states and in Pennsylvania required under the NOX SIP Call and CAIR have contributed to the air quality attainment in the Harrisburg and York areas. In addition, the NOX and SO2 emissions from these states further declined by 676,880 tons and 2,703,098 tons, respectively, from 2007 to 2013. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards These emission control requirements result in lower NOX emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in between 2004 and 2009. EPA estimated that, after phasing in the new requirements, the following vehicle NOX emission reductions will have occurred nationwide: Passenger cars (light duty vehicles) (77 percent); light duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 percent); and larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 95 percent). Some of the emissions reductions resulting from new vehicle standards occurred during the 2008–2010 attainment period; however, additional reductions will continue to occur throughout the maintenance period as new vehicles replace older vehicles. EPA expects fleet wide average emissions to decline by similar percentages as new vehicles replace older vehicles. Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule EPA issued the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule in July 2000. This rule included standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel, which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007 which reduced PM2.5 emissions from heavy-duty highway 15 The District of Columbia and Maryland were considered together in the contribution analysis. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm. Standards for gasoline engines were phased in starting in 2008. The total program is estimated to achieve a 90 percent reduction in direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95 percent reduction in NOX emissions for new engines using low sulfur diesel fuel. spark-ignition engine and recreational engine standards, an overall 80 percent reduction in NOX are expected by 2020. Some of these emission reductions occurred by the 2002–2007 attainment period and additional emission reductions will occur during the maintenance period as the fleet turns over. Nonroad Diesel Rule On June 29, 2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA promulgated the Nonroad Diesel Rule for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction, agriculture, and mining, to be phased in between 2008 and 2014. The rule phased in requirements for reducing the sulfur content of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The reduction in sulfur content prevents damage to the more advanced emission control systems needed to meet the engine standards. It will also reduce fine particulate emissions from diesel engines. The combined engine standards and the sulfur in fuel reductions will reduce NOX and PM emissions from large nonroad engines by over 90%, compared to current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel. Federal Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine Standards In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include large spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and airport groundservice equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-ignition engines such as offhighway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, and snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission standards from large sparkignition engines were implemented in two tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational vehicle emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012. Marine Diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009. With full implementation of all of the nonroad PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 As required by the CAA, EPA developed Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) Standards to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants from a published list of industrial sources referred to as ‘‘source categories.’’ The MACT standards have been adopted and incorporated by reference in Section 6.6 of Pennsylvania’s Air Pollution Control Act and implementing regulations in 25 Pa. Code § 127.35 and are also included in Federally enforceable permits issued by PADEP for affected sources. The Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boiler MACT standards (69 FR 55217, September 13, 2004, and 76 FR 15554, February 21, 2011) are estimated to reduce emissions of PM, SO2, and VOCs from major source boilers and process heaters nationwide. Also, the Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) MACT will reduce NOX and PM emissions from engines located at facilities such as pipeline compressor stations, chemical and manufacturing plants, and power plants. b. State Measures Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program In 2002, Pennsylvania adopted the Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program for model years starting in May 2004. The program incorporates California standards by reference and required model year 2005 and beyond heavy-duty diesel highway engines to be certified to the California standards, which were more stringent than the Federal standards for model years 2005 E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62404 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules and 2006. After model year 2006, Pennsylvania required implementation of the Federal standards that applied to model years 2007 and beyond, discussed in the Federal measures section of this proposed rulemaking action. This program reduced emissions of NOX statewide. Vehicle Emission Inspection/ Maintenance (I/M) Program Pennsylvania’s Vehicle Emission I/M program was expanded into the Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas in early 2004, and applies to model year 1975 and newer gasolinepowered vehicles that are 9,000 pounds and under. The program, approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313), consists of annual onboard diagnostics and gas cap test for model year 1996 vehicles and newer, and an annual visual inspection of pollution control devices and gas cap test for model year 1995 vehicles and older. This program reduces emissions of NOX from affected vehicles. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Consumer Products Regulation Pennsylvania regulation ‘‘Chapter 130, Subchapter B. Consumer Products’’ established, effective January 1, 2005, VOC emission limits for numerous categories of consumer product, and applies statewide to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures such consumer products on or after January 1, 2005 for use in Pennsylvania. It was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on December 8, 2004 (69 FR 70895). Based on the information summarized above, Pennsylvania has adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air quality in the Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas are due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. The reductions result from Federal and State requirements and regulation of precursors within Pennsylvania that affect the Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas. B. Maintenance Plans On April 22, 2014, PADEP submitted maintenance plans for the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and a maintenance plan for the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as required by section 175A of the CAA. EPA’s analysis for proposing approval of the maintenance plans is provided in this section. 1. Attainment Emissions Inventory Section 172(c)(3) requires states to submit a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 from all sources in the nonattainment area. For a maintenance plan, states are required to submit an inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to attain the NAAQS, referred to as the attainment inventory (or the maintenance plan base year inventory), and which should be based on actual emissions. PADEP submitted an attainment inventory for 2007, which is one of the years in the period during which the Harrisburg and York Areas monitored attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and Harrisburg-York Area monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The inventory for 2007 is comprised of NOX, PM2.5, SO2, VOC, and NH3 emissions from point sources, nonpoint sources, onroad mobile sources, and nonroad mobile sources. The 2007 point source inventory contained emissions for EGU and nonEGU sources in Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties that were directly reported by the facilities. Since the reported emissions did not include condensable emissions, the EGU inventory was augmented to account for condensable by application of emission factors developed by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) in 2008. The nonpoint source emissions inventory for 2007 was developed using 2007 specific activity data along with EPA emission factors and the most recent available emission calculation methodologies. PADEP used the 2008 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data to fill in any missing categories in the 2007 inventory. For the 2007 nonroad mobile sources, PADEP generated emissions using EPA’s National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) 2008 model. Since marine, air and rail/locomotive (MAR) emissions are not part of the NONROAD model, they were calculated separately outside of the NONROAD model. The 2007 onroad mobile source inventory was developed using EPA’s highway mobile source emissions model MOVES2010. PADEP used local activity to replace default inputs in the model where appropriate. EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and found the 2007 emissions inventory acceptable for meeting the requirements under section 172(c)(3). For more information on the emissions inventory submitted by PADEP for the Areas and EPA’s analysis of the emissions inventory, see Appendices B and C of the Pennsylvania submittals and the emissions inventory TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA–OAR–R03–2014–0525. PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2. Maintenance Demonstration Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area ‘‘for at least 10 years after the redesignation.’’ EPA has interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ‘‘for a period of ten years following redesignation.’’ Where the emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the maintenance period will not increase over the attainment year inventory. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum, pages 9– 10. For a demonstration of maintenance, emissions inventories are required to be projected to future dates to assess the influence of future growth and controls; however, the maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also 66 FR 53099–53100; 68 FR 25430–32. PADEP uses projection inventories to show that the Areas will remain in attainment and developed projection inventories for an interim year of 2017 and a maintenance plan end year of 2025 to show that future emissions of NOX, SO2, VOC, and PM2.5 will remain at or below the attainment year 2007 emissions levels throughout the Areas through the year 2025. Although emissions of NH3 are projected to increase from 2007 to 2017 and from 2007 to 2025, the increase will not affect the Areas’ ability to maintain the standard because it is more than compensated by the significant reductions of the other precursors in 2017 and 2025. The Federal and State measures described in Section V.A.3. of this proposed rulemaking action demonstrate that the reductions in emissions from point, area, and mobile sources in the Areas have occurred and will continue to occur through 2025. In addition, the following State and Federal regulations and programs ensure the continuing decline of SO2, NOX, PM2.5, and VOC emissions in the Areas during the maintenance period and beyond: Non-EGUs previously covered under the NOX SIP Call Pennsylvania established NOX emission limits for the large industrial boilers that were previously subject to the NOX SIP Call, but were not subject to CAIR. For these units, Pennsylvania established an allowable ozone season NOX limit based on the unit’s previous ozone season’s heat input. A combined E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules NOX ozone season emissions cap of 3,418 tons applies for all of these units. CSAPR (August 8, 2011, 76 FR 48208) If the CSAPR stay is lifted as requested by EPA, the implementation of CSAPR will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR. Regulation of Cement Kilns On July 19, 2011 (76 FR 52558), EPA approved amendments to 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145 Subchapter C to further reduce NOX emissions from cement kilns. The amendments established NOX emission rate limits for long wet kilns, long dry kilns, and preheater and precalciner kilns that are lower by 35% to 63% from the previous limit of 6 pounds of NOX per ton of clinker that applied to all kilns. The amendments were effective on April 15, 2011. Stationary Source Regulations Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter D for Adhesives, Sealers, Primers, and Solvents was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090). The regulation established VOC content limits for various categories of adhesives, sealants, primers, and solvent, and became applicable on January 1, 2012. Amendments to Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B established, effective January 1, 2009, new or more stringent VOC standards for consumer products. The amendments were approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63717). Pennsylvania’s Clean Vehicle Program The Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (formerly, New Motor Vehicle Control Program) incorporates by reference the California Low Emission Vehicle program (CA LEVII), although it allowed automakers to comply with the NLEV program as an alternative to this program until Model Year (MY) 2006. The Clean Vehicles Program, codified in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 126, Subchapter D, was modified to require CA LEVII to apply to MY 2008 and beyond, and was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on January 24, 2012 (77 FR 3386). The Clean Vehicles Program incorporates by reference the emission control standards of CA LEVII, which, among other requirements, reduces emissions of NOX by requiring that passenger car emission standards and fleet average emission standards also apply to light duty vehicles. Model year 2008 and newer passenger cars and light duty trucks are required to be certified for emissions by the California Air Resource Board (CARB), in order to be sold, leased, offered for sale or lease, imported, delivered, purchased, rented, acquired, received, titled or registered in Pennsylvania. In addition, manufacturers are required to demonstrate that the California fleet average standard is met based on the number of new light-duty vehicles delivered for sale in the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth’s submittal for the January 24, 2012 rulemaking projected that, by 2025, the program will achieve 318 tons more NOX reductions than Tier II for the counties in the Harrisburg, York, and Harrisburg/York Areas. Emission Limits on PPL Brunner Island In 2009, PPL installed a flue gas desulfurization system and electrostatic precipitators on Units 1, 2, and 3 at the PPL Brunner Island power plant located in York County, resulting in significant SO2 reductions at the facility. The facility’s Title V permit is Federally enforceable pursuant to section 502 of the CAA, and includes emission limits for PM, SO2, and NOX for Units 1, 2, and 3. Levels of SO2 were significantly reduced from 106,148 tons in 2007 to 17,822 tons in 2010. EPA approved 62405 Pennsylvania’s Title V program on July 30, 1996. 61 FR 39597. Two Pennsylvania regulations—its Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle Idling Act (August 1, 2011, 76 FR 45705) and its Outdoor Wood-Fired Boiler regulation (September 20, 2011, 76 FR 58114)—were not included in the projection inventories, but may also assist in maintaining the standard. Also, the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards (79 FR 23414, April 29, 2014) establishes more stringent vehicle emissions standards and will reduce the sulfur content of gasoline beginning in 2017. The fuel standard will achieve NOX reductions by further increasing the effectiveness of vehicle emission controls for both existing and new vehicles. The projection inventories for the 2017 and 2025 point, area, and nonroad sources were taken from regional inventories coordinated by MARAMA for the states in the Mid-Atlantic/ Northeast Visibility Union and Virginia (MANE-VU+VA), which includes Pennsylvania. Detailed discussion of how 2017 and 2025 projections were developed are contained in Appendix C–2 and C–3, respectively, of Pennsylvania’s submittals. EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and found the methodologies acceptable. EPA has determined that the 2017 and 2025 projected emissions inventories provided by PADEP are approvable. For more information on EPA’s analysis of the emissions inventory, see EPA’s TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available on line at www.regulations.gov., Docket ID No. EPA–OAR–R03–2014–0525. Tables 11, 12, and 13 provide a summary of the inventories for the 2007 attainment year, as compared to the projected inventories for the 2017 interim year and the 2025 maintenance plan end year for the Areas in tpy. TABLE 11—COMPARISON OF 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2017 AND 2025 PROJECTED PM2.5 EMISSIONS IN THE HARRISBURG AREA mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS PM2.5 2007 2017 2017 2025 2025 (attainment) ................................................................. (interim) ....................................................................... (projected decrease) ................................................... (maintenance) ............................................................. (projected decrease) ................................................... NOX 4,855 4,240 615 3,958 897 SO2 36,617 22,862 13,755 16,116 20,501 NH3 5,388 4,598 790 3,626 1,762 7,302 7,819 ¥517 8,277 ¥975 VOC 22,317 16,393 5,924 14,333 7,984 TABLE 12—COMPARISON OF 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2017 AND 2025 PROJECTED PM2.5 EMISSIONS IN THE YORK AREA PM2.5 2007 (attainment) ................................................................. 2017 (interim) ....................................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 NOX 5,417 4,915 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 37,189 28,859 SO2 NH3 117,798 16,441 E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 3,559 3,663 VOC 13,920 10,886 62406 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules TABLE 12—COMPARISON OF 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2017 AND 2025 PROJECTED PM2.5 EMISSIONS IN THE YORK AREA—Continued PM2.5 2017 (projected decrease) ................................................... 2025 (maintenance) ............................................................. 2025 (projected decrease) ................................................... NOX 502 4,944 473 8,330 27,673 9,516 SO2 NH3 101,357 16,406 84,951 VOC ¥104 3,774 ¥215 3,034 9,822 4,098 TABLE 13—COMPARISON OF 2007 ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2017 AND 2025 PROJECTED PM2.5 EMISSIONS IN THE HARRISBURG-YORK AREA PM2.5 2007 2017 2017 2025 2025 (attainment) ................................................................. (interim) ....................................................................... (projected decrease) ................................................... (maintenance) ............................................................. (projected decrease) ................................................... As shown in Tables 11, 12 and 13, the projected levels of PM2.5, NOX, SO2, and VOC are well under the 2007 attainment year levels for each of these pollutants. While the emissions of NH3 are projected to be higher than the 2007 inventory for this pollutant for both the interim year and the end-year, the significant decreases in the other precursors more than offset the increase, and thus EPA does not believe the increase in NH3 will affect the Areas’ ability to maintain the NAAQS. Pennsylvania has adequately demonstrated that the Areas will continue to maintain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS during the 10 year maintenance period. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 3. Monitoring Network Pennsylvania’s maintenance plans include a commitment to continue to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Pennsylvania currently operates a PM2.5 monitor in each of the counties in the Harrisburg Area, namely Cumberland, Dauphin, and Lebanon Counties, and a PM2.5 monitor on Hill Street in the York Area. In its April 22, 2014 submittals, Pennsylvania stated that it will consult with EPA prior to making any necessary changes to the network and will continue to quality assure the monitoring data in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58. 4. Verification of Continued Attainment To provide for tracking of the emission levels in the Areas, PADEP requires major point sources to submit air emissions information annually and prepares a new periodic inventory for all PM2.5 precursors every three years in accordance with EPA’s Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR). Emissions information will be compared VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 NOX 10,271 9,155 1,116 8,902 1,369 73,806 51,721 22,085 43,789 30,017 to the attainment year inventory (2007) to assure continued attainment with the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and will be used to assess emissions trends, as necessary. Also, as noted in the previous subsection, PADEP will continue to operate its monitoring system in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and remains obligated to quality-assure monitoring data and enter all data into the AQS in accordance with federal requirements. PADEP will use this data, supplemented with additional data, as necessary, to assure continuing attainment in the Areas. 5. Contingency Measures The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS that occurs in the Areas after redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to ensure that a state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the events that would ‘‘trigger’’ the adoption and implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s) that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s). Pennsylvania’s maintenance plans describe the procedures for the adoption and implementation of contingency measures to reduce emissions should a violation occur. Pennsylvania’s contingency measures include a first level response and a second level response. A first level response is triggered for when the annual mean PM2.5 concentration exceeds 15.5 mg/m3 in a single calendar year within the Areas, or if the periodic emissions PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 SO2 NH3 123,185 21,038 102,147 20,032 103,153 10,861 11,483 ¥622 12,051 ¥1,189 VOC 36,236 27,279 8,957 24,155 12,081 inventory for the Areas exceed the attainment year inventory by more than ten percent. The first level response will consist of a study to determine if the emissions trends show increasing concentrations of PM2.5, and whether this trend is likely to continue. If it is determined through the study that action is necessary to reverse a trend of emissions increases, Pennsylvania will, as expeditiously as possible, implement necessary and appropriate control measures to reverse the trend. A second level response will be prompted if the two-year average of the annual mean concentration exceeds 15.0 mg/m3 within the Areas. This would trigger an evaluation of the conditions causing the exceedence, whether additional emission control measures should be implemented to prevent a violation of the standard, and analysis of potential measures that could be implemented to prevent a violation. Pennsylvania would then begin its adoption process to implement the measures as expeditiously as practicable. Pennsylvania’s candidate contingency measures include the following: (1) A regulation based on the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) Model Rule to update requirements for consumer products; (2) a regulation based on the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for industrial cleaning solvents; (3) voluntary diesel projects such as diesel retrofit for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets, idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives, and idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses, and other freighthandling facilities; (4) promotion of accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, focusing on commercial equipment; and (5) promotion of E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS alternative fuels for fleets, home heating and agricultural use. Pennsylvania’s rulemaking process and schedule for adoption and implementation of any necessary contingency measure is shown in the SIP submittals as being 18 months from PADEP’s approval to initiate rulemaking. For all of the reasons discussed in this section, EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania’s 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plans for the Harrisburg, York, and Harrisburg-York Areas as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA. recently remanded to EPA by the D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC v. EPA, No. 08– 1250 (January 4, 2013), in which the D.C. Circuit Court remanded to EPA the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule because it concluded that EPA must implement that NAAQS pursuant to the PM-specific implementation provisions of subpart 4, rather than solely under the general provisions of subpart 1. That decision does not affect EPA’s proposed approval of the MVEBs for the Areas. The MVEBs in tpy are presented in Tables 14, 15, and 16. C. Transportation Conformity Section 176(c) of the CAA requires Federal actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas to ‘‘conform to’’ the goals of SIPs. This means that such actions will not cause or contribute to violations of a NAAQS, worsen the severity of an existing violation, or delay timely attainment of any NAAQS or any interim milestone. Actions involving Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject to the transportation conformity rule (40 CFR Part 93, subpart A). Under this rule, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate with state air quality and transportation agencies, EPA, and the FHWA and FTA to demonstrate that their long range transportation plans and transportation improvement programs (TIP) conform to applicable SIPs. This is typically determined by showing that estimated emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are less than or equal to the MVEBs contained in the SIP. On April 22, 2014, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions that contain the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX onroad mobile source budgets for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania did not provide emission budgets for SO2, VOC, and NH3 because it concluded, consistent with the presumptions regarding these precursors in the Transportation Conformity Rule at 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v), which predated and were not disturbed by the litigation on the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, that emissions of these precursors from motor vehicles are not significant contributors to the Area’s PM2.5 air quality problem. EPA issued conformity regulations to implement the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in July 2004 and May 2005 (69 FR 40004, July 1, 2004 and 70 FR 24280, May 6, 2005). Those actions were not part of the final rule TABLE 14—MVEBS FOR CUMBERLAND AND DAUPHIN COUNTIES FOR THE 1997 PM2.5 AND 2006 24-HOUR NAAQS VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 Year PM2.5 2017 .......... 2025 .......... NOX 365 275 10287 7024 TABLE 15—MVEBS FOR LEBANON COUNTY FOR THE 1997 PM2.5 AND 2006 PM2.5 24-HOUR NAAQS Year PM2.5 2017 .......... 2025 .......... NOX 76 52 2252 1446 TABLE 16—MVEBS FOR YORK COUNTY FOR THE 1997 PM2.5 AND 2006 PM2.5 24-HOUR NAAQS Year PM2.5 2017 .......... 2025 .......... NOX 192 144 5390 3398 EPA’s substantive criteria for determining adequacy of MVEBs are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Additionally, to approve the MVEBs, EPA must complete a thorough review of the SIP, in this case the PM2.5 maintenance plans, and conclude that with the projected level of motor vehicle and all other emissions, the SIPs will achieve its overall purpose, in this case providing for maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of three basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2) providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a public comment period; and (3) EPA taking action on the MVEB. In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA is initiating the process for determining whether or not the MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The publication of PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 62407 this document starts a 30-day public comment period on the adequacy of the submitted MVEBs. This comment period is concurrent with the comment period on this proposed action and comments should be submitted to the docket for this rulemaking. EPA may choose to make its determination on the adequacy of the budgets either in the final rulemaking on this maintenance plan and redesignation request or by informing Pennsylvania of the determination in writing, publishing a notice in the Federal Register and posting a notice on EPA’s adequacy Web page (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/ adequacy.htm).16 However, EPA would not complete the adequacy process for these budgets in advance of the final rule approving the maintenance plan and redesignation request unless the D.C. Circuit Court lifts the stay on the implementation of CSAPR. EPA has reviewed the MVEBs and found them consistent with the maintenance plan and that the budgets meet the criteria for adequacy and approval. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties for transportation conformity purposes provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA’s motion to lift the stay of CSAPR, as discussed in detail in Section IV.B. of today’s proposed rulemaking action. Additional information pertaining to the review of the MVEBs can be found in the TSDs dated September 3, 2014, available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0525. VI. Proposed Actions EPA is proposing to approve the redesignations of the HarrisburgLebanon-Carlisle-York Areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has evaluated Pennsylvania’s redesignation requests and determined that the Areas meet the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA’s motion to lift the stay of CSAPR. The monitoring data demonstrates that the Areas have attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and, for the reasons discussed previously, that they will continue to attain the NAAQS. Final approval of these redesignation requests would 16 For additional information on the adequacy process, please refer to 40 CFR 93.118(f) and the discussion of the adequacy process in the preamble to the 2004 final transportation conformity rule. See 69 FR 40039–40043. E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1 62408 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules change the designation of Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the Harrisburg-York Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the associated maintenance plans for the Areas as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP because they meet the requirements of section 175A of the CAA as described previously in this proposed rulemaking notice. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 base year emissions inventory as meeting the requirement of section 172(a)(3) of the CAA. Furthermore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties for transportation conformity purposes. EPA is also initiating the process for determining whether the MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. EPA’s proposed approval of Pennsylvania’s redesignation requests, maintenance plans, and MVEBs in today’s rulemaking action are contingent upon the lifting of the CSAPR stay. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:43 Oct 16, 2014 Jkt 235001 in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and • does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule proposing to approve Pennsylvania’s redesignation requests, maintenance plans, 2007 base year emissions inventory, and MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes for the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 40 CFR Part 81 Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: September 30, 2014. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III. [FR Doc. 2014–24596 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2014–0007; FXES11130900000–156–FF09E42000] RIN 1018–AY82 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To Downlist the Arroyo Toad, and a Proposed Rule To Reclassify the Arroyo Toad as Threatened Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the comment period. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the reopening of the public comment period on our March 27, 2014, proposed rule to reclassify the arroyo toad (Anaxyrus californicus) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are taking this action to solicit feedback on new information we received. Comments previously submitted need not be resubmitted, as they will be fully considered in preparation of the final listing determination. We anticipate publishing a final determination on or before March 27, 2015. DATES: We will consider comments received or postmarked on or before November 17, 2014. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. Any comments that we receive after the closing date may not be considered in the final decision on this action. ADDRESSES: Document availability: You may obtain copies of the proposed rule and associated documents, including the new information discussed in this document, on the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2014–0007, or by contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Written comments: You may submit written comments by one of the following methods: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS–R8–ES–2014–0007, which is the docket number for the rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM 17OCP1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

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

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

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

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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's requests to redesignate to
attainment the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York nonattainment areas
(hereafter ``the Areas'') for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). This proposed approval is contingent upon the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit
Court) granting EPA's motion to lift the stay of the Cross State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) that the D.C. Circuit Court issued on December
30, 2011. EPA is proposing to find that the attainment of the Areas is
in part due to the emissions reductions resulting from the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) in Pennsylvania and in the states upwind of
Pennsylvania. Thus, if the D.C. Circuit Court lifts the stay of CSAPR
and grants EPA's motion to begin implementation of CSAPR on January 1,
2015, those emission reductions originally required under CAIR will be
made permanent and enforceable through the implementation of CSAPR. In
addition to the redesignation requests, EPA is also proposing to
determine that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, EPA is proposing to
approve as revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan
(SIP), the associated maintenance plans to show maintenance of the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025 for the
Areas. The maintenance plans include the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5
and nitrogen oxides (NOX) mobile vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for
transportation conformity purposes. EPA is also initiating the process
to determine if these budgets are adequate for transportation
conformity purposes. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve as
revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP, the 2007 base year emissions
inventory for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA's proposed approvals of the maintenance
plans and MVEBs for the Areas are also contingent upon the lifting of
the CSAPR stay by the D.C. Circuit Court.

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

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

[[Page 62390]]

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by
email at quinto.rose@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. EPA's Requirements
A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment
B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
III. Summary of Proposed Actions
IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions
A. Effects of EME Homer City Decision
B. Effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Court Decision
Regarding the PM2.5 Implementation Under Subpart 4 of
Part D of Title I of the CAA
V. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania's SIP Submittals
A. Redesignation Requests
B. Maintenance Plans
C. Transportation Conformity
VI. Proposed Actions
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were
established on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652). EPA promulgated an annual
standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\),
based on a three-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations (the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard). In the same
rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ based
on a three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.
On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944, 1014), EPA published air quality
area designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In that
rulemaking action, EPA designated the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle
(Harrisburg) and York Areas as nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The Harrisburg Area is comprised of Cumberland,
Dauphin and Lebanon Counties; and the York Area is comprised of York
County in Pennsylvania. See 40 CFR 81.339.
On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA retained the annual average
standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\, but revised the 24-hour standard to 35
[mu]g/m\3\ based again on the three-year average of the 98th percentile
of the 24-hour concentrations (the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standard). On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA published
designations for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, which
became effective on December 14, 2009. In that rulemaking action, EPA
designated the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-York (Harrisburg-York) Area
as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40
CFR 81.339.
Today's proposed rulemaking actions address the redesignations to
attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Harrisburg and York Areas, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards for the Harrisburg-York Area.
On August 25, 2008 (73 FR 49949) and on September 25, 2009 (74 FR
48863), EPA determined that the Harrisburg and the York Areas,
respectively, had clean data and monitored attainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On March 29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA
determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean data and monitored
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Pursuant to 40
CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the requirements for
the Areas to submit attainment demonstrations and associated reasonably
available control measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP)
plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related
to the attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended until such time as: The Area is
redesignated to attainment for the standard, at which time the section
51.1004(c) requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that the
Area has again violated the standard, at which time such plans are
required to be submitted. On July 29, 2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA also
determined that the Harrisburg and York Areas had attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of
April 5, 2010. EPA's review of the most recent certified monitoring
data for the Areas show that the Areas continue to attain the standard.
On April 22, 2014, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), formally
submitted requests to redesignate the Harrisburg and York Areas from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
PADEP also formally submitted on April 22, 2014, a request to
redesignate the Harrisburg-York Area from nonattainment to attainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, PADEP
submitted maintenance plans for the Areas as SIP revisions to ensure
continued attainment throughout the Areas over the next 10 years. The
maintenance plans include the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and
NOX MVEBs for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for
transportation conformity purposes. PADEP also submitted a 2007
comprehensive emissions inventory for the 1997 annual and the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS for PM2.5, NOX, sulfur
dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and
ammonia (NH3). EPA is proposing to approve as SIP revisions
the maintenance plans for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve as SIP
revisions the 2007 emissions inventory for both standards to meet the
emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA's
proposed approvals are contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court granting
EPA's motion to lift the stay of CSAPR.

[[Page 62391]]

II. EPA's Requirements

A. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment

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

B. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A of the CAA, the plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval
of a redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future PM2.5
violations.
The 1992 Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states that a maintenance
plan should address the following provisions: (1) An attainment
emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for 10 years; (3) a commitment to maintain the existing
monitoring network; (4) verification of continued attainment; and (5) a
contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIP revisions and maintenance plans for nonattainment
areas and for areas seeking redesignation to attainment for a given
NAAQS. These emission control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., RFP and
attainment demonstration SIP revisions) and maintenance plans create
MVEBs based on onroad mobile source emissions for the relevant criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors, where appropriate, to address
pollution from onroad transportation sources. The MVEBs are the
portions of the total allowable emissions that are allocated to onroad
vehicle use that, together with emissions from all other sources in the
area, will provide attainment, RFP, or maintenance, as applicable. The
budget serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned
transportation system. Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an area seeking
a redesignation to attainment is established for the last year of the
maintenance plan.
The maintenance plans for the Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and
York Counties in Pennsylvania, includes the 2017 and 2025
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for transportation conformity
purposes. The transportation conformity determinations for the Areas
are further discussed in Section V.C. of today's proposed rulemaking
actions and technical support documents (TSDs) dated September 3, 2014,
available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-R03-
2014-0525.

III. Summary of Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to take several rulemaking actions related to the
redesignations of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Provided that the D.C. Circuit
Court grants EPA's motion to lift the December 30, 2011 stay of CSAPR
and tolls CSAPR's compliance deadlines in order to begin Phase 1 of
CSAPR on January 1, 2015, EPA is proposing to find that the Areas meet
the requirements for redesignation for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA
is thus proposing to approve Pennsylvania's requests to change the
legal definition for the Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment
to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the
Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA is also proposing to approve the associated maintenance plans
for the Areas as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, including the 2017 and
2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Areas. The
approval of the maintenance plans is one of the CAA criteria for
redesignation of the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Pennsylvania's maintenance plans
are designed to ensure continued attainment in the Areas for 10 years
after redesignation for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA previously determined that the Harrisburg and York Areas have
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to find that the Harrisburg and York Areas continue to attain
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 45424, July 29, 2011.
EPA also previously determined that the Harrisburg-York Area had clean
data showing monitored attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. See 77 FR 18922, March 29, 2012. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
find that the Harrisburg-York Area continues to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2007
comprehensive emissions inventory that includes PM2.5,
SO2, NOX, VOC, and NH3 for the Areas
as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in order to meet the requirements of
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA's analysis of the proposed actions is
provided in Section V. of today's proposed rulemaking action.
EPA's proposed rulemaking actions are contingent upon the D.C.
Circuit Court granting EPA's motion to lift the stay of CSAPR. If the
D.C. Circuit Court does not lift the stay of CSAPR, EPA will reevaluate
the basis for approval of these proposed redesignations and repropose
actions if necessary before issuing the final rule.

[[Page 62392]]

IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions

A. Effects of EME Homer City Decision

1. Background
In 2008, the D.C. Circuit Court initially vacated CAIR, North
Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded
the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits
provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir.
2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit
Court's remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR, to address interstate transport
of emissions and resulting secondary air pollutants and to replace
CAIR.\1\ CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and
NOX emissions from electric generating units (EGUs) in 28
states in the Eastern United States. Implementation of CSAPR was
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR's cap-and-trade
programs would have superseded the CAIR cap-and-trade programs.
Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and on December
30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an order staying CSAPR pending
resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to administer
CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir.
Dec. 30, 2011), Order at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ CAIR addressed the 1997 PM2.5 annual NAAQS and
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. CSAPR addresses contributions from
upwind states to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS as well as the ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS addressed by CAIR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court issued its ruling,
vacating and remanding CSAPR to EPA and once again ordering continued
implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit Court subsequently denied
EPA's petition for rehearing en banc. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.
v. EPA, No. 11-1302, 2013 WL 656247 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013), at *1.
EPA and other parties then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of
certiorari, and the Supreme Court granted the petitions on June 24,
2013. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013).
On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court vacated and reversed the D.C.
Circuit Court's decision regarding CSAPR, and remanded that decision to
the D.C. Circuit Court to resolve remaining issues in accordance with
its ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584
(2014). Though CSAPR remains presently stayed by the D.C. Circuit
Court, EPA has moved to have that stay lifted in light of the Supreme
Court decision. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, Case No. 11-
1302, Document No. 1499505 (D.C. Cir. filed June 26, 2014). In its
motion, EPA asks the D.C. Circuit Court to toll CSAPR's compliance
deadlines by three years, so that the Phase 1 emissions budgets apply
in 2015 and 2016 (instead of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 emissions
budgets apply in 2017 and beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond).
2. Proposal on This Issue
EPA promulgated CAIR on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), creating
regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and
NOX emissions. CAIR applies to 27 eastern states, including
Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia. EPA approved Pennsylvania's
SIP on December 10, 2009 (74 FR 65446) that addressed the requirements
of CAIR for the purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX
emissions and Pennsylvania's SIP redesignation requests list CAIR as a
control measure. CAIR was thus in place and getting emission reductions
in Pennsylvania and in states upwind of Pennsylvania when the Areas
began monitoring attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. The quality-assured, certified monitoring data
used to demonstrate attainment of the Harrisburg and York Areas for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 5, 2010 attainment
deadline was impacted by CAIR. The Harrisburg-York Area that has
monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS was
also impacted by CAIR.
Under the tolled compliance deadline schedule proposed by EPA in
its motion to lift the CSAPR stay, CAIR would sunset at the end of 2014
and be replaced by CSAPR beginning January 1, 2015. Provided that the
stay is lifted and EPA's tolled compliance deadlines are put in place,
the emission reductions associated with CAIR that helped the Areas
achieve attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS would be permanent and enforceable for purposes
of redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA, because
CSAPR requires similar or greater emission reductions from relevant
upwind areas starting in 2015 and beyond.

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

1. Background
On January 4, 2013, in NRDC v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit Court remanded
to EPA the ``Final Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule'' (72 FR
20586, April 25, 2007) and the ``Implementation of the New Source
Review (NSR) Program for PM2.5'' final rule (73 FR 28321,
May 16, 2008) (collectively, ``1997 PM2.5 Implementation
Rule''). 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The D.C. Circuit Court found
that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
pursuant to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of Part
D of Title I of the CAA (subpart 1), rather than the particulate-
matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of Part D of Title I (subpart
4).
Prior to the January 4, 2013 decision, the states had worked
towards meeting the air quality goals of the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with EPA regulations and guidance
derived from subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA. In response to
the D.C. Circuit Court's remand, EPA took this history into account by
setting a new deadline for any remaining submissions that may be
required for moderate nonattainment areas as a result of the D.C.
Circuit Court's decision regarding the applicability of subpart 4 of
Part D of Title I of the CAA.
On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), EPA issued a final rule,
``Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for
Submission of SIP Provisions for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS'' (the PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline
Rule), which identifies the classification under subpart 4 for areas
currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual and/or 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 standards. The final rule sets a deadline for
states to submit attainment plans and meet other subpart 4
requirements. The final rules specifies December 31, 2014 as the
deadline for states to submit any additional attainment-related SIP
elements that may be needed to meet the applicable requirements of
subpart 4 for areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997
PM2.5 and/or 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and to submit SIPs
addressing the nonattainment new source review (NSR) requirements in
subpart 4.
Therefore, as explained in detail in the following section, any
additional attainment-related SIP elements that may be needed for the
Areas to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4

[[Page 62393]]

were not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation
requests for the Areas. Pennsylvania submitted its requests for
redesignation for the Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and the Harrisburg-York Areas for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS on April 22, 2014.
2. Proposal on This Issue
In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA addresses the effect of the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision ruling and the June 2,
2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the
Areas redesignation requests. EPA is proposing to determine that the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision does not prevent EPA from
redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Even in light of the D.C. Circuit
Court's decision, redesignation for these Areas is appropriate under
the CAA and EPA's longstanding interpretations of the CAA's provisions
regarding redesignation. EPA first explains its longstanding
interpretation that requirements that are imposed, or that become due,
after a complete redesignation request is submitted for an area that is
attaining the standard, are not applicable for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request. Second, EPA then shows that, even if EPA applies
the subpart 4 requirements to the redesignation requests of the Areas
and disregards the provisions of its 1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule recently remanded by the D.C. Circuit Court,
Pennsylvania's request for redesignation of the Areas still qualifies
for approval. EPA's discussion takes into account the effect of the
D.C. Circuit Court's ruling and the June 2, 2014 PM2.5
Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the maintenance plans of
the Areas, which EPA views as approvable when subpart 4 requirements
are considered.
a. Applicable Requirements Under Subpart 4 for Purposes of Evaluating
the Redesignation Requests of the Areas
With respect to the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 ruling rejected EPA's reasons for
implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS solely in accordance with the
provisions of subpart 1, and remanded that matter to EPA, so that it
could address implementation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
under subpart 4 of Part D of the CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For the
purposes of evaluating Pennsylvania's redesignation requests for the
Areas, to the extent that implementation under subpart 4 would impose
additional requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA
believes that those requirements are not ``applicable'' for the
purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, and thus EPA is not
required to consider subpart 4 requirements with respect to the
redesignation of the Areas. Under its longstanding interpretation of
the CAA, EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a
threshold matter, that the part D provisions which are ``applicable''
and which must be approved in order for EPA to redesignate an area
include only those which came due prior to a state's submittal of a
complete redesignation request. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum. See also
``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS on or after
November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant
Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 (Shapiro
memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459,
12465-66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri,
(68 FR 25418, 25424-27, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d
537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA's redesignation rulemaking
applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra Club's view
that the meaning of ``applicable'' under the statute is ``whatever
should have been in the plan at the time of attainment rather than
whatever actually was in the plan and already implemented or due at the
time of attainment'').\2\ In this case, at the time that Pennsylvania
submitted its redesignation requests for the 1997 and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, the requirements under subpart 4 were not due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

[[Page 62394]]

request has been submitted would have already attained the NAAQS as a
result of satisfying statutory requirements that came due prior to the
submission of the request. Absent a showing that unadopted and
unimplemented requirements are necessary for future maintenance, it is
reasonable to view the requirements applicable for purposes of
evaluating the redesignation request as including only those SIP
requirements that have already come due. These are the requirements
that led to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, for redesignation
approval, that a state also satisfy additional SIP requirements coming
due after the state submits its complete redesignation request, and
while EPA is reviewing it, would compel the state to do more than is
necessary to attain the NAAQS, without a showing that the additional
requirements are necessary for maintenance.
In the context of this redesignation, the timing and nature of the
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA and EPA's
June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline
Rule, compound the consequences of imposing requirements that come due
after the redesignation request is submitted. Pennsylvania submitted
its redesignation requests for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS on April 22, 2014 for the Areas, which is prior
to the deadline by which the Areas are required to meet the attainment
plan and other requirements pursuant to subpart 4.
To require Pennsylvania's fully-completed and pending redesignation
requests for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to
comply now with requirements of subpart 4 that the D.C. Circuit Court
announced only in January 2013 and for which the deadline to comply has
not yet come, would be to give retroactive effect to such requirements
and provide Pennsylvania a unique and earlier deadline for compliance
solely on the basis of submitting its redesignation requests for the
Areas. The D.C. Circuit Court recognized the inequity of this type of
retroactive impact in Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir.
2002),\3\ where it upheld the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling refusing to
make retroactive EPA's determination that the Areas did not meet their
attainment deadlines. In that case, petitioners urged the D.C. Circuit
Court to make EPA's nonattainment determination effective as of the
date that the statute required, rather than the later date on which EPA
actually made the determination. The D.C. Circuit Court rejected this
view, stating that applying it ``would likely impose large costs on
States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air
pollution prevention plans . . . even though they were not on notice at
the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, it would be unreasonable to penalize
Pennsylvania by rejecting its redesignation requests for areas that are
already attaining the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS and that met all applicable requirements known to be in effect at
the time of the requests. For EPA now to reject the redesignation
requests solely because Pennsylvania did not expressly address subpart
4 requirements which have not yet come due and for which it had little
to no notice, would inflict the same unfairness condemned by the D.C.
Circuit Court in Sierra Club v. Whitman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

b. Subpart 4 Requirements and Pennsylvania's Redesignation Requests
Even if EPA were to take the view that the D.C. Circuit Court's
January 4, 2013 decision requires that, in the context of pending
redesignations for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, subpart 4 requirements were due and in effect
at the time Pennsylvania submitted its redesignation requests, EPA
proposes to determine that the Areas still qualify for redesignation to
attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. As explained subsequently, EPA believes that the redesignation
request for the Areas, though not expressed in terms of subpart 4
requirements, substantively meet the requirements of that subpart for
purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
With respect to evaluating the relevant substantive requirements of
subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating the Areas, EPA notes that
subpart 4 incorporates components of subpart 1 of part D, which
contains general air quality planning requirements for areas designated
as nonattainment. See section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains
specific planning and scheduling requirements for coarse particulate
matter (PM10) \4\ nonattainment areas, and under the D.C.
Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same
statutory requirements also apply for PM2.5 nonattainment
areas. EPA has longstanding general guidance that interprets the 1990
amendments to the CAA, making recommendations to states for meeting the
statutory requirements for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, the
General Preamble. In the General Preamble, EPA discussed the
relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP requirements, and pointed
out that subpart 1 requirements were to an extent ``subsumed by, or
integrally related to, the more specific PM10 requirements''
(57 FR 13538, April 16, 1992). The subpart 1 requirements include,
among other things, provisions for attainment demonstrations, RACM,
RFP, emissions inventories, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ PM10 refers to particulates nominally 10
micrometers in diameter or smaller.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the purposes of these redesignation requests, in order to
identify any additional requirements which would apply under subpart 4,
consistent with EPA's June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 4
Classification and Deadline Rule, EPA is considering the Areas to be
``moderate'' PM2.5 nonattainment areas. As EPA explained in
its June 2, 2014 rule, section 188 of the CAA provides that all areas
designated nonattainment areas under subpart 4 are initially classified
by operation of law as ``moderate'' nonattainment areas, and remain
moderate nonattainment areas unless and until EPA reclassifies the area
as a ``serious'' nonattainment area. Accordingly, EPA believes that it
is appropriate to limit the evaluation of the potential impact of
subpart 4 requirements to those that would be applicable to moderate
nonattainment areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 4 apply to
moderate nonattainment areas and include the following: (1) An approved
permit program for construction of new and modified major stationary
sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration
(section 189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C));
and (4) quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by
the applicable attainment date (section 189(c)).
The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section
189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions
requirements of sections 172 and 173 to PM10, without adding
to them. Consequently, EPA believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not
itself impose for redesignation purposes any additional requirements
for moderate areas beyond those contained in subpart

[[Page 62395]]

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

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

With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under
subpart 4,\6\ when EPA evaluates a redesignation request under either
subpart 1 or 4, any area that is attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS
is viewed as having satisfied the attainment planning requirements for
these subparts. For redesignations, EPA has for many years interpreted
attainment-linked requirements as not applicable for areas attaining
the standard. In the General Preamble, EPA stated that: ``The
requirements for RFP will not apply in evaluating a request for
redesignation to attainment since, at a minimum, the air quality data
for the area must show that the area has already attained. Showing that
the State will make RFP towards attainment will, therefore, have no
meaning at that point.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

The General Preamble also explained that: ``[t]he section 172(c)(9)
requirements are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the
applicable date. These requirements no longer apply when an area has
attained the standard and is eligible for redesignation. Furthermore,
section 175A for maintenance plans . . . provides specific requirements
for contingency measures that effectively supersede the requirements of
section 172(c)(9) for these areas.'' Id. EPA similarly stated in its
1992 Calcagni Memorandum that, ``The requirements for reasonable
further progress and other measures needed for attainment will not
apply for redesignations because they only have meaning for areas not
attaining the standard.''
It is evident that even if we were to consider the D.C. Circuit
Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that
attainment-related requirements specific to subpart 4 should be imposed
retroactively \7\ or prior to December 31, 2014 and thus, were due
prior to Pennsylvania's redesignation requests, those requirements do
not apply to areas that are attaining the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS, for the purpose of evaluating pending
requests to redesignate the areas to attainment. EPA has consistently
enunciated this interpretation of applicable requirements under section
107(d)(3)(E) since the General Preamble was published more than twenty
years ago. Courts have recognized the scope of EPA's authority to
interpret ``applicable requirements'' in the redesignation context. See
Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Moreover, even outside the context of redesignations, EPA has
viewed the obligations to submit attainment-related SIP planning
requirements of subpart 4 as inapplicable for areas that EPA determines
are attaining the1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA's prior ``Clean Data Policy'' rulemakings for the PM10
NAAQS, also governed by the requirements of subpart 4, explain EPA's
reasoning. They describe the effects of a determination of attainment
on the attainment-related SIP planning requirements of subpart 4. See
``Determination of Attainment for Coso Junction Nonattainment Area,''
(75 FR 27944, May 19, 2010). See also Coso Junction Proposed
PM10 Redesignation, (75 FR 36023, 36027, June 24, 2010);
Proposed and Final Determinations of Attainment for San Joaquin
Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 40954-55, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR
63641, 63643-47, October 30, 2006). In short, EPA in this context has
also long concluded that to require states to meet superfluous SIP
planning requirements is not necessary and not required by the CAA, so
long as those areas continue to attain the relevant NAAQS.
Elsewhere in this document, EPA determined that the Areas have
attained and continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. Under its longstanding interpretation, EPA is
proposing to determine here that the Areas meet the attainment-related
plan requirements of subparts 1 and 4 for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude that
the requirements to submit an attainment demonstration under
189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination under section 172(c)(1) and section
189(a)(1)(c), a RFP demonstration under 189(c)(1), and contingency
measure requirements under section 172(c)(9) are satisfied for purposes
of evaluating these redesignation requests.
c. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5 Precursors
The D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC v. EPA remanded to EPA the two rules
at issue in the case with instructions to EPA to re-promulgate them
consistent with the requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this section
addresses the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion with respect to
PM2.5 precursors. While past implementation of subpart 4 for
PM10 has allowed for control of PM10 precursors
such as NOX from major stationary, mobile, and area sources
in order to attain the standard as expeditiously as practicable,
section 189(e) of the CAA specifically provides that control
requirements for major stationary sources of direct PM10
shall also apply to PM10 precursors from those sources,
except where EPA determines that major stationary sources of such
precursors ``do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels
which exceed the standard in the area.''
EPA's 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, remanded by the
D.C. Circuit Court, contained rebuttable presumptions concerning
certain PM2.5 precursors applicable to attainment plans and
control measures related to those plans. Specifically, in 40 CFR
51.1002, EPA provided, among other things, that a state was ``not
required to address VOC [and NH3] as . . . PM2.5
attainment plan precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and
NH3] emissions in the State for control measures.'' EPA
intended these to be rebuttable presumptions. EPA established these
presumptions at the time because of uncertainties regarding the
emission inventories for these pollutants and the effectiveness of
specific control measures in various regions of the country in reducing
PM2.5 concentrations. EPA also left open the possibility for
such regulation of VOC and NH3 in specific areas where that
was necessary.
The D.C. Circuit Court in its January 4, 2013 decision made
reference to both section 189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated that,
``In light of our disposition, we need not address the petitioners'
challenge to the presumptions in [40 CFR 51.1002] that VOCs and
NH3 are

[[Page 62396]]

not PM2.5 precursors, as subpart 4 expressly governs
precursor presumptions.'' NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10.
Elsewhere in the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion, however, the D.C.
Circuit Court observed: ``NH3 is a precursor to fine
particulate matter, making it a precursor to both PM2.5 and
PM10. For a PM10 nonattainment area governed by
subpart 4, a precursor is presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C.
7513a(e) [section 189(e)].'' Id. at 21, n.7.
For a number of reasons, EPA believes that its proposed
redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS are consistent with the D.C. Circuit Court's
decision on this aspect of subpart 4. While the D.C. Circuit Court,
citing section 189(e), stated that ``for a PM10 area
governed by subpart 4, a precursor is `presumptively' regulated,'' the
D.C. Circuit Court expressly declined to decide the specific challenge
to EPA's 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule provisions regarding
NH3 and VOC as precursors. The D.C. Circuit Court had no
occasion to reach whether and how it was substantively necessary to
regulate any specific precursor in a particular PM2.5
nonattainment area, and did not address what might be necessary for
purposes of acting upon a redesignation request.
However, even if EPA takes the view that the requirements of
subpart 4 were deemed applicable at the time the state submitted the
redesignation request, and disregards the 1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule's rebuttable presumptions regarding NH3
and VOC as PM2.5 precursors, the regulatory consequence
would be to consider the need for regulation of all precursors from any
sources in the Areas to demonstrate attainment and to apply the section
189(e) provisions to major stationary sources of precursors. In the
case of the Areas, EPA believes that doing so is consistent with
proposing redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The Areas have attained the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS without any specific
additional controls of NH3 and VOC emissions from any
sources in the Areas.
Precursors in subpart 4 are specifically regulated under the
provisions of section 189(e), which requires, with important
exceptions, control requirements for major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors.\8\ Under subpart 1 and EPA's prior
implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors were subject to regulation, with the exception of
NH3 and VOC. Thus EPA must address here whether additional
controls of NH3 and VOC from major stationary sources are
required under section 189(e) of subpart 4 in order to redesignate the
Areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
As explained subsequently, EPA does not believe that any additional
controls of NH3 and VOC are required in the context of these
redesignations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing
section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538-13542. With regard to precursor
regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble explicitly stated
that control of VOC under other CAA requirements may suffice to relieve
a state from the need to adopt precursor controls under section 189(e).
See 57 FR 13542. EPA in this rulemaking action, proposes to determine
that the Pennsylvania SIP revisions have met the provisions of section
189(e) with respect to NH3 and VOC as precursors. These
proposed determinations are based on EPA's findings that: (1) The Areas
contain no major stationary sources of NH3, and (2) existing
major stationary sources of VOC are adequately controlled under other
provisions of the CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS.\9\ In the
alternative, EPA proposes to determine that, under the express
exception provisions of section 189(e), and in the context of the
redesignation of the Areas, which are attaining the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, at present NH3 and VOC
precursors from major stationary sources do not contribute
significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Areas. See 57 FR 13539-42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule
provisions in 40 CFR 51.1002 were not directed at evaluation of
PM2.5 precursors in the context of redesignation, but at SIP
plans and control measures required to bring a nonattainment area into
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. By contrast,
redesignation to attainment primarily requires the nonattainment area
to have already attained due to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions, and to demonstrate that controls in place can continue to
maintain the standard. Thus, even if we regard the D.C. Circuit Court's
January 4, 2013 decision as calling for ``presumptive regulation'' of
NH3 and VOC for PM2.5 under the attainment
planning provisions of subpart 4, those provisions in and of themselves
do not require additional controls of these precursors for an area that
already qualifies for redesignation. Nor does EPA believe that
requiring Pennsylvania to address precursors differently than it has
already would result in a substantively different outcome.
Although, as EPA has emphasized, its consideration here of
precursor requirements under subpart 4 is in the context of a
redesignation to attainment, EPA's existing interpretation of subpart 4
requirements with respect to precursors in attainment plans for
PM10 contemplates that states may develop attainment plans
that regulate only those precursors that are necessary for purposes of
attainment in the area in question, i.e., states may determine that
only certain precursors need be regulated for attainment and control
purposes.\10\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of
subpart 4 for PM10.\11\ EPA believes that application of
this approach to PM2.5 precursors under subpart 4 is
reasonable. Because the Areas have already attained the 1997 annual and
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with its current approach to
regulation of PM2.5 precursors, EPA believes that it is
reasonable to conclude in the context of these redesignations that
there is no need to revisit the attainment control strategy with
respect to the treatment of precursors. Even if the D.C. Circuit
Court's decision is construed to impose an obligation, in evaluating
these redesignation requests, to consider additional precursors under
subpart 4, it would not affect EPA's approval here of Pennsylvania's
requests for redesignation of the Areas for the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In the context of a redesignation,
the Areas have shown that they have attained the standards. Moreover,
Pennsylvania has shown and EPA has proposed to determine that

[[Page 62397]]

attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in these Areas are due to permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions on all precursors necessary to provide for continued
attainment of the standards. See Section V.A.3 of this rulemaking
notice. It follows logically that no further control of additional
precursors is necessary. Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4,
2013 decision of the D.C. Circuit Court as precluding redesignation of
the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans for California--San Joaquin Valley PM10
Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-
Hour and Annual PM10 Standards,'' (69 FR 30006, May 26,
2004) (approving a PM10 attainment plan that impose
controls on direct PM10 and NOX emissions and
did not impose controls on SO2, VOC, or NH3
emissions).
\11\ See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423
F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In summary, even if, prior to the date of the redesignation request
submittal, Pennsylvania was required to address precursors for the
Areas under subpart 4 rather than under subpart 1, as interpreted in
EPA's remanded 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, EPA would
still conclude that the Areas had met all applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3(E)(ii)
and (v) of the CAA.

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

EPA is proposing, contingent upon the D.C. Circuit Court's lifting
of the stay of CSAPR, several rulemaking actions for the Harrisburg-
Lebanon-Carlisle-York nonattainment areas: (1) To redesignate the
Harrisburg and York Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, and to redesignate the Harrisburg-York Area to
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) to approve
into the Pennsylvania SIP, the associated maintenance plans for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; and (3) to
approve the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory into the
Pennsylvania SIP to satisfy section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requirement
for the Areas, one of the criteria for redesignation. EPA's proposed
approvals of the redesignation requests and maintenance plans for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are based upon
EPA's determination that the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which EPA is proposing in
this rulemaking action, and that all other redesignation criteria have
been met for the Areas. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve the
2017 and 2025 MVEBs for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon and York Counties,
Pennsylvania for transportation conformity purposes. The following is a
description of how the Pennsylvania April 22, 2014 submittals satisfy
the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

A. Redesignation Requests

1. Attainment
As noted previously, in the final rulemaking action dated July 29,
2011 (76 FR 45424), EPA determined that the Harrisburg and York
nonattainment areas had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
by its applicable attainment date. EPA based this determination of
attainment upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air
quality monitoring data for the period of 2007-2009 showing that the
Areas had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further
discussion of pertinent air quality issues underlying this
determination was provided in the July 29, 2011 final rulemaking action
for EPA's determination of attainment for these Areas.
Also noted previously, in the final rulemaking action dated March
29, 2012 (77 FR 18922), EPA determined that the Harrisburg-York Area
had clean data for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA based
this determination upon complete, quality assured, quality controlled,
and certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the Area has
monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based
on the 2008-2010 data in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.
EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality PM2.5
monitoring data in the Areas consistent with the requirements contained
at 40 CFR part 50, and recorded in EPA's AQS database. To support the
previous determination of attainment of the Areas, EPA has also
reviewed more recent data in its AQS database, including certified,
quality-assured data for the period from 2008-2010, 2009-2011, 2010-
2012 and 2011-2013. These data, shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3 show that
the Areas continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, as discussed subsequently with
respect to the maintenance plans, PADEP has committed to continue
monitoring ambient PM2.5 concentrations in accordance with
40 CFR part 58. Thus, EPA is proposing to determine that the Areas
continue to attain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, contingent upon the DC Circuit Court's lifting
the stay of CSAPR.

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

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

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

[[Page 62398]]

2. The Areas Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Subpart 1 of the CAA and Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
of the CAA
In accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA, the SIP
revisions for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS for the Areas must be fully approved under section 110(k) of the
CAA and all the requirements applicable to the Areas under section 110
of the CAA (general SIP requirements) and part D of Title I of the CAA
(SIP requirements for nonattainment areas) must be met.
a. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations.
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) of the CAA include, but are not limited to the following: (1)
Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable
public notice and hearing; (2) provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air
quality; (3) implementation of a source permit program; provisions for
the implementation of part C requirements (PSD); (4) provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements for NSR permit programs; (5)
provisions for air pollution modeling; and (6) provisions for public
and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule
development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain certain
measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing
to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision,
EPA has required certain states to establish programs to address the
interstate transport of air pollutants in accordance with the
NOX SIP Call (63 FR 57356, October 27, 1998), amendments to
the NOX SIP Call (64 FR 26298, May 14, 1999 and 65 FR 11222,
March 2, 2000), and CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005). However, section
110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requirements for a state are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, EPA does not believe that these requirements
are applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110(a)(2) elements
of the CAA not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not
linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation. The Areas will still be subject to these
requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that section
110(a)(2) of the CAA and part D requirements which are linked with a
particular area's designation and classification are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request, and that
section 110(a)(2) elements of the CAA not linked in the area's
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability
of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels
requirement. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings
(61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-
Akron-Lorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and
Tampa, Florida final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See
also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation
(65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000) and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
redesignation (66 FR 53099, October 19, 2001).
EPA has reviewed the Pennsylvania SIP and has concluded that it
meets the general SIP requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
to the extent they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA
has previously approved provisions of Pennsylvania's SIP addressing
section 110(a)(2) requirements, including provisions addressing
PM2.5. See 77 FR 58955 (September 25, 2012). These
requirements are, however, statewide requirements that are not linked
to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Areas. Therefore,
EPA believes that these SIP elements are not applicable requirements
for purposes of review of Pennsylvania's PM2.5 redesignation
requests.
b. Subpart 1 Requirements
Subpart 1 sets forth the basic nonattainment plan requirements
applicable to PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Under section 172
of the CAA, states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing
for timely attainment and meet a variety of other requirements. The
General Preamble for Implementation of Title I discusses the evaluation
of these requirements in the context of EPA's consideration of a
redesignation request. The General Preamble sets forth EPA's view of
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation
requests when an area is attaining the standard. See 57 FR 13498 (April
16, 1992).
As noted previously, EPA has determined that the Areas have
attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.2004(c), the requirement for Pennsylvania to
submit, for the Areas, attainment demonstrations and associated RACM,
RFP plans, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to the
attainment of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS are suspended until the Areas are redesignated to attainment for
the standards, or EPA determines that the Areas again violated the
standards, at which time such plans are required to be submitted. Since
attainment had been reached for the Areas for the 1997 annual and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and the Areas continue to attain
the standards, no additional measures are needed to provide for
attainment. Therefore, the requirements of sections 172(c)(1),
172(c)(2), 172(c)(6), and 172(c)(9) of the CAA are no longer considered
to be applicable for purposes of redesignation of the Areas for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
The requirement under section 172(c)(3) was not suspended by EPA's
clean data determination for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and is the only remaining requirement under
section 172 of the CAA to be considered for purposes of redesignation
of the Areas.
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. As
part of Pennsylvania's redesignation request submittals, Pennsylvania
submitted a 2007 base year emissions inventory for the Areas for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS which includes
emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of point
sources, nonroad mobile sources, area sources and on-road mobile
sources. The pollutants that comprise the inventory are NOX,
VOC, PM2.5, NH3, and SO2.

[[Page 62399]]

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

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

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

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

Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and
quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified
stationary sources in an area, and section 172(c)(5) of the CAA
requires source permits for the construction and operation of new and
modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area.
EPA has determined that, since the PSD requirements will apply after
redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the
requirement that a nonattainment NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994 entitled, ``Part D NSR
Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.''
Nevertheless, Pennsylvania currently has an approved NSR program,
codified in the State's regulation at 25 Pa. Code 127.201. See 77 FR
41276 (July 13, 2012) (approving NSR program into the SIP). See also 49
FR 33127 (August 21, 1984) (approving Pennsylvania's PSD program).
However, Pennsylvania's PSD program for the 1997 annual and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS will become effective in the Areas upon
redesignation to attainment. See 49 FR 33128 (August 21, 1984)
(approving PSD program into the SIP).
Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires the SIP to meet the
applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. As noted
previously, EPA believes the Pennsylvania SIP revisions meet the
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA that are applicable for
purposes of redesignation.
Section 175A of the CAA requires a state seeking redesignation to
attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of
the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10 years after the
redesignation.'' In conjunction with its request to redesignate the
Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions to
provide for maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Areas for at least 10 years after
redesignation, through 2025. Pennsylvania is requesting that EPA
approve these SIP revisions as meeting the requirement of section 175A
of the CAA. Once approved, the maintenance plans for the Areas will
ensure that the SIPs for Pennsylvania meet the requirements of the CAA
regarding maintenance of the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for the Areas. EPA's analysis of the maintenance
plan is provided in Section V.B. of today's proposed rulemaking action.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 of
the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act

[[Page 62400]]

(transportation conformity) as well as to all other Federally supported
or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
which EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA. EPA
approved Pennsylvania's transportation conformity SIP requirements on
April 29, 2009 (74 FR 19541).
Thus, for purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the
1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA determines
that upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory
as proposed in this rulemaking action, the Areas will meet all
applicable SIP requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA for
purposes of redesignating the Areas to attainment for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
c. Pennsylvania Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section
110(k) of the CAA
Upon final approval of the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventory
proposed in this rulemaking action, EPA will have fully SIP-approved
all applicable requirements of the Pennsylvania SIP revisions for the
Areas for purposes of redesignaton to attainment for the 1997 annual
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with section
110(k) of the CAA. As noted in this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing
to approve the Areas' 2007 emissions inventory (submitted as part of
the maintenance plans) as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3)
of the CAA for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. Therefore, upon approval of the 2007 emissions inventory, EPA
will have satisfied all applicable requirements under part D of Title I
of the CAA for the Areas.
3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
As required by section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA, EPA is
proposing to determine that Pennsylvania has demonstrated that the air
quality improvement in the Areas is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable reductions.\12\ In making this demonstration,
Pennsylvania has calculated the change in emissions between 2002 for
the Harrisburg Area and 2005 for the York and Harrisburg-York Areas,
which are years used to designate the Areas as nonattainment, and 2007,
which is one of the years the Areas monitored attainment, as shown in
Tables 7, 8, and 9. The reduction in emissions in tons per year, and
the corresponding improvement in air quality from 2002 and 2005 to 2007
in the Areas can be attributed to a number of regulatory control
measures that have been implemented in the Areas and contributing areas
in recent years. For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2002,
2005, and 2007 emissions inventories, see EPA's emissions inventory
TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov. Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-RO3-
2014-0525.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ It should be noted that the mobile source controls
discussed in this section also provide reductions in VOC and/or
SO2 emissions. While those emissions may be reduced, the
submitted maintenance plan and redesignation request do not rely on
these emission reductions.

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

[[Page 62401]]

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

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

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

[[Page 62402]]

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

a. Federal Measures Implemented
Reductions in PM2.5 precursor emissions have occurred
statewide and in upwind states as a result of Federal emission control
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the
future.
Control of NOX and SO2
PM2.5 concentrations in the York and Harrisburg Areas
are impacted by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, and the Areas'
air quality is strongly affected by regulation of SO2 and
NOX emissions from power plants.
NOX SIP Call--On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone
pollution.\13\ Affected states were required to comply with Phase I of
the SIP Call beginning in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission
reductions resulting from regulations developed in response to the
NOX SIP Call are permanent and enforceable. By imposing an
emissions cap regionally, the NOX SIP Call reduced
NOX emissions from large EGUs and large non-EGUs such as
industrial boilers, internal combustion engines, and cement kilns. In
response to the NOX SIP Call, Pennsylvania adopted its
NOX Budget Trading Program regulations for EGUs and large
industrial boilers, with emission reductions starting in May 2003.
Pennsylvania's NOX Budget Trading Program regulation was
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on August 21, 2001 (66 FR 43795). To
meet other requirements of the NOX SIP Call, Pennsylvania
adopted NOX control regulations for cement plants and
internal combustion engines, with emission reductions starting in May
2005. These regulations were approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on
September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57428).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ Although the NOX SIP Call was issued in order to
address ozone pollution, reductions of NOX as a result of
that program have also impacted PM2.5 pollution, for
which NOX is also a precursor emission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CAIR--As previously noted, CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) created
regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and
NOX emissions in 27 eastern states, including Pennsylvania.
EPA approved the Commonwealth's CAIR regulation, codified in 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 145, Subchapter D, into the Pennsylvania SIP on December
10, 2009 (74 FR 65446). In 2009, the CAIR ozone season NOX
trading program superseded the NOX Budget Trading Program,
although the emission reduction obligations of the NOX SIP
Call were not rescinded. See 40 CFR 51.121(r) and 51.123(aa). Data
collected from EPA's long-term national air quality and deposition
monitoring networks show that these regional cap-and-trade programs
have been effective in reducing emissions of SO2 and
NOX nationwide.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\14\ Clean Air Interstate Rule, Acid Rain Program, and Former
NOX Budget Trading Program, 2012 Progress Report
(December 2013), available at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/ARPCAIR_12_downloads/ARPCAIR12_01.pdf; Clean Air Interstate
Rule, Acid Rain Program, and Former NOX Budget Trading
Program, 2012 Progress Report (May 2014), available at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/ARPCAIR_12_downloads/ARPCAIR12_02.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under the NOX SIP Call and CAIR, SO2 and
NOX emissions from EGUs were significantly reduced statewide
and in states upwind of the Harrisburg and York areas. Table 10 shows
statewide EGU emissions data for 2002 and 2007 for the states that were
determined to contribute significantly to air quality in the Harrisburg
and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See Air
Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document included in the
docket for this proposed rulemaking action. Table 10 also shows the
level of emissions in the contributing states for 2013, the latest year
for which annual data is available, which shows the continuing decline
of SO2 and NOX emissions in these states.

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

[[Page 62403]]

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

Table 10 shows that states impacting the York and Harrisburg Areas
reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by
554,027 tons and 835,921 tons, respectively, between 2002 and 2007. EPA
has therefore determined that the significant reductions in
NOX and SO2 from upwind states and in
Pennsylvania required under the NOX SIP Call and CAIR have
contributed to the air quality attainment in the Harrisburg and York
areas. In addition, the NOX and SO2 emissions
from these states further declined by 676,880 tons and 2,703,098 tons,
respectively, from 2007 to 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards

These emission control requirements result in lower NOX
emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including sport utility
vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in between 2004 and 2009. EPA
estimated that, after phasing in the new requirements, the following
vehicle NOX emission reductions will have occurred
nationwide: Passenger cars (light duty vehicles) (77 percent); light
duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 percent); and
larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 95
percent). Some of the emissions reductions resulting from new vehicle
standards occurred during the 2008-2010 attainment period; however,
additional reductions will continue to occur throughout the maintenance
period as new vehicles replace older vehicles. EPA expects fleet wide
average emissions to decline by similar percentages as new vehicles
replace older vehicles.

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule

EPA issued the Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule in July 2000. This
rule included standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel,
which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007
which reduced PM2.5 emissions from heavy-duty highway
engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to
15 ppm. Standards for gasoline engines were phased in starting in 2008.
The total program is estimated to achieve a 90 percent reduction in
direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95 percent reduction in
NOX emissions for new engines using low sulfur diesel fuel.
Nonroad Diesel Rule
On June 29, 2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA promulgated the Nonroad Diesel
Rule for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in
construction, agriculture, and mining, to be phased in between 2008 and
2014. The rule phased in requirements for reducing the sulfur content
of diesel used in nonroad diesel engines. The reduction in sulfur
content prevents damage to the more advanced emission control systems
needed to meet the engine standards. It will also reduce fine
particulate emissions from diesel engines. The combined engine
standards and the sulfur in fuel reductions will reduce NOX
and PM emissions from large nonroad engines by over 90%, compared to
current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel.
Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine Standards
In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for groups of
previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include large
spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and airport
ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-ignition
engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, and
snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission standards
from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two tiers, with
Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational vehicle
emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012. Marine
Diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009. With
full implementation of all of the nonroad spark-ignition engine and
recreational engine standards, an overall 80 percent reduction in
NOX are expected by 2020. Some of these emission reductions
occurred by the 2002-2007 attainment period and additional emission
reductions will occur during the maintenance period as the fleet turns
over.
Federal Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
As required by the CAA, EPA developed Maximum Available Control
Technology (MACT) Standards to regulate emissions of hazardous air
pollutants from a published list of industrial sources referred to as
``source categories.'' The MACT standards have been adopted and
incorporated by reference in Section 6.6 of Pennsylvania's Air
Pollution Control Act and implementing regulations in 25 Pa. Code Sec.
127.35 and are also included in Federally enforceable permits issued by
PADEP for affected sources. The Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
(ICI) Boiler MACT standards (69 FR 55217, September 13, 2004, and 76 FR
15554, February 21, 2011) are estimated to reduce emissions of PM,
SO2, and VOCs from major source boilers and process heaters
nationwide. Also, the Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)
MACT will reduce NOX and PM emissions from engines located
at facilities such as pipeline compressor stations, chemical and
manufacturing plants, and power plants.
b. State Measures
Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program
In 2002, Pennsylvania adopted the Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions
Control Program for model years starting in May 2004. The program
incorporates California standards by reference and required model year
2005 and beyond heavy-duty diesel highway engines to be certified to
the California standards, which were more stringent than the Federal
standards for model years 2005

[[Page 62404]]

and 2006. After model year 2006, Pennsylvania required implementation
of the Federal standards that applied to model years 2007 and beyond,
discussed in the Federal measures section of this proposed rulemaking
action. This program reduced emissions of NOX statewide.
Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program
Pennsylvania's Vehicle Emission I/M program was expanded into the
Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas in early 2004, and applies
to model year 1975 and newer gasoline-powered vehicles that are 9,000
pounds and under. The program, approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on
October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58313), consists of annual on-board diagnostics
and gas cap test for model year 1996 vehicles and newer, and an annual
visual inspection of pollution control devices and gas cap test for
model year 1995 vehicles and older. This program reduces emissions of
NOX from affected vehicles.
Consumer Products Regulation
Pennsylvania regulation ``Chapter 130, Subchapter B. Consumer
Products'' established, effective January 1, 2005, VOC emission limits
for numerous categories of consumer product, and applies statewide to
any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures such
consumer products on or after January 1, 2005 for use in Pennsylvania.
It was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on December 8, 2004 (69 FR
70895).
Based on the information summarized above, Pennsylvania has
adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air quality in the
Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas are due to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions. The reductions result from Federal
and State requirements and regulation of precursors within Pennsylvania
that affect the Harrisburg, York and Harrisburg-York Areas.

B. Maintenance Plans

On April 22, 2014, PADEP submitted maintenance plans for the
Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
and a maintenance plan for the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS as required by section 175A of the CAA.
EPA's analysis for proposing approval of the maintenance plans is
provided in this section.
1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) requires states to submit a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources in the
nonattainment area. For a maintenance plan, states are required to
submit an inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area
which is sufficient to attain the NAAQS, referred to as the attainment
inventory (or the maintenance plan base year inventory), and which
should be based on actual emissions. PADEP submitted an attainment
inventory for 2007, which is one of the years in the period during
which the Harrisburg and York Areas monitored attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and Harrisburg-York Area monitored
attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The inventory
for 2007 is comprised of NOX, PM2.5,
SO2, VOC, and NH3 emissions from point sources,
nonpoint sources, onroad mobile sources, and nonroad mobile sources.
The 2007 point source inventory contained emissions for EGU and
non-EGU sources in Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties that
were directly reported by the facilities. Since the reported emissions
did not include condensable emissions, the EGU inventory was augmented
to account for condensable by application of emission factors developed
by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA) in
2008. The nonpoint source emissions inventory for 2007 was developed
using 2007 specific activity data along with EPA emission factors and
the most recent available emission calculation methodologies. PADEP
used the 2008 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data to fill in any
missing categories in the 2007 inventory. For the 2007 nonroad mobile
sources, PADEP generated emissions using EPA's National Mobile
Inventory Model (NMIM) 2008 model. Since marine, air and rail/
locomotive (MAR) emissions are not part of the NONROAD model, they were
calculated separately outside of the NONROAD model. The 2007 onroad
mobile source inventory was developed using EPA's highway mobile source
emissions model MOVES2010. PADEP used local activity to replace default
inputs in the model where appropriate.
EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and found the
2007 emissions inventory acceptable for meeting the requirements under
section 172(c)(3). For more information on the emissions inventory
submitted by PADEP for the Areas and EPA's analysis of the emissions
inventory, see Appendices B and C of the Pennsylvania submittals and
the emissions inventory TSDs dated August 13, 2014, available on line
at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-R03-2014-0525.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to attainment
to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten
years following redesignation.'' Where the emissions inventory method
of showing maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions
during the maintenance period will not increase over the attainment
year inventory. See 1992 Calcagni Memorandum, pages 9-10.
For a demonstration of maintenance, emissions inventories are
required to be projected to future dates to assess the influence of
future growth and controls; however, the maintenance demonstration need
not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA,
supra. See also 66 FR 53099-53100; 68 FR 25430-32. PADEP uses
projection inventories to show that the Areas will remain in attainment
and developed projection inventories for an interim year of 2017 and a
maintenance plan end year of 2025 to show that future emissions of
NOX, SO2, VOC, and PM2.5 will remain
at or below the attainment year 2007 emissions levels throughout the
Areas through the year 2025. Although emissions of NH3 are
projected to increase from 2007 to 2017 and from 2007 to 2025, the
increase will not affect the Areas' ability to maintain the standard
because it is more than compensated by the significant reductions of
the other precursors in 2017 and 2025.
The Federal and State measures described in Section V.A.3. of this
proposed rulemaking action demonstrate that the reductions in emissions
from point, area, and mobile sources in the Areas have occurred and
will continue to occur through 2025. In addition, the following State
and Federal regulations and programs ensure the continuing decline of
SO2, NOX, PM2.5, and VOC emissions in
the Areas during the maintenance period and beyond:
Non-EGUs previously covered under the NOX SIP Call
Pennsylvania established NOX emission limits for the
large industrial boilers that were previously subject to the
NOX SIP Call, but were not subject to CAIR. For these units,
Pennsylvania established an allowable ozone season NOX limit
based on the unit's previous ozone season's heat input. A combined

[[Page 62405]]

NOX ozone season emissions cap of 3,418 tons applies for all
of these units.
CSAPR (August 8, 2011, 76 FR 48208)
If the CSAPR stay is lifted as requested by EPA, the implementation
of CSAPR will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR.
Regulation of Cement Kilns
On July 19, 2011 (76 FR 52558), EPA approved amendments to 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 145 Subchapter C to further reduce NOX
emissions from cement kilns. The amendments established NOX
emission rate limits for long wet kilns, long dry kilns, and preheater
and precalciner kilns that are lower by 35% to 63% from the previous
limit of 6 pounds of NOX per ton of clinker that applied to
all kilns. The amendments were effective on April 15, 2011.
Stationary Source Regulations
Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter D for
Adhesives, Sealers, Primers, and Solvents was approved into the
Pennsylvania SIP on September 26, 2012 (77 FR 59090). The regulation
established VOC content limits for various categories of adhesives,
sealants, primers, and solvent, and became applicable on January 1,
2012.
Amendments to Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130,
Subchapter B established, effective January 1, 2009, new or more
stringent VOC standards for consumer products. The amendments were
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 63717).
Pennsylvania's Clean Vehicle Program
The Pennsylvania Clean Vehicles Program (formerly, New Motor
Vehicle Control Program) incorporates by reference the California Low
Emission Vehicle program (CA LEVII), although it allowed automakers to
comply with the NLEV program as an alternative to this program until
Model Year (MY) 2006. The Clean Vehicles Program, codified in 25 Pa.
Code Chapter 126, Subchapter D, was modified to require CA LEVII to
apply to MY 2008 and beyond, and was approved into the Pennsylvania SIP
on January 24, 2012 (77 FR 3386). The Clean Vehicles Program
incorporates by reference the emission control standards of CA LEVII,
which, among other requirements, reduces emissions of NOX by
requiring that passenger car emission standards and fleet average
emission standards also apply to light duty vehicles. Model year 2008
and newer passenger cars and light duty trucks are required to be
certified for emissions by the California Air Resource Board (CARB), in
order to be sold, leased, offered for sale or lease, imported,
delivered, purchased, rented, acquired, received, titled or registered
in Pennsylvania. In addition, manufacturers are required to demonstrate
that the California fleet average standard is met based on the number
of new light-duty vehicles delivered for sale in the Commonwealth. The
Commonwealth's submittal for the January 24, 2012 rulemaking projected
that, by 2025, the program will achieve 318 tons more NOX
reductions than Tier II for the counties in the Harrisburg, York, and
Harrisburg/York Areas.
Emission Limits on PPL Brunner Island
In 2009, PPL installed a flue gas desulfurization system and
electrostatic precipitators on Units 1, 2, and 3 at the PPL Brunner
Island power plant located in York County, resulting in significant
SO2 reductions at the facility. The facility's Title V
permit is Federally enforceable pursuant to section 502 of the CAA, and
includes emission limits for PM, SO2, and NOX for
Units 1, 2, and 3. Levels of SO2 were significantly reduced
from 106,148 tons in 2007 to 17,822 tons in 2010. EPA approved
Pennsylvania's Title V program on July 30, 1996. 61 FR 39597.
Two Pennsylvania regulations--its Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle
Idling Act (August 1, 2011, 76 FR 45705) and its Outdoor Wood-Fired
Boiler regulation (September 20, 2011, 76 FR 58114)--were not included
in the projection inventories, but may also assist in maintaining the
standard. Also, the Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards
(79 FR 23414, April 29, 2014) establishes more stringent vehicle
emissions standards and will reduce the sulfur content of gasoline
beginning in 2017. The fuel standard will achieve NOX
reductions by further increasing the effectiveness of vehicle emission
controls for both existing and new vehicles.
The projection inventories for the 2017 and 2025 point, area, and
nonroad sources were taken from regional inventories coordinated by
MARAMA for the states in the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union
and Virginia (MANE-VU+VA), which includes Pennsylvania. Detailed
discussion of how 2017 and 2025 projections were developed are
contained in Appendix C-2 and C-3, respectively, of Pennsylvania's
submittals. EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP and
found the methodologies acceptable.
EPA has determined that the 2017 and 2025 projected emissions
inventories provided by PADEP are approvable. For more information on
EPA's analysis of the emissions inventory, see EPA's TSDs dated August
13, 2014, available on line at www.regulations.gov., Docket ID No. EPA-
OAR-R03-2014-0525. Tables 11, 12, and 13 provide a summary of the
inventories for the 2007 attainment year, as compared to the projected
inventories for the 2017 interim year and the 2025 maintenance plan end
year for the Areas in tpy.

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

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

[[Page 62406]]

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

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

As shown in Tables 11, 12 and 13, the projected levels of
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, and VOC are well
under the 2007 attainment year levels for each of these pollutants.
While the emissions of NH3 are projected to be higher than
the 2007 inventory for this pollutant for both the interim year and the
end-year, the significant decreases in the other precursors more than
offset the increase, and thus EPA does not believe the increase in
NH3 will affect the Areas' ability to maintain the NAAQS.
Pennsylvania has adequately demonstrated that the Areas will continue
to maintain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
during the 10 year maintenance period.
3. Monitoring Network
Pennsylvania's maintenance plans include a commitment to continue
to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary to
demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Pennsylvania currently
operates a PM2.5 monitor in each of the counties in the
Harrisburg Area, namely Cumberland, Dauphin, and Lebanon Counties, and
a PM2.5 monitor on Hill Street in the York Area. In its
April 22, 2014 submittals, Pennsylvania stated that it will consult
with EPA prior to making any necessary changes to the network and will
continue to quality assure the monitoring data in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 58.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
To provide for tracking of the emission levels in the Areas, PADEP
requires major point sources to submit air emissions information
annually and prepares a new periodic inventory for all PM2.5
precursors every three years in accordance with EPA's Air Emissions
Reporting Requirements (AERR). Emissions information will be compared
to the attainment year inventory (2007) to assure continued attainment
with the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and
will be used to assess emissions trends, as necessary. Also, as noted
in the previous subsection, PADEP will continue to operate its
monitoring system in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and remains
obligated to quality-assure monitoring data and enter all data into the
AQS in accordance with federal requirements. PADEP will use this data,
supplemented with additional data, as necessary, to assure continuing
attainment in the Areas.
5. Contingency Measures
The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a
violation of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS that occurs in the
Areas after redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that a state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should
identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
Pennsylvania's maintenance plans describe the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to reduce emissions
should a violation occur. Pennsylvania's contingency measures include a
first level response and a second level response. A first level
response is triggered for when the annual mean PM2.5
concentration exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within
the Areas, or if the periodic emissions inventory for the Areas exceed
the attainment year inventory by more than ten percent. The first level
response will consist of a study to determine if the emissions trends
show increasing concentrations of PM2.5, and whether this
trend is likely to continue. If it is determined through the study that
action is necessary to reverse a trend of emissions increases,
Pennsylvania will, as expeditiously as possible, implement necessary
and appropriate control measures to reverse the trend.
A second level response will be prompted if the two-year average of
the annual mean concentration exceeds 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ within the Areas.
This would trigger an evaluation of the conditions causing the
exceedence, whether additional emission control measures should be
implemented to prevent a violation of the standard, and analysis of
potential measures that could be implemented to prevent a violation.
Pennsylvania would then begin its adoption process to implement the
measures as expeditiously as practicable.
Pennsylvania's candidate contingency measures include the
following: (1) A regulation based on the Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) Model Rule to update requirements for consumer products; (2) a
regulation based on the Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for
industrial cleaning solvents; (3) voluntary diesel projects such as
diesel retrofit for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets,
idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives, and idling
reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses, and
other freight-handling facilities; (4) promotion of accelerated
turnover of lawn and garden equipment, focusing on commercial
equipment; and (5) promotion of

[[Page 62407]]

alternative fuels for fleets, home heating and agricultural use.
Pennsylvania's rulemaking process and schedule for adoption and
implementation of any necessary contingency measure is shown in the SIP
submittals as being 18 months from PADEP's approval to initiate
rulemaking. For all of the reasons discussed in this section, EPA is
proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 maintenance plans for the Harrisburg, York, and
Harrisburg-York Areas as meeting the requirements of section 175A of
the CAA.

C. Transportation Conformity

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires Federal actions in nonattainment
and maintenance areas to ``conform to'' the goals of SIPs. This means
that such actions will not cause or contribute to violations of a
NAAQS, worsen the severity of an existing violation, or delay timely
attainment of any NAAQS or any interim milestone. Actions involving
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) funding or approval are subject to the transportation conformity
rule (40 CFR Part 93, subpart A). Under this rule, metropolitan
planning organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment and maintenance areas
coordinate with state air quality and transportation agencies, EPA, and
the FHWA and FTA to demonstrate that their long range transportation
plans and transportation improvement programs (TIP) conform to
applicable SIPs. This is typically determined by showing that estimated
emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are
less than or equal to the MVEBs contained in the SIP. On April 22,
2014, Pennsylvania submitted SIP revisions that contain the 2017 and
2025 PM2.5 and NOX onroad mobile source budgets
for Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania did not provide emission budgets for SO2, VOC,
and NH3 because it concluded, consistent with the
presumptions regarding these precursors in the Transportation
Conformity Rule at 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v), which predated and were not
disturbed by the litigation on the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation
Rule, that emissions of these precursors from motor vehicles are not
significant contributors to the Area's PM2.5 air quality
problem. EPA issued conformity regulations to implement the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in July 2004 and May 2005 (69 FR 40004, July 1,
2004 and 70 FR 24280, May 6, 2005). Those actions were not part of the
final rule recently remanded to EPA by the D.C. Circuit Court in NRDC
v. EPA, No. 08-1250 (January 4, 2013), in which the D.C. Circuit Court
remanded to EPA the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule because
it concluded that EPA must implement that NAAQS pursuant to the PM-
specific implementation provisions of subpart 4, rather than solely
under the general provisions of subpart 1. That decision does not
affect EPA's proposed approval of the MVEBs for the Areas. The MVEBs in
tpy are presented in Tables 14, 15, and 16.

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

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

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

EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of MVEBs are
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Additionally, to approve the MVEBs, EPA
must complete a thorough review of the SIP, in this case the
PM2.5 maintenance plans, and conclude that with the
projected level of motor vehicle and all other emissions, the SIPs will
achieve its overall purpose, in this case providing for maintenance of
the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA's
process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of three basic
steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a
public comment period; and (3) EPA taking action on the MVEB.
In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA is initiating the process
for determining whether or not the MVEBs are adequate for
transportation conformity purposes. The publication of this document
starts a 30-day public comment period on the adequacy of the submitted
MVEBs. This comment period is concurrent with the comment period on
this proposed action and comments should be submitted to the docket for
this rulemaking. EPA may choose to make its determination on the
adequacy of the budgets either in the final rulemaking on this
maintenance plan and redesignation request or by informing Pennsylvania
of the determination in writing, publishing a notice in the Federal
Register and posting a notice on EPA's adequacy Web page (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm).\16\ However,
EPA would not complete the adequacy process for these budgets in
advance of the final rule approving the maintenance plan and
redesignation request unless the D.C. Circuit Court lifts the stay on
the implementation of CSAPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

EPA has reviewed the MVEBs and found them consistent with the
maintenance plan and that the budgets meet the criteria for adequacy
and approval. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for Cumberland, Dauphin,
Lebanon, and York Counties for transportation conformity purposes
provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA's motion to lift the
stay of CSAPR, as discussed in detail in Section IV.B. of today's
proposed rulemaking action. Additional information pertaining to the
review of the MVEBs can be found in the TSDs dated September 3, 2014,
available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0525.

VI. Proposed Actions

EPA is proposing to approve the redesignations of the Harrisburg-
Lebanon-Carlisle-York Areas from nonattainment to attainment for the
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has evaluated
Pennsylvania's redesignation requests and determined that the Areas
meet the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA provided that the D.C. Circuit Court grants EPA's motion to
lift the stay of CSAPR. The monitoring data demonstrates that the Areas
have attained the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, and, for the reasons discussed previously, that they will
continue to attain the NAAQS. Final approval of these redesignation
requests would

[[Page 62408]]

change the designation of Harrisburg and York Areas from nonattainment
to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the
Harrisburg-York Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the
associated maintenance plans for the Areas as revisions to the
Pennsylvania SIP because they meet the requirements of section 175A of
the CAA as described previously in this proposed rulemaking notice. In
addition, EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 base year emissions
inventory as meeting the requirement of section 172(a)(3) of the CAA.
Furthermore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs submitted by Pennsylvania for
Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and York Counties for transportation
conformity purposes. EPA is also initiating the process for determining
whether the MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes.
EPA's proposed approval of Pennsylvania's redesignation requests,
maintenance plans, and MVEBs in today's rulemaking action are
contingent upon the lifting of the CSAPR stay. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will
be considered before taking final action.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
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);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule proposing to approve Pennsylvania's
redesignation requests, maintenance plans, 2007 base year emissions
inventory, and MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes for the
Harrisburg and York Areas for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
and the Harrisburg-York Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not
approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes
that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments
or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

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

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

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.