Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard, 28906-28925 [2015-12237]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 97 (Wednesday, May 20, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28906-28925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12237]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0029; FRL-9928-00-Region 3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for 
the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual and 
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 December 22, 2014 request to 
redesignate to attainment the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley nonattainment 
area (Pittsburgh Area or Area) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS or standards). EPA is also proposing to determine that 
the Area continues to attain the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve as a 
revision to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP) the 
associated maintenance plan that was submitted with the redesignation

[[Page 28907]]

request, to show maintenance of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025 for the Area. EPA is also proposing 
to approve as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP the 2007 emissions 
inventories for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2011 
emissions inventories for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS that 
were included in the maintenance plan. The maintenance plan also 
included the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides 
(NOX) motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the Area 
for both NAAQS which EPA is proposing to approve for conformity 
purposes. This rulemaking action to propose approval of the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS redesignation request and 
associated maintenance plan for the Area is based on EPA's 
determination that Pennsylvania has met the criteria for redesignation 
to attainment specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA) for both NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 19, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2015-0029 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-2015-0029, Cristina Fernandez, Associate 
Director, Office of Air Quality 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-
2015-0029. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or 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. 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. Effect of the Court Decisions Regarding EPA's CSAPR
    B. Effect of the D.C. Circuit Court Decision Regarding 
PM2.5 Implementation Under Subpart 4 of Part D of Title I 
of the CAA
V. EPA's Analysis of Pennsylvania's Submittal
    A. Redesignation Request
    B. Maintenance Plan
    C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
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 NAAQS). In the same 
rulemaking action, 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), EPA published air quality area 
designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In that rulemaking 
action, EPA designated the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area as 
nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Id. at 1000. 
The Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area is comprised of Beaver, Butler, 
Washington, Westmoreland Counties and portions of Allegheny, Armstrong, 
Green and Lawrence Counties. 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 24-hour concentrations (the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS). On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), EPA published designations 
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which became effective on 
December 14, 2009. In that rulemaking action, EPA designated the 
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.339.
    On October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62147) and May 2, 2014 (79 FR 25014), 
EPA made determinations that the Pittsburgh Area had attained the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively. Pursuant 
to 40 CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the 
requirements for the Area to submit an attainment demonstration and 
associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), a reasonable 
further progress (RFP) plan, contingency measures, and other planning 
SIPs related to the attainment of either the 1997 annual or 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS were, and continue to be, suspended until 
such time as: the Area is redesignated to attainment for each standard, 
at which time the requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that 
the Area has again violated any of the standards, at which time such 
plans are required to be submitted. On October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62147), 
EPA also determined in accordance with section 179(c) of the CAA, that 
the Pittsburgh Area attained

[[Page 28908]]

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its applicable attainment 
date of April 5, 2010.
    On December 22, 2014, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the 
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), formally 
submitted a request to redesignate the Pittsburg-Beaver Valley Area 
from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, PADEP submitted a combined 
maintenance plan for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS for the Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued attainment 
throughout the Area over the next 10 years. The maintenance plan 
includes the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs 
for the Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS. The maintenance plan also includes the 2007 comprehensive 
emissions inventories for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 
the 2011 comprehensive emissions inventories for the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS for PM2.5, NOX, sulfur 
dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and 
ammonia (NH3).
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA addresses the effects of 
several decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit Court) and a decision of the United 
States Supreme Court: (1) The D.C. Circuit Court's August 21, 2012 
decision to vacate and remand to EPA the Cross-State Air Pollution 
Control Rule (CSAPR); (2) the Supreme Court's April 29, 2014 reversal 
of the vacature of CSAPR, and remand to the D.C. Circuit Court; (3) the 
D.C. Circuit Court's October 23, 2014 decision to lift the stay of 
CSAPR; and (4) the D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision to 
remand to EPA two final rules implementing the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS.

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); (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 this 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, 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 an ambient air 
quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58; (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 for nonattainment areas and maintenance 
plans 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 also 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 plan for the Pittsburgh Area, comprised of Beaver, 
Butler, Washington, Westmoreland Counties and portions of Allegheny, 
Armstrong, Green and Lawrence Counties in Pennsylvania, includes the 
2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for 
transportation conformity purposes. The transportation conformity 
determination for the Area is further discussed in Section V.C. of this 
proposed rulemaking action and in a technical support document (TSD), 
``Adequacy Findings for the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) in 
the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and the 2006 24-Hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS Maintenance Plan for the Pittsburgh-Beaver 
Valley, Pennsylvania (PA) Nonattainment Area'' (Adequacy Findings TSD), 
dated April 23, 2015, available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket 
ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0029.

III. Summary of Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to take several rulemaking actions related to the 
redesignation of the Pittsburgh Area to attainment for the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to find that 
the Pittsburgh Area meets the requirements for redesignation of the 
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS under section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve

[[Page 28909]]

Pennsylvania's request to change the legal designation of the 
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also 
proposing to approve the associated maintenance plan for the Pittsburgh 
Area as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, including the 2017 and 2025 
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Area for 
transportation conformity purposes. Approval of the maintenance plan is 
one of the CAA criteria for redesignation of the Area to attainment for 
both NAAQS. Pennsylvania's combined maintenance plan is designed to 
ensure continued attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area for at least 10 years after 
redesignation.
    EPA previously determined that the Pittsburgh Area attained both 
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (see 77 FR 
62147 (October 12, 2012) and 79 FR 25014 (May 2, 2014)), and EPA is 
proposing to find that the Area continues to attain both NAAQS. In 
order to meet the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, EPA is 
also proposing to approve the 2007 comprehensive emissions inventories 
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2011 comprehensive 
emissions inventories for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 
submitted with Pennsylvania's maintenance plan that includes an 
inventory of PM2.5, SO2, NOX, VOC, and 
NH3 for the Area as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. 
EPA's analysis of the proposed actions is provided in Section V. of 
this proposed rulemaking.

IV. Effects of Recent Court Decisions on Proposed Actions

A. Effect of the Court Decisions Regarding EPA's CSAPR

1. Background
    The D.C. Circuit Court and the Supreme Court have issued a number 
of decisions and orders regarding the status of EPA's regional trading 
programs for transported air pollution, the Clean Air Interstate Rule 
(CAIR) and CSAPR, that impact this proposed redesignation action. 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 annual PM2.5 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). EPA moved to have the stay of CSAPR lifted by the D.C. Circuit 
Court 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 asked 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). On October 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit 
Court granted EPA's motion and lifted the stay of CSAPR which was 
imposed on December 30, 2011. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 
No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 23, 2014), Order at 3. On December 3, 2014, 
EPA issued an interim final rule to clarify how EPA will implement 
CSAPR consistent with the D.C. Circuit Court's order granting EPA's 
motion requesting lifting the stay and tolling the rule's deadlines. 
See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) (interim final rulemaking). 
Consistent with that rule, EPA began implementing CSAPR on January 1, 
2015.
2. Proposal on This Issue
    Because CAIR was promulgated in 2005 and incentivized sources and 
states to begin achieving early emission reductions, the air quality 
data examined by EPA in issuing a final determination of attainment for 
the Pittsburgh Area in 2012 (October 12, 2012, 77 FR 62147) and the air 
quality data from the Area since 2005 necessarily reflect reductions in 
emissions from upwind sources as a result of CAIR, and Pennsylvania 
included CAIR as one of the measures that helped to bring the Area into 
attainment. However, modeling conducted by EPA during the CSAPR 
rulemaking process, which used a baseline emissions scenario that 
``backed out'' the effects of CAIR, see 76 FR 48223, projected that the 
counties in the Pittsburgh Area would have design values below the 1997 
annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 2012 and 2014 
without taking into account emission reductions from CAIR or CSAPR. See 
Appendix B of EPA's ``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support 
Document,'' (Pages B-57, B-58, B-85, B-86 and B-87), which is available 
in the docket for this proposed rulemaking action. In addition, the 
2011-2013 quality-assured, quality-controlled, and certified monitoring 
data for the Pittsburgh Area confirms that the PM2.5 design 
values for the Area remained well below the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS in 2013.
    The status of CSAPR is not relevant to this redesignation. CSAPR 
was promulgated in June 2011, and the rule was stayed by the D.C. 
Circuit Court just six months later, before the trading programs it 
created were scheduled to go into effect. As stated previously, EPA 
began implementing CSAPR on January 1, 2015, subsequent to the emission 
reductions documented in the Commonwealth's December 22, 2014 request 
for resedignation. Therefore, the Area's attainment of the 1997 annual 
or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS cannot have been a result of 
any emission reductions associated with CSAPR. In summary, neither the 
status of CAIR nor the current status of CSAPR affects any of the 
criteria for proposed approval of

[[Page 28910]]

this redesignation request for the Pittsburgh Area.

B. Effect of the 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 as 
``moderate'' for areas currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 
annual and/or 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The rule set a 
deadline for states to submit attainment plans and meet other subpart 4 
requirements. The rule specified 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.
    As explained in detail in the following section, since Pennsylvania 
submitted its request to redesignate the Pittsburgh Area on December 
22, 2014, any additional attainment-related SIP elements that may be 
needed for the Area to meet the applicable requirements of subpart 4 
were not due at the time Pennsylvania submitted its request to 
redesignate the Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. Proposal on This Issue
    In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA addresses the effect of the 
D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 ruling and the June 2, 2014 
PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule on the 
redesignation request for the Area. EPA is proposing to determine that 
the D.C. Circuit Court's January 4, 2013 decision does not prevent EPA 
from redesignating the Area 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 this Area 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 Area 
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 Area still qualifies 
for approval. EPA's discussion also 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 Area, which EPA views as approvable even when subpart 4 
requirements are considered.
a. Applicable Requirements Under Subpart 4 for Purposes of Evaluating 
the Redesignation Request of the Area
    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 December 22, 2014 redesignation 
request for the Area, 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 area. 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 
request for the Pittsburgh Area for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the requirements under subpart 4 were not 
due.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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.
    \3\ EPA found Pennsylvania's December 22, 2014 submittal 
redesignation of the Area complete on January 22, 2015. EPA's 
complete determination is available in the docket for this 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's view that, for purposes of evaluating the redesignation of 
the Area, the subpart 4 requirements were not due at the time 
Pennsylvania submitted the redesignation request is in keeping with the 
EPA's interpretation of subpart 2 requirements for subpart 1 ozone 
areas redesignated subsequent to the D.C.

[[Page 28911]]

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 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 request for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS on December 22, 2014 for the Pittsburgh Area, 
which is prior to the deadline by which the area is required to meet 
the attainment plan and other requirements pursuant to subpart 4.
    To require Pennsylvania's fully-complete and pending redesignation 
request 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 December 31, 2014 
deadline to comply occurred subsequent to EPA's receipt of 
Pennsylvania's December 22, 2014 redesignation request 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 request for the Area. 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),\4\ 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 December 22, 2014 redesignation request 
for an area that EPA previously determined was 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 
request. For EPA now to reject the redesignation request solely because 
Pennsylvania did not expressly address subpart 4 requirements which 
came due after receipt of such request, (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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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 Request
    Even if EPA were to take the view that the D.C. Circuit Court's 
January 4, 2013 decision, or the June 2, 2014 PM2.5 Subpart 
4 Classification and Deadline Rule, requires that, in the context of 
pending redesignation requests for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, which were submitted prior to December 31, 
2014, subpart 4 requirements must be considered as being due and in 
effect, EPA proposes to determine that the Area still qualifies 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 Area, though not expressed in terms 
of subpart 4 requirements, substantively meets the requirements of that 
subpart for purposes of redesignating the Area to

[[Page 28912]]

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 Area, 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) \5\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ PM10 refers to particulates nominally 10 
micrometers in diameter or smaller.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of this redesignation request, 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 to be 
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 1.\6\ 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). With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements 
under subpart 4,\7\ 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\ 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.
    \7\ EPA refers here 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, or the June 2, 2014 
PM2.5 Subpart 4 Classification and Deadline Rule, to mean 
that attainment-related requirements specific to subpart 4 were either 
due prior to Pennsylvania's December 22, 2014 redesignation request and 
must now be imposed retroactively,\8\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As explained earlier, EPA does 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 the 1997 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

[[Page 28913]]

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.
    As stated previously in this proposed rulemaking action, on October 
12, 2012 (77 FR 62147) and May 2, 2014 (79 FR 25014), EPA made 
determinations that the Pittsburgh Area had attained the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively. Pursuant to 40 
CFR 51.1004(c) and based on these determinations, the requirements for 
the Area to submit an attainment demonstration and associated RACM, RFP 
plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to the 
attainment of either the 1997 annual or 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS were, and continue to be, suspended until such time as: the Area 
is redesignated to attainment for each standard, at which time the 
requirements no longer apply; or EPA determines that the Area has again 
violated any of the standards, at which time such plans are required to 
be submitted. Under its longstanding interpretation, EPA is proposing 
to determine here that the Area meets the attainment-related plan 
requirements of subparts 1 and 4 for the 1997 annual and 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 this redesignation request.
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 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, the redesignation of the Pittsburgh Area 
for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is 
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 Area to demonstrate attainment and to apply the section 
189(e) provisions to major stationary sources of precursors. In the 
case of the Pittsburgh Area, EPA believes that doing so is consistent 
with proposing redesignation of the Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The Area has attained the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS without any specific additional 
controls of NH3 and VOC emissions from any sources in the 
Area.
    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.\9\ 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 
Area for the 1997 annual and 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 this 
redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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 revision has 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 
Pittsburgh Area contains no major stationary sources of

[[Page 28914]]

NH3; and (2) existing major stationary sources of VOC are 
adequately controlled under other provisions of the CAA regulating the 
ozone NAAQS.\10\ 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 Area, which is attaining the 1997 
annual and 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 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area. See 57 FR 13539-42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Area has reduced VOC emissions through the 
implementation of various control programs including VOC Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations and various onroad 
and nonroad 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.\11\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of 
subpart 4 for PM10.\12\ EPA believes that application of 
this approach to PM2.5 precursors under subpart 4 is 
reasonable. Because the Area has already attained the 1997 annual and 
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 this redesignation that there 
is no need to revisit an 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 this redesignation 
request, to consider additional precursors under subpart 4, it would 
not affect EPA's approval here of Pennsylvania's request for 
redesignation of the Pittsburgh Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In the context of a redesignation, 
Pennsylvania has shown that the Area has attained both standards. 
Moreover, Pennsylvania has shown, and EPA proposes to determine, that 
attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 
in this Area is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions on 
all precursors necessary to provide for continued attainment of the 
standards. See Section V.A.3 of this rulemaking action. 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 Area to 
attainment for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 
at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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).
    \12\ See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423 
F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, even if, prior to submitting its December 22, 2014 
redesignation request, or subsequent to such submission and prior to 
December 31, 2014, Pennsylvania was required to address precursors for 
the Area 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 Area 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 Submittal

    EPA is proposing several rulemaking actions for the Pittsburgh 
Area: (1) To redesignate the Pittsburgh Area to attainment for the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) to approve into the 
Pennsylvania SIP the associated maintenance plan for the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; and (3) to approve the 2007 
comprehensive emissions inventory for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS and the 2011 comprehensive emissions inventories for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS to satisfy section 172(c)(3) requirement, 
which is one of the CAA criteria for redesignation. EPA's proposed 
approval of the redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are based upon EPA's 
determination that the Area continues to attain both standards, which 
EPA is proposing in this rulemaking action, and that all other 
redesignation criteria have been met for the Area. In addition, EPA is 
proposing to approve the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and 
NOX MVEBs included in the maintenance plan for the 
Pittsburgh Area for transportation conformity purposes. The following 
is a description of how Pennsylvania's December 22, 2014 submittal 
satisfies the requirements of the CAA including specifically section 
107(d)(3)(E) for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS.

A. Redesignation Request

1. Attainment
    On October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62147), EPA determined that the 
Pittsburgh Area attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its 
applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010, based upon quality-assured 
and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for 2007-2009. In a 
separate rulemaking action dated May 2, 2014 (79 FR 25014), EPA 
determined that the Pittsburgh Area attained the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, based on quality-assured and certified ambient 
air quality monitoring data for 2010-2012 and 2011-2013. The basis and 
effect of these determinations of attainment for both the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS were discussed in the notices 
of the proposed (77 FR 34297 (June 11, 2012) and 78 FR 49403 (August 
14, 2013), respectively) and final (77 FR 62147 and 79 FR 25014, 
respectively) rulemakings which determined the Area attained the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively.
    EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality PM2.5 
monitoring data in the Pittsburgh Area consistent with the requirements 
contained in 40 CFR part 50, and recorded in EPA's Air Quality System 
(AQS), including quality-assured, quality-controlled, and state-
certified data for the monitoring periods

[[Page 28915]]

2008-2010, 2009-2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013. This data, provided in 
Tables 1 and 2, shows that the Area continues to attain the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.

Table 1--Design Values for the Pittsburgh Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/m\3\) for 2008-2010, 2009-
                                         2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Monitor ID #                       2008-2010       2009-2011       2010-2012       2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avalon, 420030002...............................          * 16.3          * 14.7            13.4            11.4
South Fayette, 420030067........................            11.1              11            10.5             9.6
North Braddock, 420031301.......................            13.3            12.7            12.5          * 11.7
Washington, 421250200...........................            11.8            11.3            11.1            10.3
Charleroi, 421250005............................            12.9            12.6            11.9              11
Florence, 421255001.............................            10.8               9             7.2             7.2
Harrison 2, 420031008...........................              13            12.4          * 11.7            10.6
Beaver Falls, 420070014.........................            13.1            12.4              12            11.6
Greensburg, 42129008............................            13.4            13.7            12.6            11.1
Lawrenceville, 420030008........................            12.2            11.6            11.1            10.3
North Park, 420030093...........................            10.1             9.7             9.4             8.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This data is shown in EPA's AQS as incomplete. Additional statistical analysis was done to ensure the
  Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area meets the completeness requirement of the Clean Data Determination.


Table 2--Design Values for the Pittsburgh Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/m\3\) for 2008-2010, 2009-
                                         2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Monitor ID #                       2008-2010       2009-2011       2010-2012       2011-2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avalon, 420030002...............................            * 38            * 34              29              25
South Fayette, 420030067........................              26              27              26              24
North Braddock, 420031301.......................              35              34              33              29
Washington, 421250200...........................              26              27              25              23
Charleroi, 421250005............................              28              28              26              25
Florence, 421255001.............................              25              20              17              16
Harrison 2, 420031008...........................            * 31            * 30              28              25
Beaver Falls, 420070014.........................              30              29              27              26
Greensburg, 42129008............................              32            * 33            * 29            * 26
Lawrenceville, 420030008........................              28              27              26              23
North Park, 420030093...........................            * 25              25              23              19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This data is shown in EPA's AQS as incomplete. Additional statistical analysis was done to ensure the
  Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area meets the completeness requirement of the Clean Data Determination.

    EPA's review of the monitoring data from 2008 through 2013 supports 
EPA's previous determinations that the Area has attained the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and that the Area 
continues to attain both standards. In addition, as discussed 
subsequently, with respect to the maintenance plan, Pennsylvania 
commits to maintain an ambient air quality monitoring network in 
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Thus, based upon an analysis of 
currently available data, EPA is proposing to determine that the 
Pittsburgh Area continues to attain the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Subpart 1 of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
    In accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v), the SIP revision for 
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the 
Pittsburgh Area must be fully approved under section 110(k) and all the 
requirements applicable to the Area 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) 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 minor source permit program and 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 
for various NAAQS, EPA has required certain states to establish 
programs to address transport of air pollutants in accordance with 
EPA's Finding of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain 
States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of 
Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone (63 FR 57356, October 27, 1998), 
also known as the NOX SIP Call; amendments to the 
NOX SIP Call (64 FR 26298, May 14, 1999 and 65 FR 11222, 
March 2, 2000), CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) and CSAPR. However,

[[Page 28916]]

section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a 
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that 
state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classification 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 
not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with 
an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation. The Area will still be subject to these 
requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that the section 
110(a)(2) 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 not linked to 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). For additional 
discussion on this issue, see the Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 
at 37890, June 19, 2000) and the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania 
redesignation (66 FR at 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) (approving 
infrastructure SIP submittals for 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 
NAAQS). These requirements are, however, statewide requirements that 
are not linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the 
Area. Therefore, EPA believes that these SIP elements are not 
applicable requirements for purposes of review of the Commonwealth's 
PM2.5 redesignation request.
b. Subpart 1 Requirements
    Subpart 1 sets forth the basic nonattainment plan requirements 
applicable to PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Under section 172, 
states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely 
attainment and must meet a variety of other requirements.
    EPA's longstanding interpretation of the nonattainment planning 
requirements of section 172 is that once an area is attaining the 
NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for purposes of 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be approved into the 
SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 1992 General Preamble 
for Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth its interpretation of 
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation 
requests when an area is attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498, 13564 
(April 16, 1992). EPA noted that the requirements for RFP and other 
measures designed to provide for attainment do not apply in evaluating 
redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning 
requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area that has already attained 
the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the 1992 
Calcagni Memorandum. EPA's understanding of section 172 also forms the 
basis of its Clean Data Policy, which was articulated with regard to 
PM2.5 in 40 CFR 51.1004(c), and suspends a state's 
obligation to submit most of the attainment planning requirements that 
would otherwise apply, including an attainment demonstration and 
planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, and contingency measures under 
section 172(c)(9).\13\ Courts have upheld EPA's interpretation of 
section 172(c)(1)'s ``reasonably available'' control measures and 
control technology as meaning only those controls that advance 
attainment, which precludes the need to require additional measures 
where an area is already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252 
(D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 
2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744 (5th Cir. 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This regulation was promulgated as part of the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rule that was subsequently 
challenged and remanded in NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 
2013), as discussed in Section IV.B of this rulemaking. However, the 
Clean Data Policy portion of the implementation rule was not at 
issue in that case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, because attainment has been reached for the 1997 annual 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Pittsburgh Area (see 
October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62147) and May 2, 2014 (79 FR 25014)), no 
additional measures are needed to provide for attainment, and section 
172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment demonstration and RACM are no 
longer considered to be applicable for purposes of redesignation as 
long as the Area continues to attain each standard until redesignation. 
Section 172(c)(2)'s requirement that nonattainment plans contain 
provisions promoting reasonable further progress toward attainment is 
also not relevant for purposes of redesignation because EPA has 
determined that the Pittsburgh Area has monitored attainment of the 
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, 
because the Pittsburgh Area has attained the 1997 annual and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer subject to a RFP 
requirement, the requirement to submit the section 172(c)(9) 
contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures 
necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Because attainment 
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for 
attainment.
    The requirement under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA was not 
suspended by EPA's clean data determination for the 1997 annual and 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is the only remaining 
requirement under section 172 to be considered for purposes of 
redesignation of the Area.
    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires submission and approval of a 
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. For 
purposes of the PM2.5 NAAQS, this emissions inventory should 
address not only direct emissions of PM2.5, but also 
emissions of all precursors with the potential to participate in 
PM2.5 formation, i.e., SO2, NOX, VOC 
and NH3.
    To satisfy the 172(c)(3) requirement for the 1997 annual and 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, Pennsylvania's December 22, 2014 
redesignation request and maintenance plan contains 2007 and 2011 
comprehensive emissions inventories. PADEP submitted the 2007 and 2011 
emissions inventories to fulfill its obligation to submit a 
comprehensive inventory under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, because 
that inventory has gone through extensive quality assurance. The 2007 
and 2011 emissions inventories were the most current accurate and 
comprehensive emissions inventories of PM2.5, 
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 for the Area 
when the Area attained the 1997

[[Page 28917]]

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, as part of this 
rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's 2007 
comprehensive emissions inventory for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS and the 2011 comprehensive emissions inventories for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as satisfying the requirement of section 
172(c)(3) of the CAA. Final approval of the 2007 and 2011 comprehensive 
emissions inventories will satisfy the emissions inventory requirement 
under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. The 2007 and 2011 comprehensive 
emissions inventories address the general source categories of point 
sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and non-road mobile 
sources. A summary of the 2007 and 2011 comprehensive emissions 
inventories are shown in Tables 3 and 4. For more information on EPA's 
analysis of the 2007 and 2011 emissions inventories, see the TSDs 
prepared by the EPA Region III Office of Air Monitoring and Analysis 
dated April 22, 2015, ``Technical Support Document (TSD) for the 
Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the Pittsburgh-Beaver 
Valley 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 Nonattainment Area'' (Inventory 
TSDs), available in the docket for this rulemaking action at 
www.regulations.gov. See Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2015-0029.

              Table 3--2007 Emissions for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area, in tons per year (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Sector                    PM2.5            NOX             SO2             VOC             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................           8,913          92,750         438,716           3,186             584
Area............................           6,392           7,946          12,817          28,991           2,474
Onroad..........................           1,692          49,052             378          20,194             858
Nonroad.........................           1,151          21,175             694          10,834              16
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................          18,148         170,923         452,605          63,205           3,932
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                      Table 4--2011 Emissions for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area, in tpy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Sector                    PM2.5            NOX             SO2             VOC             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................           7,287          80,746         122,541           3,333             322
Area............................           7,455          19,667           3,841          26,012           3,109
Onroad..........................             967          29,184             149          14,813             624
Nonroad.........................             667           7,110              20           7,832              10
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................          16,376         136,707         126,551          51,990           4,065
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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) 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 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 New Source Review Requirements for 
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Nevertheless, 
Pennsylvania currently has an approved NSR program codified in 
Pennsylvania's regulations at 25 Pa. Code Chapter 127.201, et. seq. 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 
which incorporates by reference the Federal PSD program at 40 CFR 
52.21). However, Pennsylvania's PSD program for PM2.5 will 
become effective in the Pittsburgh Area upon redesignation to 
attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires the SIP to meet the 
applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted previously, EPA 
believes the Pennsylvania SIP meets the requirements of section 
110(a)(2) that are applicable for purposes of redesignation.
    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.'' In 
conjunction with its request to redesignate the Pittsburgh Area to 
attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision on December 
22, 2014 to provide for maintenance of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Pittsburgh Area for at least 10 years 
after redesignation, throughout 2025. Pennsylvania is requesting that 
EPA approve the maintenance plan to meet the requirement of section 
175A of the CAA for both NAAQS. Once approved, the maintenance plan for 
the Area will ensure that the SIP for Pennsylvania meets the 
requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the 1997 annual and 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the Area. EPA's analysis of the 
maintenance plan is provided in Section V.B. of this 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 that are developed, funded or approved under 
Title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act 
(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).
    EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for

[[Page 28918]]

purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under CAA section 107(d) 
because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation, 
and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been 
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding 
this interpretation) and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (discussing 
Tampa, Florida).
    Thus, for purposes of redesignating to attainment the Pittsburgh 
Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA 
proposes that upon final approval of the 2007 and 2011 comprehensive 
emissions inventories as proposed in this rulemaking action, 
Pennsylvania will meet all the applicable SIP requirements under part D 
of Title I of the CAA for purposes of redesignating the Area to 
attainment for both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS.
c. The Area Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of 
the CAA
    Upon final approval of the 2007 and 2011 comprehensive emissions 
inventories as proposed in this rulemaking action, EPA will have fully 
approved all applicable requirements of Pennsylvania's SIP for the 
Pittsburgh Area for purposes of redesignation to attainment for the 
1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with 
section 110(k) of the CAA.
3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, section 
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine that the air quality 
improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions 
in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable 
Federal air pollution control regulations and other permanent and 
enforceable reductions. Pennsylvania has calculated the change in 
emissions between 2005, a year showing nonattainment for the 1997 
annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Pittsburgh 
Area, and 2007, the year for which the Area monitored attainment for 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2011, the year for which the 
Area monitored attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
    A summary of the emissions reductions in tpy of PM2.5, 
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 from 2005 to 
2007 in the Pittsburgh Area, submitted by PADEP, is provided in Table 
5. For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2007 emissions 
inventories, see EPA's Inventory TSDs dated April 22, 2015, available 
in the docket for this rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov.

               Table 5--Emission Reductions From 2005 to 2007 in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Percent
                                     Sector            2005            2007        Net reduction     reduction
                                                                                     2005-2007       2005-2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.........................  Point...........          27,817           8,913          18,904            67.9
                                Area............           7,916           6,392           1,524            19.3
                                On-road.........           1,898           1,692             206            10.9
                                Non-road........           1,539           1,151             388            25.2
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........          39,170          18,148          21,022            53.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX...........................  Point...........          92,808          92,750              58             0.0
                                Area............           8,622           7,946             676             7.8
                                On-road.........          58,268          49,052           9,216            15.8
                                Non-road........          31,519          21,175          10,344            32.8
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........         191,217         170,923          20,294            10.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2...........................  Point...........         470,511         438,716          31,795             6.8
                                Area............           9,905          12,817          -2,912           -29.4
                                On-road.........             875             378             497            56.8
                                Non-road........           2,364             694           1,670            70.6
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........         483,655         452,605          31,050             6.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...........................  Point...........           5,553           3,186           2,367            42.6
                                Area............          36,683          28,991           7,692            20.9
                                On-road.........          22,306          20,194           2,112             9.5
                                Non-road........          11,499          10,834             665             5.8
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........          76,041          63,205          12,836            16.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NH3...........................  Point...........             738             584             154            20.9
                                Area............           2,948           2,474             474            16.1
                                On-road.........             934             858              76             8.1
                                Non-road........              14              16              -2           -14.3
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........           4,634           3,932             702            15.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A summary of the emissions reductions in tpy of PM2.5, 
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 from 2005 to 
2011 in the Pittsburgh Area, submitted by PADEP, is provided in Table 
6. For more information on EPA's analysis of the 2011 emissions 
inventories, see EPA's Inventory TSDs dated April 22, 2015, available 
in the docket for this rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov.

[[Page 28919]]



               Table 6--Emission Reductions From 2005 to 2011 in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Percent
                                     Sector            2005            2011        Net reduction     reduction
                                                                                     2005-2011       2005-2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.........................  Point...........          27,817           7,287          20,530            73.8
                                Area............           7,916           7,455             461             5.8
                                On-road.........           1,898             967             931            49.1
                                Non-road........           1,539             667             872            56.6
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........          39,170          16,376          22,794            58.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX...........................  Point...........          92,808          80,746          12,062            12.9
                                Area............           8,622          19,667         -11,045          -128.1
                                On-road.........          58,268          29,184          29,084            50.0
                                Non-road........          31,519           7,110          24,409            77.4
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........         191,217         136,707          54,510            28.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2...........................  Point...........         470,511         122,541         347,970            73.9
                                Area............           9,905           3,841           6,064            61.1
                                On-road.........             875             149             762            82.9
                                Non-road........           2,364              20           2,344            99.1
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........         483,655         126,551         357,104            73.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...........................  Point...........           5,553           3,333           2,200            40.0
                                Area............          36,683          26,012          10,671            29.1
                                On-road.........          22,306          14,813           7,493            33.6
                                Non-road........          11,499           7,832           3,667            31.9
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........          76,041          51,990          24,051            31.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NH3...........................  Point...........             738             322             416            56.3
                                Area............           2,948           3,109            -161            -5.5
                                On-road.........             934             624             310            33.2
                                Non-road........              14              10               4            28.6
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                Total...........           4,634           4,065             569            12.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reduction in emissions and the corresponding improvement in air 
quality in the Pittsburgh Area from 2005 to 2007 for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQs, and 2005 to 2011 for the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQs, can be attributed to a number of regulatory 
control measures that have been implemented in the Area and 
contributing areas in recent years.
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 Pittsburgh Area are impacted 
by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, and the Area's 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.\14\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 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). EPA 
promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR as an emission trading program for 
EGUs. As discussed previously, pursuant to the D.C. Circuit Court's 
October 23, 2014 Order, the stay of CSAPR has been lifted and 
implementation of CSAPR commenced in January 2015. EPA expects that the 
implementation of CSAPR will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR 
and

[[Page 28920]]

result in additional SO2 and NOX emission 
reductions throughout the maintenance period.
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 parts per million (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 percent, 
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 is 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 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
    The Pittsburgh Area has had a vehicle emissions inspection program 
since 1984, and in 2004, Pennsylvania revised the implementation of its 
Vehicle Emission I/M program in the Pittsburgh Area, 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.
Regulation of Cement Kilns and Large Stationary Internal Combustion 
Engines
    On December 10, 2009 (74 FR 65446), EPA approved Pennsylvania 
regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 145, Subchapters B and C (relating to 
emissions of NOX from stationary internal combustion 
engines, and emissions of NOX from cement manufacturing).
Consumer Products Regulation
    Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, Subchapter B 
(Consumer Products) established, effective January 1, 2005, VOC 
emission limits to numerous categories of consumer products, and 
applies statewide to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, 
or manufactures such consumer products on or after January 5, 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

[[Page 28921]]

demonstrated that the improvements in air quality in the Pittsburgh 
Area 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 Pittsburgh Area.

B. Maintenance Plan

    On December 22, 2014, PADEP submitted a combined maintenance plan 
for the Pittsburgh Area for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, as required by section 175A of the CAA. EPA's 
analysis for proposing approval of the maintenance plan is provided in 
this section.
1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    An attainment inventory is comprised of the emissions during the 
time period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment. 
PADEP determined that the appropriate attainment inventory year for the 
maintenance plan for the 1997 annual NAAQS is 2007, one of the years in 
the periods during which the Pittsburgh Area monitored attainment of 
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. PADEP determined that the 
appropriate attainment inventory year for the maintenance plan for the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is 2011, one of the years in the 
periods during which the Pittsburgh Area monitored attainment of the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2007 and 2011 inventories 
included in the maintenance plan contain primary PM2.5 
emissions (including condensables), SO2, NOX, 
VOC, and NH3.
    In its redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, PADEP described the 
methods used for developing its 2007 and 2011 comprehensive emissions 
inventories. EPA reviewed the procedures used to develop the 
inventories and found them to be reasonable. EPA has reviewed the 
documentation provided by PADEP and found the 2007 and 2011 emissions 
inventories submitted with the maintenance plan to be approvable. For 
more information on EPA's analysis of the 2007 and 2011emissions 
inventories, see EPA's Inventory TSDs, dated April 22, 2015, available 
in the docket for this rulemaking action at www.regulations.gov.
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.'' 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 Area 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 Area 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 
NOX ozone season emissions cap of 3,418 tons applies for all 
of these units.
CSAPR (August 8, 2011, 76 FR 48208)
    EPA promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR as an emission trading 
program for EGUs. As discussed previously, pursuant to the D.C. Circuit 
Court's October 23, 2014 Order, the stay of CSAPR has been lifted and 
implementation of CSAPR commenced in January 2015. EPA expects that the 
implementation of CSAPR will preserve the reductions achieved by CAIR 
and result in additional SO2 and NOX emission 
reductions throughout the maintenance period.
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 percent to 63 percent 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.
Consumer Products Regulation
    Amendments to Pennsylvania regulation 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130, 
Subchapter B (Consumer Products) 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 National Low Emission Vehicle (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 approximately 285 tons more NOX 
reductions than Tier II for the counties in the Pittsburgh Area.
    Two Pennsylvania regulations--the Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle 
Idling Act (August 1, 2011, 76 FR 45705) and the 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.
Natural Gas Activities
    The emissions growth due to a new emissions source, development of 
natural gas resources from Marcellus Shale (and other deep formations), 
is included in the area source inventory.

[[Page 28922]]

PADEP requires annual emission reporting under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 135 
(relating to reporting of sources) of unconventional natural gas 
development companies. The initial annual source reporting for 
unconventional natural gas operations began in 2012 for emissions 
during the 2011 calendar year. Emissions were projected to 2017 and 
2025 based on the most recent emissions inventory reports available 
(2013 for compressor engines and 2012 for all other sources). See 
Appendix B-3 of Pennsylvania's submittal for more details on the 
methodology used for estimating Marcellus Shale development activity 
and for the emission totals by pollutant. Starting January 2015, 
Federal regulations (40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOO) require wells to 
capture gas at the wellhead. EPA estimates that VOC emissions from 
hydraulically fractured well completions will decrease by 95 percent as 
a result of this regulation.
    The State and Federal regulations and programs described above 
ensure the continuing decline of SO2, NOX, 
PM2.5, and VOC emissions in the Pittsburgh Area during the 
maintenance period and beyond. A summary of the projected reductions 
from these measures from 2007 to 2025 is shown in Table 7, and from 
2011 to 2025 is shown in Table 8. The future year inventories include 
potential emissions increases from natural gas activities.

                  Table 7--Emission Reductions From 2007 to 2025 Due to Control Measures in TPY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2             VOC             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................              54          -3,095         340,699            -293             -12
Area............................             672             -23           2,515           2,961            -136
On-Road.........................           1,155          38,343             260          15,069             405
Non-Road........................             611          11,370             588           4,697              -3
Natural Gas Activities..........            -397          -8,716             -37          -8,502               0
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals......................           2,095          37,879         343,995          13,932             254
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                  Table 8--Emission Reductions From 2011 to 2025 Due to Control Measures in TPY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       PM2.5            NOX             SO2             VOC             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................          -1,572         -15,099          24,494            -146            -274
Area............................           1,735          11,698          -6,461             -18             499
On-Road.........................             430          18,475              31           9,688             171
Non-Road........................             127          -2,695             -86           1,695               0
Natural Gas Activities..........            -397          -8,716             -37          -8,502               0
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals......................             323           3,663          17,941           2,717             387
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 
demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra; 
Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also 66 FR 53099-53100 and 68 FR 25430-
32. PADEP uses projection inventories to show that the Pittsburgh Area 
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, 
PM2.5, VOC, and NH3 will remain at or below the 
attainment year 2007 for the 1997 annual and 2011 for the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively, throughout the Pittsburgh Area 
through the year 2025.
    EPA has reviewed the documentation provided by PADEP for developing 
annual 2017 and 2025 emissions inventories for the Pittsburgh Area. See 
Appendix C-2 and C-3 of Pennsylvania's submittal. 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 inventories, see EPA's Inventory TSDs, dated April 22, 2015, 
available in the docket for this rulemaking action at 
www.regulations.gov.
    Table 9 provides a summary of the PM2.5, NOX, 
SO2, VOC, and NH3 emissions inventories in tpy, 
for the Pittsburgh Area for the 2007 attainment year for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2011 attainment year for the 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as compared to the projected 
inventories for the 2017 interim year, and the 2025 maintenance plan 
end year for the Pittsburgh Area.

    Table 9--Comparison of 2007 and 2011 Attainment Years and 2017 and 2025 Projected PM2.5 Emissions in the
                                                 Pittsburgh Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                     PM2.5            NOX             SO2             NH3             VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 (attainment)...............          18,148         170,923         452,605           3,932          63,205
2011 (attainment)...............          16,376         136,707         126,551           4,065          51,990
2017 (interim)..................          15,932         132,236         100,867           3,625          49,860
2007-2017 (projected decrease)..           2,216          38,687         351,738             307          13,345
2011-2017 (projected decrease)..             444           4,471          25,644             440           2,130
2025 (maintenance)..............          16,053         133,044         108,610           3,678          49,273
2007-2025 (projected decrease)..           2,095          37,879         343,995             254          13,932

[[Page 28923]]

 
2011-2025 (projected decrease)..             323           3,663          17,941             387           2,717
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Table 9, the projected levels of PM2.5, 
NOX, SO2, VOC, and NH3 are under the 
2007 and 2011 attainment year levels for each of these pollutants. 
Pennsylvania has adequately demonstrated that the Area will continue to 
maintain the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
3. Monitoring Network
    Pennsylvania's maintenance plan includes a commitment to operate 
its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary to demonstrate 
ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Pennsylvania currently operates a 
PM2.5 monitor in the Pittsburgh Area. In its December 22, 
2014 submittal, Pennsylvania stated that it will consult with EPA prior 
to making any necessary changes to the network and will continue to 
operate the monitoring network 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 Area, PADEP 
will: (a) Evaluate annually the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) data and 
the annual emissions reported from stationary sources to compare them 
with the assumptions used in the maintenance plan, and (b) evaluate the 
periodic emissions inventory for all PM2.5 precursors 
prepared every three years in accordance with EPA's Air Emissions 
Reporting Requirements (AERR) to determine whether there is an 
exceedance of more than ten percent over the 2007 and 2011 inventories. 
Also, as noted in the previous subsection, PADEP has stated that it 
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 has stated that it will use this data in considering whether 
additional control measures are needed to assure continuing attainment 
in the Area.
5. Contingency Measures
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct 
any violation of the 1997 annual and/or the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS that occurs in the Pittsburgh Area 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 plan describes 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 when the annual mean PM2.5 
concentration exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within 
the Area, when the 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 
concentration exceeds 35.0 [mu]g/m\3\ in a single calendar year within 
the area, or when the periodic emissions inventory for the Area exceeds 
the attainment year inventory (2007 and 2011) 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\ or if the two-
year average of the 98th percentile 24-hour PM2.5 
concentration exceeds 35.0 [mu]g/m\3\within the Area. This would 
trigger an evaluation of the conditions causing the exceedance, 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. If a violation of the PM2.5 NAAQS occurs, 
PADEP will propose and adopt necessary additional control measures in 
accordance with the implementation schedule in the maintenance plan.
    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 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 plan for the Pittsburgh 
Area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA.

C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

    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,

[[Page 28924]]

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 December 22, 2014, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision that 
contains the 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 and NOX onroad 
mobile source budgets for Beaver, Butler, Washington, and Westmoreland 
Counties and portions of Allegheny, Armstrong, Green and Lawrence 
Counties. 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). The D.C. Circuit Court's January 2013 decision does not affect 
EPA's proposed approval of the MVEBs for the Area. The MVEBs are 
presented in Table 10.

Table 10--MVEBs for the Pittsburgh Area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-
                         Hour PM2.5 NAAQS in TPY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Year                            PM2.5      NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017................................................       700    17,584
2025................................................       537    10,709
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 plan, 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 also initiating the 
process for determining whether or not the MVEBs are adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes. The publication of this rulemaking 
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).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 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 at 40039-40043.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has reviewed the MVEBs and finds that the submitted MVEBs are 
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 
the Pittsburgh Area for transportation conformity purposes. Additional 
information pertaining to the review of the MVEBs can be found in the 
Adequacy Findings TSD dated April 23, 2015, available on line at 
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0902.

VI. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve Pennsylvania's request to redesignate 
the Pittsburgh Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 
annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has evaluated 
Pennsylvania's redesignation request and determined that upon approval 
of the 2007 and 2011 comprehensive emissions inventories for the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively, proposed 
as part of this rulemaking action, it would meet the redesignation 
criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. The monitoring 
data demonstrates that the Pittsburgh Area attained as determined by 
EPA in a prior rulemaking and for reasons discussed herein, that it 
will continue to attain both NAAQS. Final approval of this 
redesignation request would change the designation of the Pittsburgh 
Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the 
associated maintenance plan for the Pittsburgh Area as a revision to 
the Pennsylvania SIP for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS because it meets the requirements of section 
175A of the CAA as described previously in this proposed rulemaking. In 
addition, EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 and 2011 comprehensive 
emissions inventories as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) 
of the CAA for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 
respectively. Furthermore, EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 and 
2025 PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the Pittsburgh Area 
for transportation conformity purposes. 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);

[[Page 28925]]

     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 request, maintenance plan, 2007 and 2011 comprehensive 
emissions inventories for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively, and MVEBs for transportation 
conformity purposes for the Pittsburgh Area for both 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: May 11, 2015.
William C. Early,
Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2015-12237 Filed 5-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P