IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

On March 27, 2007, the PADEP requested redesignation of the Harrisburg Area to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. On March 27, 2007, PADEP submitted a maintenance plan for the Harrisburg Area as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment of the 8hour ozone NAAQS over the next 11 years until 2018. PADEP also submitted a 2002 baseyear inventory concurrently with its maintenance plan as a SIP revision. EPA has determined that the Harrisburg Area has attained the 8hour ozone standard and has met the requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

Approval of the redesignation request would change the official designation of the Harrisburg Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate into the Pennsylvania SIP, a 2002 baseyear inventory and a maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of the 8hour ozone NAAQS in the Harrisburg Area for the next 11 years, until 2018. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the 8hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the NOX and VOC MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes for the years 2009 and 2018. These MVEBs (including safety margins) are displayed in Table 1 below. Note that separate conformity budgets are being established for each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The transportation conformity regulations (40 CFR 93.124(d)) allow a SIP to establish MVEBs for each MPO if a nonattainment area includes more than one MPO, which is the case in the Harrisburg Area. The responsible agency for the counties of Cumberland, Dauphin, and Perry is the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS), and the responsible agency for the county of Lebanon is LEBCO (Lebanon County MPO), both designated Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) under Federal transportation planning requirements. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PENNDOT) has requested separate budgets to allow the planning organizations to move their transportation conformity determinations through the approval process separately.
[[Page 30524]]
Table 1.Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Kilograms Per Day (Tons per DayRounded)
Year VOC NOX Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS)Cumberland, Dauphin, and Perry Counties
2009.................................. 23,014 (25.4) 41,917 (46.2) 2018.................................. 16,136 (17.8) 18,409 (20.3) Lebanon County MPO (LEBCO)
2009.................................. 4,301 (4.7) 8,928 (9.8) 2018.................................. 2,512 (2.8) 3,684 (4.1) * Note: Tons per day are informational only. Differences occur due to rounding.

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

EPA is proposing to determine that the Harrisburg Area has attained the 8hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation criteria have been met. The following is a description of how the PADEP's March 27, 2007 submittal satisfies the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

A. The Harrisburg Area Has Attained the 8Hour NAAQS

EPA is proposing to determine that the Harrisburg Area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered to be attaining the 8hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the design value, which is the 3year average of the fourthhighest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor, within the area, over each year must not exceed the ozone standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value at every monitor is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be collected and qualityassured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Air Quality System (AQS). The monitors generally should have remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required for demonstrating attainment.

In the Harrisburg Area, there are three monitors that measure air quality with respect to ozone. There are two monitors in Dauphin County, (the Harrisburg monitor, and the Hershey monitor), and one monitor in Perry County, (the Little Buffalo State Park monitor). As part of its redesignation request, Pennsylvania referenced ozone monitoring data for the years 20032005 (the most recent three years of data available as of the time of the redesignation request) for the Harrisburg Area. This data has been quality assured and is recorded in the AQS. PADEP uses the AQS as the permanent database to maintain its data and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy. The fourthhigh 8hour daily maximum concentrations for the three monitors in the Harrisburg Area, along with the threeyear average are summarized in Table 2 below.
Table 2.Harrisburg Nonattainment Area Fourth Highest 8Hour Ozone Values
Annual 4th Year highest reading (ppm) Harrisburg Monitor, Dauphin County, AQS ID 420430401 2003.................................................. 0.074 2004.................................................. 0.076 2005.................................................. 0.084 2006.................................................. 0.077 The average for the 3year period 20032005 is 0.078 The average for the 3year period 20042006 is 0.079 Hershey Monitor, Dauphin County, AQS ID 420431100 2003.................................................. 0.079 2004.................................................. 0.072 2005.................................................. 0.085 2006.................................................. 0.081 The average for the 3year period 20032005 is 0.078 The average for the 3year period 20042006 is 0.079 Little Buffalo State Park Monitor, Perry County, AQS ID 420990301 2003.................................................. 0.084 2004.................................................. 0.069 2005.................................................. 0.082 2006.................................................. 0.077 [[Page 30525]]
The average for the 3year period 20032005 is 0.078 The average for the 3year period 20042006 is 0.076

The air quality data show that the Harrisburg Area has attained the standard with a design value of 0.078 ppm. The data collected at the Area monitors satisfies the CAA requirement that the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. EPA believes this conclusion remains valid after a review of the quality assured 2006 data because the Area is still attaining the standard with a design value at each monitor of 0.084 ppm or less for 2004 through 2006. The PADEP's request for redesignation for the Harrisburg Area indicates that the data is complete and was quality assured in accordance with part 58. In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, PADEP has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by Pennsylvania and data taken from AQS indicate that the Harrisburg Area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Harrisburg Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA

EPA has determined that the Harrisburg Area has met all SIP requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all applicable SIP requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these proposed determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable to the Harrisburg Area and determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable requirements. Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, States requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 1246512466 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of DetroitAnn Arbor). 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. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also, 68 FR at 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

This section also sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of the Court's ruling in South Coast on this redesignation action. For the reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's ruling alters any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation, and does not prevent EPA from finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's decision, as it currently stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing that has been filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with the redesignation of this Area to attainment, because in either circumstance, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the Act and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.

1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements

Section 110(a)(2) of Title 1 of the CAA delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which includes enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to the following:

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has required certain states to establish programs to address transport of air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that State. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the State. Thus, we do not believe that these requirements are applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.

[[Page 30526]]

In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. The Harrisburg Area will still be subject to these requirements after it is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements, which are linked with a particular area's designation and classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. This policy is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); ClevelandAkronLorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also, the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19, 2001). Similarly, with respect to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ``an'' `applicable requirement' for purposes of section 110(1) because the NOX rules apply regardless of an area's attainment or nonattainment status for the 8hour (or the 1 hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004). EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. As we explain later in this notice, no part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation under the 8hour standard became due for the Harrisburg Area prior to submission of the redesignation request.

Because the Pennsylvania SIP satisfies all of the applicable general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2), EPA concludes that Pennsylvania has satisfied the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Requirements Under the 8Hour Standard

Pursuant to an April 30, 2004 final rule (69 FR 23951), the Harrisburg Area was designated a basic nonattainment area under subpart 1 for the 8hour ozone standard. Sections 172176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 of part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of part D, establishes additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment classification.

With respect to the 8hour standard, the court's ruling rejected EPA's reasons for classifying areas under subpart 1 for the 8hour standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency. Consequently, it is possible that this Area could, during a remand to EPA, be reclassified under subpart 2. Although any future decision by EPA to classify this Area under subpart 2 might trigger additional future requirements for the Area, EPA believes that this does not mean that redesignation of the Area cannot now go forward. This belief is based upon (1) EPA's longstanding policy of evaluating redesignation requests in accordance with the requirements due at the time the request is submitted; and (2) consideration of the inequity of applying retroactively any requirements that might in the future be applied.

First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the Harrisburg Area was classified under subpart 1 and was obligated to meet subpart 1 requirements. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, to qualify for redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete redesignation request. See September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division). See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 1246566 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of DetroitAnn Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004), which upheld this interpretation. See 68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).

Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was submitted. The D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity in such retroactive rulemaking. See Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002), in which the D.C. Circuit upheld a District Court's ruling refusing to make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past the statutory due date. Such a determination would have resulted in the imposition of additional requirements on the area. The Court stated: ``Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment determination within the statutory time frame, Sierra Club's proposed solution only makes the situation worse. Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs on the States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution prevention plans in 1997, even though they were not on notice at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly here it would be unfair to penalize the Area by applying to it for purposes of redesignation, additional SIP requirements under subpart 2 that were not in effect at the time it submitted its redesignation request.

With respect to 8hour subpart 2 requirements, if the Harrisburg Area initially had been classified under subpart 2, the first two part D subpart 2 requirements applicable to the Harrisburg Area under section 182(a) of the CAA would be a baseyear inventory requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the CAA, and, the emissions statement requirement pursuant to section 182(a)(3)(B).

As stated previously, these requirements are not yet due for purposes of redesignation of the Harrisburg Area, but nevertheless, Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP, an emissions statement rule for the 1hour standard that covers all portions of the designated 8hour nonattainment area and, that satisfies the emissions statement requirement for the 8hour standard. See, 25 Pa. Code 135.21(a)(1), codified at 40 CFR 52.2020; 60 FR 2881, January 12, 1995. With respect to the base year inventory requirement, in this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 baseyear inventory for the Harrisburg Area, which was submitted on March 27, 2007, concurrently with its maintenance plan, into the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 baseyear inventory as fulfilling the requirements, if necessary, of both section 182(a)(1) and section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. A detailed evaluation of Pennsylvania's 2002 baseyear inventory for the Harrisburg Area can be found in a Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared by EPA for this rulemaking. EPA has determined that the emission inventory and emissions statement requirements for the Harrisburg Area have been satisfied.

In addition to the fact that part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the redesignation request, EPA believes that the general conformity and NSR requirements do not require approval prior to redesignation.

With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to
[[Page 30527]]
establish criteria and procedures to ensure that Federallysupported or funded projects conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (``general conformity''). State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate. EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request under section 107(d) since State conformity rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where State rules have not been approved. See, Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426, 438440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).

In the case of the Harrisburg Area, EPA has also determined that before being redesignated, the Harrisburg Area need not comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation. EPA has determined that areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the standard without part D NSR in effect. The rationale for this position is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Normally, State's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program will become effective in the area immediately upon redesignation to attainment. See the more detailed explanations in the following redesignation rulemakings: Detroit, MI (60 FR 1246712468), (March 7, 1995); ClevelandAkronLorrain, OH (61 FR 20458, 2046920470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, 53669, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, MI (61 FR 31831, 3183631837, June 21, 1996). In the case of the Harrisburg Area, the Chapter 127 part D NSR regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP (codified at 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1)) explicitly apply the requirements for NSR in section 184 of the CAA to ozone attainment areas within the OTR. The OTR NSR requirements are more stringent than that required for a marginal or basic ozone nonattainment area. On October 19, 2001 (66 FR 53094), EPA fully approved Pennsylvania's NSR SIP revision consisting of Pennsylvania's Chapter 127 part D NSR regulations that cover the Harrisburg Area.

EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including the NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation. The rationale for this is based on two considerations. First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184 requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR after redesignation to attainment. Therefore, the State remains obligated to have NSR, as well as RACT, and Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance programs even after redesignation. Second, the section 184 control measures are regionwide requirements and do not apply to the Harrisburg Area by virtue of the Area's designation and classification. See 61 FR 53174, 5317553176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 2483024832 (May 7, 1997).
3. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1Hour Standard

In its December 22, 2006 decision in South Coast, the Court also addressed EPA's revocation of the 1hour ozone standard. The current status of the revocation and associated antibacksliding rules is dependent on whether the Court's decision stands as originally issued or is modified in response to any petition for rehearing or request for clarification that has been filed. As described more fully below, EPA determined that the Harrisburg Area attained the 1hour standard by its attainment date (60 FR 3349, January 17, 1995), continues to attain that standard, and has fulfilled any requirements of the 1hour standard that would apply even if the 1hour standard is reinstated and those requirements are viewed as applying under the statute itself. Thus, the Court's decision, as it currently stands, imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of the Area to attainment.

The conformity portion of the Court's ruling does not impact the redesignation request for the Harrisburg Area because there are no conformity requirements that are relevant to a redesignation request for any standard, including the requirement to submit a transportation conformity SIP.\1\ As we have previously noted, under longstanding EPA policy, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been approved. 40 CFR 51.390. See, Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (Tampa, FL redesignation).
\1\ Clean Air Act section 176(c)(4)(E) currently requires States to submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain federal criteria and procedures for determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity SIPs are different from the motor vehicle emissions budgets that are established in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.

With respect to the requirement for submission of contingency measures for the 1hour standard, section 182(a) does not require contingency measures for marginal areas, and, therefore, that portion of the Court's ruling does not impact the redesignation request for the Harrisburg Area.

Prior to its designation as an 8hour ozone nonattainment area, the Harrisburg Area was designated a marginal nonattainment area for the 1 hour standard. With respect to the 1hour standard, the applicable requirements of subpart 1 and of subpart 2 of part D (section 182) for the Harrisburg Area are discussed in the following paragraphs: Section 182(a)(2)(A) required SIP revisions to correct or amend RACT for sources in marginal areas, such as the Harrisburg Area, that were subject to control technique guidelines (CTGs) issued before November 15, 1990 pursuant to CAA section 108. On December 22, 1994, EPA fully approved into the Pennsylvania SIP all corrections required under section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA (59 FR 65971, December 22, 1994). EPA believes that this requirement applies only to marginal and higher classified areas under the 1hour NAAQS pursuant to the 1990 amendments to the CAA; therefore, this is a onetime requirement. After an area has fulfilled the section 182(a)(2)(A) requirement for the 1hour NAAQS, there is no requirement under the 8hour NAAQS.

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

Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires a triennial Periodic Emissions Inventory
[[Page 30528]]
for the nonattainment area. The most recent inventory for the Harrisburg Area was compiled for 2002 and submitted to EPA as a SIP revision with the maintenance plan for the Harrisburg Area.

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

Section 182(a)(3)(B) requires sources of VOCs and NOX in the nonattainment area to submit annual Emissions Statements regarding the quantity of emissions from the previous year. As discussed previously, Pennsylvania already has in its approved SIP, a previously approved emissions statement rule for the 1hour standard which applies to the Harrisburg Area.

Section 182(a)(1) provides for the submission of a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources, as described in section 172(c)(3), in accordance with guidance provided by the Administrator. In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to approve a 2002 baseyear emissions inventory for the Harrisburg Area as meeting the requirement of section 182(a)(1). While EPA generally required that the baseyear inventory for the 1hour standard be for calendar year 1990, EPA believes that Pennsylvania's 2002 inventory fulfills this requirement because it meets EPA's guidance and because it is more current than 1990. EPA also proposes to determine that, if the 1hour standard is deemed to be reinstated, the 2002 baseyear inventory for the 8hour standard will provide an acceptable substitute for the base year inventory for the 1hour standard.

EPA has previously determined that the Harrisburg Area attained the 1hour ozone NAAQS by the November 15, 1993 attainment date (60 FR 3349, January 17, 1995), and we believe that the Harrisburg Area is still in attainment for the 1hour ozone NAAQS based upon the ozone monitoring data for the years 20032005. To demonstrate attainment, i.e., compliance with this standard, the annual average of the number of expected exceedances of the 1hour standard over a 3year period must be less than or equal to 1. Table 3 provides a summary of the number of expected exceedances for each of the years 2003 through 2005 and 3year annual average at each of the Harrisburg Area monitors. Table 3.Harrisburg Area Number of Expected Exceedances of the 1Hour Ozone Standard
Number of Year expected exceedances Harrisburg Monitor/AIRS ID 410430401
2003.................................................. 0.0 2004.................................................. 0.0 2005.................................................. 0.0 2006.................................................. 0.0 The average number of expected exceedances for the 3year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.0
The average number of expected exceedances for the 3year period 2004 through 2006 is 0.0
Hershey Monitor/AIRS ID 420431100
2003.................................................. 0.0 2004.................................................. 0.0 2005.................................................. 0.0 2006.................................................. 0.0 The average number of expected exceedances for the 3year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.0
The average number of expected exceedances for the 3year period 2004 through 2006 is 0.0
Perry County Monitor/AIRS ID 420990301
2003.................................................. 0.0 2004.................................................. 0.0 2005.................................................. 0.0 2006.................................................. 0.0 The average number of expected exceedances for the 3year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.0
The average number of expected exceedances for the 3year period 2004 through 2006 is 0.0

In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by Pennsylvania and taken from AQS indicate that the Harrisburg Area is maintaining air quality that conforms to the 1hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes this conclusion remains valid after review of the quality assured 2006 data because no exceedances were recorded in the Harrisburg Area in 2006.

4. Transport Region Requirements

All areas in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), both attainment and nonattainment, are subject to additional control requirements under section 184 for the purpose of reducing interstate transport of emissions that may contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment. The section 184 requirements include RACT, NSR, enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance, and Stage II vapor recovery or a comparable measure.

In the case of the Harrisburg Area, which is located in the OTR, nonattainment NSR will be applicable after redesignation. As discussed previously, EPA has fully approved Pennsylvania's NSR SIP revision which applies the requirements for NSR of section 184 of the CAA to attainment areas within the OTR.

[[Page 30529]]

As discussed previously in this notice, EPA has also interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including NSR, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation. See 61 FR 53174, October 10, 1996, and 62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997 (Reading, Pennsylvania
Redesignation).
5. Harrisburg Has a Fully Approved SIP for Purposes of Redesignation

EPA has fully approved the Pennsylvania SIP for the purposes of this redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request. Calgagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989990 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR at 25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the Harrisburg Area Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

EPA believes that the Commonwealth has demonstrated that the observed air quality improvement in the Harrisburg Area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other Stateadopted measures. Emission reductions attributable to these rules are shown in Table 4.
Table 4.Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2004 in Tons per Day (tpd) Year Point Area Mobile Nonroad Total Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 2002........................................... 3.0 29.5 43.4 19.6 95.4 2004........................................... 2.4 28.9 36.9 19.0 87.2 Diff (0204)................................... 0.6 0.6 6.5 0.6 8.2 Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 2002........................................... 16.7 3.0 86.8 21.4 127.9 2004........................................... 12.9 3.1 76.2 20.2 112.5 Diff (0204)................................... 3.8 0.1 10.6 1.2 15.4

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions decreased by 8.6 percent from 95.4 tpd to 87.2 tpd; NOX emissions decreased by 12.1 percent from 127.9 tpd to 112.5 tpd. A comparison of the 2002 and 2004 emissions by county and source type can be found in the Technical Support Document prepared for this rulemaking. The reductions between 2002 and 2004, and anticipated future reductions, are due to the following permanent and enforceable measures.

1. Stationary Point Sources

Federal NOX SIP Call (66 FR 43795, August 21, 2001). 2. Stationary Area Sources

Solvent Cleaning (68 FR 2206, January 16, 2003).

Portable Fuel Containers (69 FR 70893, December 8, 2004). 3. Highway Vehicle Sources

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP).
Tier 1 (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991).

Tier 2 (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000).

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

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

Vehicle Emission Inspection/Maintenance Program (70 FR 58313, October 6, 2005).
4. NonRoad Sources

Nonroad Diesel (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004).

EPA believes that permanent and enforceable emissions reductions are the cause of the longterm improvement in ozone levels and are the cause of the Area achieving attainment of the 8hour ozone standard. D. The Harrisburg Area Has a Fully Approvable Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA

In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Harrisburg Area to attainment status, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 8hour ozone NAAQS in the Area for at least 11 years after redesignation. The Commonwealth is requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirement of section 175A of the CAA. Once approved, the maintenance plan for the 8hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the Harrisburg Area meets the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the applicable 8hour ozone standard.

What Is Required in 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 Commonwealth must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 years following the initial 10year 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 8hour ozone violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni memorandum dated September 4, 1992, provides additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address the following provisions:
[[Page 30530]]
(a) an attainment emissions inventory;
(b) a maintenance demonstration;
(c) a monitoring network;
(d) verification of continued attainment; and
(e) a contingency plan.
Analysis of the Harrisburg Area Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment inventoryAn attainment inventory includes the emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment. PADEP determined that the appropriate attainment inventory year is 2004. That year establishes a reasonable year within the 3year block of 20032005 as a baseline and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of the CAA requirements to date. The 2004 inventory is consistent with EPA guidance and is based on actual ``typical summer day'' emissions of VOC and NOX during 2004 and consists of a list of sources and their associated emissions.

The 2002 and 2004 point source data was compiled from actual sources. Pennsylvania requires owners and operators of larger facilities to submit annual production figures and emission calculations each year. Throughput data are multiplied by emission factors from Factor Information Retrieval (FIRE) Data Systems and EPA's publication series AP42, and are based on Source Classification Codes (SCC).

The 2002 area source data was compiled using countylevel activity data, from census numbers, from county numbers, etc. The 2004 area source data was projected from the 2002 inventory using temporal allocations provided by the MidAtlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA).

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

The 2002 and 2004 emissions for the majority of nonroad emission source categories were estimated using the EPA NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD model calculates emissions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gasfueled nonroad equipment types and includes growth factors. The NONROAD model does not estimate emissions from locomotives or aircraft. For 2002 and 2004 locomotive emissions, the PADEP projected emissions from a 1999 survey using national fuel consumption information and EPA emission and conversion factors. Emissions from commercial aircraft for 2002 are estimated using the EPAapproved Emissions & Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) 4.20, the latest version available at the time the inventory was developed. Commercial aircraft operations were significant in the Harrisburg Area and were modeled by the EDMS model directly. Harrisburg International Airport (HIA) accounts for all commercial operations in the area. Small aircraft emissions were calculated by using small airport operation statistics, which can be found at http://www.airnav.com and the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Area

Forecast Detailed Report.

More detailed information on the compilation of the 2002, 2004, 2009, and 2018 inventories can be found in the Technical Appendices which are part of this submittal.
(b) Maintenance DemonstrationOn March 27, 2007, the PADEP submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the CAA. The Harrisburg maintenance plan shows maintenance of the 8hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or below the attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the Harrisburg Area through the year 2018. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See, Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also, 66 FR at 5309953100; 68 FR at 2543025432.

Tables 5 and 6 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the Harrisburg Area for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The PADEP chose 2009 as an interim year in the tenyear maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected to increase above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the maintenance period. A breakdown of the 2004, 2009, and 2018 VOC and NOX emissions by County and Source Type can be found in the TSD prepared for this rulemaking.
Table 5.Total VOC Emissions for 20042018 (tpd)
2004 VOC 2009 VOC 2018 VOC Source category emissions emissions emissions Point............................ 2.4 3.0 3.8 Area............................. 28.9 27.4 29.4 Mobile*.......................... 36.9 30.1 20.6 Nonroad.......................... 19.0 16.0 13.4

Total........................ 87.2 76.5 67.2 * Includes safety margin identified in the motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity. Totals may vary due to rounding.
Table 6.Total NOX Emissions for 20042018 (tpd)
2004 NOX 2009 NOX 2018 NOX Source category emissions emissions emissions Point............................ 12.9 19.8 23.8 Area............................. 3.1 3.2 3.4 Mobile*.......................... 76.2 56.0 24.4 Nonroad.......................... 20.2 17.1 12.3

Total........................ 112.5 96.2 63.9 * Includes safety margin identified in the motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity. Totals may vary due to rounding.

[[Page 30531]]

Additionally, the following programs are either effective or due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance demonstration of the 8hour ozone NAAQS:

Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance demonstration of the 8hour ozone NAAQS:

Based on the comparison of the projected emissions and the attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA concludes that PADEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8hour ozone standard should be maintained in the Harrisburg Area. (c) Monitoring NetworkThere are currently three monitors in the Harrisburg Area measuring ozone in the Harrisburg Area. The PADEP will continue to operate its current air quality monitors (located in Dauphin and Perry Counties), in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. (d) Verification of Continued AttainmentIn addition to maintaining the key elements of its regulatory program, the Commonwealth will track the attainment status of the ozone NAAQS in the Area by reviewing air quality and emissions data during the maintenance period. The Commonwealth will perform an annual evaluation of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) data and emissions reported from stationary sources and compare them to the assumptions about these factors used in the maintenance plan. The Commonwealth will also evaluate the periodic (every three years) emission inventories prepared under EPA's Consolidated Emission Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51, subpart A) to see if they exceed the attainment year inventory (2004) by more than 10 percent. The PADEP will also continue to operate the existing ozone monitoring stations in the Area pursuant to 40 CFR part 58 throughout the maintenance period and submit qualityassured ozone data to EPA through the AQS system. Section 175A(b) of the CAA states that eight years following redesignation of the Harrisburg Area, PADEP will be required to submit a second maintenance plan that will ensure attainment through 2028. PADEP has made that commitment to meet the requirement of section 175A(b).
(e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency MeasuresThe contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to ensure that the Commonwealth will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s) that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).

The ability of the Harrisburg Area to stay in compliance with the 8hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOX emissions in the Area remaining at or below 2004 levels. The Commonwealth's maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX emissions to decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018. The Commonwealth's maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce emissions should a violation occur.

Contingency measures will be considered if for two consecutive years the fourth highest 8hour ozone concentrations at the design value monitor (the highest of the three area monitors) are above 84 ppb. If this trigger point occurs, the Commonwealth will evaluate whether additional local emission control measures should be implemented in order to prevent a violation of the air quality standard. PADEP will also analyze the conditions leading to the excessive ozone levels and evaluate which measures might be most effective in correcting the excessive ozone levels. PADEP will also analyze the potential emissions effect of Federal, state, and local measures that have been adopted but not yet implemented at the time the excessive ozone levels occurred. PADEP will then begin the process of implementing any selected measures.

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

Regulatory measures:
Additional controls on consumer products.
Additional controls on portable fuel containers.

Nonregulatory measures:
Voluntary diesel engine ``chip reflash''installation software to correct the defeat device option on certain heavyduty diesel engines. Diesel retrofit, including replacement, repowering or alternative fuel use, for public or private local onroad or offroad fleets. Idling reduction technology for Class 2 yard locomotives.
Idling reduction technologies or strategies for truck stops, warehouses and other freighthandling facilities.
Accelerated turnover of lawn and garden equipment, especially commercial equipment, including promotion of electric equipment. Additional promotion of alternative fuel (e.g., biodiesel) for home heating and agricultural use.

The plan lays out a process to have any regulatory contingency measures in effect within 19 months of the trigger. The plan also lays out a process to implement the nonregulatory contingency measures within 1224 months of the trigger.
[[Page 30532]]
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified in the Harrisburg Maintenance Plan Adequate and Approvable? A. What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?

Under the CAA, Stat

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Ellen Wentworth, (215) 814-2034, or by email at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.