Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) is requesting that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre ozone nonattainment Area (or “Area”) be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is composed of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, and Wyoming Counties. EPA is approving the ozone redesignation request for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area. In conjunction with its redesignation request, PADEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. EPA is approving the 8-hour maintenance plan. PADEP also submitted a 2002 base year inventory for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area, which EPA is approving. In addition, EPA is approving the adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area maintenance plan for purposes of transportation conformity, and is approving those MVEBs. EPA is approving the redesignation request, and the maintenance plan and the 2002 base year emissions inventory as revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Effective Date: This final rule is effective on December 19, 2007.
EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2007-0605. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environment Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
On September 25, 2007 (72 FR 54390), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The NPR proposed approval of Pennsylvania's redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP revisions for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area that provide for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. The NPR also proposed approval of a 2002 base year emissions inventory for the Area. The formal SIP revisions were submitted by PADEP on June 12, 2007. Other specific requirements of Pennsylvania's redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP revisions, and the rationales for EPA's proposed actions, are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR. Start Printed Page 64949
However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23591, April 30, 2004). South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, Docket No. 04-1201, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the D.C. Circuit clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard to those parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for areas currently classified under subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the Act as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment dates and the timing for emissions reductions needed for attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS remain effective. The June 8 decision left intact the Court's rejection of EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-hour standard in certain nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA's revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-backsliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been successfully challenged. The June 8 decision reaffirmed the December 22, 2006 decision that EPA had improperly failed to retain measures required for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification; (2) Section 185 penalty fees for the 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment areas; and (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain NAAQS. In addition, the June 8 decision clarified that the Court's reference to conformity requirements for anti-backsliding purposes was limited to requiring the continued use of the 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity determinations, which is already required under EPA's conformity regulations. The Court thus clarified the 1-hour conformity determinations are not required for anti-backsliding purposes.
For the reasons set forth in the proposal, EPA does not believe that the Court's rulings alter any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation, and do not prevent EPA from finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's December 22, 2006 and June 8, 2007 decisions impose no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to attainment, because even in the light of the Court's decisions, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.
II. Final Action
EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's redesignation request, maintenance plan, and 2002 base year emissions inventory SIP revisions because they satisfy the requirements for approval. EPA has evaluated Pennsylvania's redesignation request that was submitted on June 12, 2007 and determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the redesignation request and monitoring data demonstrate that the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The final approval of this redesignation request will change the designation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area submitted on June 12, 2007 as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is also approving the MVEBs submitted by PADEP in conjunction with its redesignation request. In addition, EPA is approving the 2002 base year emissions inventory submitted by PADEP on June 12, 2007 as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP. In this final rulemaking, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the MVEBs for NOX and VOCs in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area for the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan are adequate and approved for conformity purposes. As a result of our finding, the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area must use the MVEBs from the submitted 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for future conformity determinations. The adequate and approved MVEBs are provided in the following table:
The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area is subject to the CAA's requirement for the basic nonattainment areas until and unless it is redesignated to attainment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This final rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Because this action affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or allows the state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements, this action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject Start Printed Page 64950to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 18, 2008. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action, approving the redesignation of the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated maintenance plan, the 2002 base year emission inventory, and the MVEBs identified in the maintenance plan, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Nitrogen dioxide
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Volatile organic compounds
End List of Subjects Start Signature
Dated: November 8, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
and 81 are amended as follows:End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 52—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part
Subpart NN—PennsylvaniaStart Amendment Part
2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding an entry at the end of the table to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
|Name of non-regulatory SIP revision||Applicable geographic area||State submittal date||EPA approval date||Additional explanation|
|* * * * * * *|
|8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory||Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Area: Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe and Wyoming Counties||06/12/07||11/19/07 [Insert page number where the document begins]|
PART 81—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
4. In § 81.339, the table entitled “Pennsylvania-Ozone (8-Hour Standard)” is amended by revising the entry for the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA, Lackawanna County, Luzerne County, Monroe County, Wyoming County to read as follows:End Amendment Part
|Designated area||Designation a||Category/classification|
|* * * * * * *|
|Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA: Lackawanna County, Luzerne County, Monroe County, Wyoming County||12/19/07||Attainment.|
|* * * * * * *|
|a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except otherwise noted.|
|1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.|
[FR Doc. E7-22446 Filed 11-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P