29652 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–12513 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0034; FRL–9309–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; 

Missouri; Saint Louis Nonattainment 

Area; Determination of Attainment of 

the 1997 Annual Fine Particle Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action 

determining that the Saint Louis fine 

particle (PM2.5) nonattainment area in 

Illinois and Missouri has attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This 

final determination of attainment is 

based upon quality assured, quality 

controlled, and certified ambient air 

monitoring data for the 2007–2009 

monitoring period which show that the 

Saint Louis area has monitored 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, as well as quality assured data 

for 2010 that are in EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS), but not yet certified, that 

show that the Saint Louis area has 

continued to monitor attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Pursuant to 

EPA’s PM2.5 implementation 

regulations, this final determination 

suspends the states’ obligation to submit 

a number of plans for this area 

including: An attainment 

demonstration, associated reasonably 

available control measures (RACM), 

including reasonably available control 

technology (RACT), a reasonable further 

progress plan, contingency measures, 

and other planning State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

related to attainment of the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS for so long as the area 

continues to attain the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

EPA’s determination that this area has 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

is not equivalent to redesignating the 

area to attainment. The designation of 

the area will remain nonattainment for 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS until 

such time as EPA determines that this 

area meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requirements for redesignation to 

attainment. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

May 23, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0034. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, 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 at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 

886–6524 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 886–6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov. 

You may also contact Michael Jay, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 901 North Fifth Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101, (913) 551–7460, 

jay.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background of this action? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the relevant air 

quality data? 

IV. What are EPA’s responses to public 

comments? 

V. What are the effects of this action? 

VI. When is this rule effective? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is making a final determination 

that the Saint Louis PM2.5

nonattainment area, in the States of 

Missouri and Illinois, has attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

published its proposed determination 

for the Saint Louis PM2.5 nonattainment 

area on March 7, 2011 (76 FR 12302). 

EPA received one set of comments on its 

proposal from the Interdisciplinary 

Environmental Clinic, Washington 

University School of Law on behalf of 

the American Bottom Conservancy. 

These comments and EPA’s responses 

are found in Section IV of this notice. 

As set forth in the proposal, EPA’s 

determination is based upon quality 

assured, quality controlled, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data from the 

2007–2009 monitoring period and 

additional quality assured, quality 

controlled data in AQS for 2010 which 

show that the Saint Louis area has 

monitored attainment of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

II. What is the background of this 

action? 

The proposed rule (76 FR 12302, 

March 7, 2011) sets forth the 

background of this action. The proposed 

rule describes the pertinent PM2.5

NAAQS, the designation of the Saint 

Louis area as nonattainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 

effect of determining attainment of this 

standard on the suspension of 

attainment-related planning 

requirements. Details are provided in 

the notice of proposed rulemaking. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

relevant air quality data? 

In its proposal (76 FR 12302, March 

7, 2011), EPA evaluated data recorded 

in the AQS database for the Saint Louis 

PM2.5 nonattainment area from 2007 to 

2009. Eight monitoring sites in the 

nonattainment area presented complete 

data. The highest design value at these 

sites was 14.1 μg/m3 at monitor 17–119– 

1007 in Madison County, Illinois. EPA 

concluded that the Saint Louis area has 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

based on its evaluation of quality 

assured and certified data from the area 

monitoring sites with complete data for 

the 2007–2009 monitoring period. 

Supplemental, supporting air quality 

data were also considered, as discussed 

in the proposed rule. 

The historical certified data recorded 

at the monitors that were discontinued 

during the 2007–2009 monitoring 

period and recent certified data 

recorded at monitors that started 

operation during the period provide 

additional support for EPA’s 

determination that the Saint Louis area 

has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

EPA also considered additional 

monitoring data for 2010 that have been 

submitted by the states and are in AQS, 

although not yet certified. The 2010 data 

indicate that the Saint Louis area 

continues in attainment for the 2008– 

2010 monitoring period. EPA believes 

that these data show that the area 

continues to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 29653 

IV. What are EPA’s responses to public 

comments? 

On March 7, 2011, EPA proposed to 

determine that the Saint Louis PM2.5

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (76 FR 

12302). EPA received one comment 

letter on the proposed approval, from 

the Interdisciplinary Environmental 

Clinic at Washington University Law 

School, on behalf of the American 

Bottom Conservancy (ABC). Below we 

set forth a summary of ABC’s comments 

and EPA’s responses. 

Comment: The commenter contends 

that U.S. Steel-Granite City Works 

(USS–GCW) is a significant source of 

PM2.5 emissions in the Saint Louis area, 

and that the plant’s operations raise 

environmental justice concerns. The 

commenter states that a large number of 

low income and minority residents near 

USS–GCW are affected by the air quality 

resulting from the plant’s substantial 

PM2.5 emissions. 

Response: As stated in our proposal, 

the 2007–2009 design value for the 

monitor closest to the USS–GCW plant, 

monitor 17–119–1007 in Granite City, is 

14.1 μg/m3, which meets the NAAQS. 

We further found that 2010 monitoring 

data indicate that the 2008–2010 design 

values from monitor 17–119–1007 and 

also from another Granite City monitor 

close to the plant, 17–119–0024, that 

began operating in July 2007, show 

attainment of the NAAQS. In addition to 

these monitors in Granite City, air 

quality is measured at more monitors in 

Madison County (Alton and Wood 

River) as well as by monitors in the 

adjacent Saint Clair County and 

elsewhere throughout the area. See 

Section III of the proposed rule for more 

detail, at 76 FR 12303. These monitors 

measure PM2.5 concentrations in the 

ambient air—the air people breathe. The 

annual PM2.5 standard was set to protect 

the public from long-term fine 

particulate exposure. EPA’s obligation, 

in this rulemaking, is solely to 

determine whether quality assured 

monitored data for the most recent 

three-year period show that the Saint 

Louis area is meeting the annual PM2.5

NAAQS. Monitored attainment of the 

standard is the only basis of a 

determination of attainment or 

nonattainment, and it is the only 

relevant issue. EPA’s role in this 

rulemaking is limited to making the 

determination in accordance with the 

requirements of the CAA and EPA 

regulations. See 40 CFR 50.13 and 40 

CFR 50 Appendix N. Should the plant’s 

operations or any other source of 

emissions at any time in the future 

result in monitored nonattainment of 

the standard, in accordance with the 

statute and EPA regulations, then EPA 

will take action, through notice and 

comment rulemaking, to withdraw this 

determination. Thus, people who live or 

work in Granite City or surrounding 

towns will be protected if the air quality 

falls back into nonattainment. 

EPA reviewed air quality data 

throughout the Saint Louis area, 

including environmental justice areas 

and other areas alike, and EPA is 

determining that the Saint Louis area is 

attaining the standard only because we 

find that all portions of the area are 

meeting the standard. This means that 

the health of citizens who live or work 

in environmental justice communities is 

protected just as the health of citizens 

who live or work elsewhere in the area 

is protected. 

Comment: ‘‘The highest ambient PM2.5

air monitoring values in [the Saint Louis 

area] consistently have been associated 

with monitor 17–119–1007 in Madison 

County, Illinois, just a few blocks from 

USS–GCW. The facility is a significant 

source of PM2.5 and has been identified 

[by Illinois] as a contributor to PM2.5

nonattainment’’ at the monitor. 

Response: EPA agrees that Madison 

County, Illinois monitors have generally 

recorded the highest ambient PM2.5

concentrations in the Saint Louis area. 

In addition to monitor 17–119–1007, 

area high values have been recorded at 

monitor 17–119–0024. Both monitors 

are in Granite City near USS–GCW. 

Nevertheless, the two most recent threeyear periods of data (2007–2009 and 

2008–2010) show that all area monitors, 

including monitors 17–119–0024 and 

17–119–1007 in Granite City, are 

meeting the annual PM2.5 standard. For 

the monitor of greatest concern to the 

commenter, EPA calculated the 2008– 

2010 design value as 13.8 μg/m3, which 

is the area’s highest design value. This 

supports EPA’s determination that the 

Saint Louis area continues to meet the 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Comment: The commenter argues that 

the proposed determination of 

attainment is based on air quality data 

that are unrepresentative of air quality 

during ‘‘normal’’ operation of the USS– 

GCW facility. The commenter asserts 

that the period of USS–GCW’s 

shutdown from the end of 2008 through 

a substantial portion of 2009 is 

associated with considerably lower than 

normal ambient PM2.5 values, based on 

data from monitor 17–119–1007. Thus, 

the commenter claims that the apparent 

finding of attainment is ‘‘illusory’’ 

because it is dependent on air data 

gathered during the plant shutdown that 

the commenter believes are not 

indicative of USS–GCW’s true impact 

on the air quality and risks to public 

health in the community. ABC asks that 

EPA reconsider its decision to make a 

determination of attainment for the 

Saint Louis area for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS based on the 

unrepresentative period from 2007– 

2009. 

ABC also noted that steel production 

at USS–GCW remained relatively 

constant between 2004 and 2008 with 

annual production of 2,294,000 to 

2,545,000 tons. The commenter states 

that in 2009, steel production dropped 

sharply to 906,000 tons because the 

plant was closed for a substantial 

portion of the year. USS–GCW steel 

production then increased significantly 

from 2009 to 2010 with the facility 

producing 2,539,000 tons of steel in 

2010. The commenter asserts that as a 

result, ambient air quality PM2.5

concentrations near the USS–GCW 

facility increased in 2010 as well. 

Response: First, EPA notes that the 

commenter concedes that air quality 

data for 2007–2009 for the Saint Louis 

area meet the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. The commenter argues, 

however, that these data are not 

‘‘representative’’ of air quality in the 

area. While EPA agrees that the 2009 air 

quality values monitored in the Saint 

Louis area generally were lower than the 

2007, 2008, and 2010 values recorded at 

the same monitors, EPA disagrees with 

the commenter’s position that this 

should prevent EPA from determining 

that the Saint Louis area is meeting the 

1997 annual PM2.5 standard. A 

determination of attainment under 40 

CFR 50 Appendix N is based on an 

analysis of the three most recent years 

of complete, quality assured monitoring 

data. These data by definition are 

representative of air quality during the 

requisite period. And here, EPA 

determined that both 2007 to 2009 data 

and 2008 to 2010 data indicate that the 

area is attaining the standard. 

A determination of attainment centers 

on the monitored air quality during a 

specific time period. The underlying 

causes of the monitored values are not 

relevant to the determination. 

Maintenance of the standard in the 

future is also not relevant to an 

assessment of current attainment. The 

ability of an area to maintain attainment 

of the NAAQS is reserved for 

consideration as a required element for 

EPA approval of an area’s redesignation 

request, and is a question that is 

separate from and independent of a 

determination of attainment. See CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E), listing separately 

among the requirements for 

redesignation a determination of 

attainment and an approved 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
29654 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

maintenance plan. Even after EPA 

finalizes a determination of attainment 

for the Saint Louis area, the area 

remains designated nonattainment, and 

the determination is subject to revision 

if in the future EPA determines that the 

air quality in the area once again fails 

to meet the standard. 

We note that the monitored ambient 

PM2.5 levels rose from 2009 to 2010, but 

they did not reach the levels above the 

standard that had been recorded a few 

years earlier. The Granite City monitor 

17–119–1007 recorded an 11.3 μg/m3

annual PM2.5 average in 2009 and the 

data in EPA’s AQS for 2010 show an 

annual average of 14.3 μg/m3. This 2010 

value is below the standard and less 

than the annual averages of 15.1 μg/m3

in 2007 and 15.7 μg/m3 in 2008 at 

monitor 17–119–1007, when the plant 

was also operating at a level of 

production that the commenter regards 

as ‘‘normal.’’ For a determination of 

attainment of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS, 

the design value is calculated using the 

arithmetic mean of three consecutive 

annual averages, such as 2007–2009 or 

2008–2010. However, for the sole 

purpose of showing what the air quality 

might have been without the impact of 

the plant shutdown, EPA calculated the 

mean using the annual averages from 

the three most recent years when USS– 

GCW had ‘‘normal’’ steel production, 

i.e., 2007, 2008, and 2010. The mean 

derived from this calculation, 15.0 μg/ 

m3, meets the level of the 1997 PM2.5

annual standard. While this calculated 

value does not obey the requirement to 

use consecutive years and thus is not a 

design value that can be compared to 

the NAAQS for regulatory purposes, it 

does provide reassurance that data from 

recent years during which the plant 

operated at higher levels of production 

do not undermine EPA’s determination, 

using the appropriate design value, that 

the Saint Louis area attains the annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

EPA also notes the design values 

history in the Saint Louis area. The 

2008–2010 design values appear likely 

to be similar to or even a little lower 

than the 2007–2009 design values. Most 

significantly, despite any increase in 

2010 values from the 2009 values, the 

air quality meets the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard. The historic design values at 

monitor 17–119–1007, which is closest 

to USS–GCW, are shown on Table 1. 

The 2008–2010 design value in Table 1 

was calculated using quality assured but 

not yet certified 2010 data. 

TABLE 1—ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES AT 17–119–1007 

Years 2001–2003 2002–2004 2003–2005 2004–2006 2005–2007 2006–2008 2007–2009 2008–2010 

Value .................................. 17.5 μg/m3 16.9 17.0 16.6 16.5 15.7 14.1 * 13.8 

* Value calculated with quality assured, but uncertified 2010 data. 

Table 1 shows the design values have 

decreased from values above 16 μg/m3

to 15.7 μg/m3 in 2006–2008. That is, 

these data suggest a downward trend in 

PM2.5 concentrations even in years with 

similar levels of steel production at 

USS–GCW, suggesting that air quality 

has improved as a result of long-term 

emission reductions from sources 

throughout the Saint Louis area and 

elsewhere. See also EPA’s response to 

the comment below. Nevertheless, as we 

noted before, a determination of 

attainment is a straightforward 

assessment of air quality during a 

particular time period. EPA is not 

required, when making a determination 

of attainment, to account for the causes 

of attainment or to show that attainment 

is due to permanent and enforceable 

emissions reductions. That showing, 

like maintenance, is a specific 

requirement for redesignation of an area 

to attainment, and independent of a 

determination of attainment. EPA will 

consider this requirement for 

redesignation at such time as the states 

submit any requests for redesignation. It 

is not, however, a relevant requirement 

in this rulemaking. Compare section 

107(d)(3)(E) (i) and (iii). 

Comment: ABC commented that, ‘‘Not 

only is USS–GCW a significant source of 

PM2.5 in the [Saint Louis] area, but the 

facility has a history of air pollution 

noncompliance. Regardless of EPA’s 

determination of attainment, ABC urges 

‘‘EPA and IEPA to be vigilant about 

enforcing CAA violations at USS–GCW 

to reduce the threats of air pollution to 

the surrounding community.’’ ABC 

noted some enforcement actions taken 

at USS–GCW. ABC concluded by asking 

EPA ‘‘to use all legal authorities to 

protect the community from excessive 

PM2.5 emissions.’’ 

Response: A determination of 

attainment is simply an evaluation of 

the ambient air quality data that are 

compared to the NAAQS. For the Saint 

Louis area, EPA has determined that the 

most recent air quality data establish 

that the area meets the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. The evaluation is not required 

to consider the emission limits or 

compliance history of sources. The 

determination of attainment does not 

express or imply any EPA position on 

the compliance history of USS–GCW. 

EPA is also working with Illinois and 

Missouri to seek additional emission 

reductions to continue to improve the 

air quality in the Saint Louis area. For 

example, important steps toward further 

control of USS–GCW are provided in 

the Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) that U.S. Steel and Illinois 

signed on June 30 and July 1, 2010, 

respectively. This agreement is expected 

to provide significant reductions of 

PM2.5 emissions from USS–GCW by the 

start of 2012 and again in spring 2013. 

Although some MOU conditions to aid 

compliance are already in place, 

particulate matter emission limits on 

several units are effective beginning 

January 1, 2012, and on additional units 

starting March 31, 2013. 

EPA stated in the proposed rule and 

has reiterated in this final rule that this 

determination of attainment is not a 

redesignation. The Saint Louis area 

remains designated nonattainment. For 

the area to be redesignated to 

attainment, Illinois and Missouri must 

show that the improvement in air 

quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions, and 

EPA must fully approve a maintenance 

plan meeting the requirements of 

section 175A of the CAA. Thus, in any 

PM2.5 redesignation request that Illinois 

or Missouri submits for this area, the 

state would be required to demonstrate, 

among other things, that controls at 

USS–GCW and other sources in the area 

and upwind are sufficient to assure that 

the area will continue to attain the 

standard for at least 10 years beyond the 

date of the redesignation. 

V. What are the effects of this action? 

This determination suspends, under 

the provisions of the PM2.5

Implementation Rule (40 CFR 

51.1004(c)), the requirements for the 

Saint Louis PM2.5 nonattainment area 

and the States of Illinois and Missouri 

to submit attainment demonstrations, 

RACM (including RACT), reasonable 

further progress plans, contingency 

measures, and other planning SIPs 

revisions related to attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS provided 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 29655 

that the area continues to attain the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

As discussed further, final approval of 

the determination of attainment for the 

Saint Louis PM2.5 nonattainment area: 

(1) Suspends the obligation for Missouri 

and Illinois to submit the requirements 

listed above; (2) continues such 

suspension until such time, if any, that 

EPA subsequently determines that any 

monitor in the area has violated the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS; and, (3) is 

separate from, and will not influence or 

otherwise affect, any future designation 

determination or requirements for the 

Saint Louis PM2.5 nonattainment area 

based on the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS or future PM2.5 NAAQ revision. 

Final approval also suspends the 

sanction and Federal Implementation 

Plan (FIP) timetables for Illinois that 

were started on November 27, 2009 

(EPA found in a November 27, 2009 

Final Rule (74 FR 62251), that Illinois 

failed to submit a plan with the 

elements listed in the previous 

paragraph for the Saint Louis PM2.5

nonattainment area). If, in the future, 

EPA determines, after notice-andcomment rulemaking in the Federal 

Register, that the area has violated the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the basis for 

the suspension of the specific 

requirements, set forth above, would no 

longer exist, and the States of Missouri 

and Illinois would thereafter have to 

address the pertinent requirements. The 

suspension of the sanction and FIP 

timetables would also end and those 

timetables would begin again at the 

point at which they were suspended. 

This rulemaking action is limited to a 

determination that the air quality data 

show that the Saint Louis PM2.5

nonattainment area has monitored 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, and it is not equivalent to the 

redesignation of the Saint Louis PM2.5

nonattainment area to attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. It is not a 

redesignation to attainment under 

section 107(d)(3) of the CAA because 

the EPA has not yet approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

required under CAA section 175A, nor 

a determination that the Saint Louis 

PM2.5 nonattainment area has met the 

other requirements for redesignation 

under the CAA. The designation status 

of the Missouri and Illinois portions of 

the Saint Louis PM2.5 nonattainment 

area will remain nonattainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such 

time as the EPA takes final rulemaking 

action to determine that such portions 

meet the CAA requirements for 

redesignation to attainment. 

VI. When is this rule effective? 

EPA finds that there is good cause for 

this determination of attainment to 

become effective on the date of 

publication of this action in the Federal 

Register, because a delayed effective 

date is unnecessary due to the nature of 

the action. The expedited effective date 

for this action is authorized under both 

5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that 

rule actions may become effective less 

than 30 days after publication if the rule 

‘‘grants or recognizes an exemption or 

relieves a restriction,’’ and 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3), which allows an effective date 

less than 30 days after publication ‘‘as 

otherwise provided by the agency for 

good cause found and published with 

the rule.’’ As noted above, this 

determination of attainment will result 

in a suspension of the requirements for 

the Saint Louis area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, a RFP plan, 

section 172(c)(9) contingency measures, 

and any other planning SIPs related to 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS for so long as the area 

continues to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The suspension of these requirements is 

sufficient reason to allow an expedited 

effective date of this rule under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(1). This determination of 

attainment will also suspend the 

sanction and FIP timetables for Illinois 

on the effective date of this rule. In 

addition, the suspension of the 

obligations of Illinois and Missouri to 

make submissions for these 

requirements provides good cause to 

make this rule effective on the date of 

publication of this action in the Federal 

Register, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

The purpose of the 30-day waiting 

period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is 

to give affected parties a reasonable time 

to adjust their behavior and prepare 

before the final rule takes effect. Where, 

as here, the final rule suspends 

requirements rather than imposing 

obligations, affected parties, such as the 

Saint Louis area, do not need time to 

adjust and prepare before the rule takes 

effect. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action makes a determination of 

attainment based on air quality, and 

results in the suspension of certain 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule 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. 

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 action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
29656 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by July 22, 2011. Filing a petition 

for reconsideration by the Administrator 

of this Final Rule does not affect the 

finality of this action for the purposes of 

judicial review nor does it extend the 

time within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: May 10, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

Dated: May 16, 2011. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart O—Illinois 

■ 2. Section 52.725 is amended by 

adding paragraph (k) to read as follows: 

§ 52.725 Control strategy: Particulates. 

* * * * * 

(k) Determination of Attainment. EPA 

has determined, as of May 23, 2011, that 

the Saint Louis, Illinois-Missouri PM2.5

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. This 

determination, in accordance with 40 

CFR 51.1004(c), suspends the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

reasonably available control measures, 

reasonable further progress, contingency 

measures, and other plan elements 

related to attainment of the standards 

for as long as the area continues to meet 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 3. Subpart AA is amended by adding 

§ 52.1341 to read as follows: 

§ 52.1341 Control strategy: Particulate 

Matter. 

Determination of Attainment. EPA 

has determined, as of May 23, 2011, that 

the Saint Louis, Illinois-Missouri PM2.5

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. This 

determination, in accordance with 40 

CFR 51.1004(c), suspends the 

requirements for this area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

reasonably available control measures, 

reasonable further progress, contingency 

measures, and other plan elements 

related to attainment of the standards 

for as long as the area continues to meet 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12480 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 67 

[Docket ID FEMA–2011–0002] 

Final Flood Elevation Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Base (1% annual-chance) 

Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified 

BFEs are made final for the 

communities listed below. The BFEs 

and modified BFEs are the basis for the 

floodplain management measures that 

each community is required either to 

adopt or to show evidence of being 

already in effect in order to qualify or 

remain qualified for participation in the 

National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP). 

DATES: The date of issuance of the Flood 

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing 

BFEs and modified BFEs for each 

community. This date may be obtained 

by contacting the office where the maps 

are available for inspection as indicated 

in the table below. 

ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each 

community are available for inspection 

at the office of the Chief Executive 

Officer of each community. The 

respective addresses are listed in the 

table below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis 

Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering 

Management Branch, Federal Insurance 

and Mitigation Administration, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 500 C 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, 

(202) 646–4064, or (e-mail) 

luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) makes the final determinations 

listed below for the modified BFEs for 

each community listed. These modified 

elevations have been published in 

newspapers of local circulation and 

ninety (90) days have elapsed since that 

publication. The Deputy Federal 

Insurance and Mitigation Administrator 

has resolved any appeals resulting from 

this notification. 

This final rule is issued in accordance 

with section 110 of the Flood Disaster 

Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, 

and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has 

developed criteria for floodplain 

management in floodprone areas in 

accordance with 44 CFR part 60. 

Interested lessees and owners of real 

property are encouraged to review the 

proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM 

available at the address cited below for 

each community.The BFEs and 

modified BFEs are made final in the 

communities listed below. Elevations at 

selected locations in each community 

are shown. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This final rule is categorically excluded 

from the requirements of 44 CFR part 

10, Environmental Consideration. An 

environmental impact assessment has 

not been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood 

elevation determinations are not within 

the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

Regulatory Classification. This final 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under the criteria of section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 

1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

58 FR 51735. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. 

This final rule involves no policies that 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This final rule meets the 

applicable standards of Executive Order 

12988. 

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 67—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 67 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES