1 of 53 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


40 CFR Part 52 


[EP A-R08-0AR-2006-0952; FRL- ] 


Air Quality Implementation Plans; Montana; Attainment Plan for Libby, MT PM2.5 

Nonattainment Area and PMIO State Implementation Plan Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Montana on March 26, 2008. Montana submitted this SIP revision to 

meet Clean Air Act requirements for attaining the 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (~g/m3) 

annual fine Particulate Matter (PM2.s) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for the 

Libby nonattainment area. The plan, herein called an "attainment plan," includes an attainment 

demonstration, an analysis of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Reasonably 

Available Control Measures (RACT/RACM), base-year and projection year emission 

inventories, and contingency measures. The requirement for a Reasonable Further Progress 

(RFP) plan is satisfied because Montana projects that attainment with the 1997 PM25 NAAQS 

will occur in the Libby nonattainment area by April 2010. In addition, we are proposing to 

approve the PM JO SIP revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program submitted 

by Montana on June 26, 2006 for inclusion into Libby's attainment plan. This submittal contains 

provisions, including contingency measures, for controlling both PM]o and PM25 emissions from 

woodstoves, road dust, and outdoor burning. Finally, EPA is proposing to find on-road directly 

emitted PM25 and oxides of nitrogen (NO x) in the Libby, Montana nonattainment area 

insignificant for regional transportation conformity purposes. If this insignificance finding is 
20f53 

finalized as proposed, the Libby, Montana nonattainment area will not have to perform a regional 

emissions analysis for either direct PM2.5 or NOx as part of future conformity determinations for 

the annual 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before [Insert date 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register]. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-0AR-2006­

0952, by one of the following methods: 

• 	 www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 

• 	 E-mail: freeman.crystal@epa.gov 

• 	 Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in FOR FURTHER 

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments). 

• 	 Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, Colorado 80202­

1129. 

• 	 Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich, Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, 

Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted Monday through Friday, 

8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. Special arrangements should 

be made for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-0AR-2006-0952. 

EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change 
30f53 

and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or 

e-mail. The www.regulations.gov web site is an anonymous access system, which means EPA 

will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA, without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of 

the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EP A may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special 

characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional 

information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at 

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional instructions on submitting comments, 

go to Section I, "General Information," of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as c-opyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available 

either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental 
40f53 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA 

requests that, if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in FOR FURTHER 

INFORMATION CONTACT to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy ofthe docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Freeman, Air Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 

Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, Phone: (303) 312-6602, Fax: (303) 312-6064, 

freeman.crystal@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose ofthis document, we are giving meaning to certain words or initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the context 

indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The words EPA. we. us or our mean or refer to the United States Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

(iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan. 

(iv) The initials PM2.

5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less 

than 2.5 micrometers. 

(v) The initials PMIO mean or refer to particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less 

than 10 micrometers. 

(vi) The word State or Montana refers to the State of Montana unless the context indicates 

otherwise. 
50f53 

(vii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. What Action Is EPA Proposing? 

III. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Action? 

A. Designation History 

B. Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule 

IV. What Is Included in Montana's Submittal? 

A. Background 

B. PMIO SIP Revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program 

C. Libby and Vicinity PM25 Control Plan 

V. EPA's Analysis of Montana's Submittal 

A. PMIO SIP Revisions to Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program 

B. Attaimnent Demonstration 

C. Analysis of Montana's Submittal 

1. Pollutants Addressed and Attainment Date 

2. Monitoring Data 

3. Emission Inventory 

4. Modeling 

5. RACT/RACM 

6. Contingency Measures 

7. Transportation Conformity Requirements 
60f53 

VI. Proposed Action 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. 	 General Information 

A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI Do not submit this information to EPA through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD 

ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the 

information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so 

marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips/or Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to: 

a. 	 Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information 

(subject heading, Federal Register date and page number). 

b. 	 Follow directions - The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or 

organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or 

section number. 

c. 	 Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language 

for your requested changes. 

d. 	 Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that 

you used. 
70f53 

e. 	 If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your 

estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. 

f. 	 Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. 

g. 	 Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or 

personal threats. 

h. 	 Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. 

II. 	 What Action Is EPA Proposing? 

EPA is proposing to approve two Montana SIP submittals for the Libby nonattainment 

area: (1) PM 1 0 SIP revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program submitted by 

Montana on June 26, 2006; and (2) the Libby PM2.5 attainment plan submitted by Montana on 

March 26, 2008. EPA has determined that the PMlO SIP revisions and the PM2.5 attainment plan 

meet applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act, including the Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule (herein referred to as the implementation rule) issued by EPA on April 25, 

2007 (72 FR 20586). Furthermore, EPA has determined that Montana's PM2.5 SIP submittal for 

the Libby area includes an attainment demonstration, an analysis ofRACTIRACM, base-year 

and projection-year emission inventories and contingency measures. The attainment plan 

supports a determination that the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area will attain the 1997 PM2.5 

NAAQS by the April 2010 deadline for attainment. Finally, EPA is proposing to find on-road 

directly emitted PM2.5 and NOx in the Libby, Montana nonattainment area insignificant for 

regional transportation conformity purposes. 
80f53 

EPA's analysis and findings are discussed in this proposed rulemaking. Additional technical 

support documents are available at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R08-0AR-2006­

0952. 

III. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Action? 

A. Designation History 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA established PM2.5 NAAQS, including an annual 

standard of 15.0 ).tg/m3 based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24­

hour (or daily) standard of65 ).tg/m3 based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. EPA established the standards based on significant evidence and numerous 

health studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated with exposures to PM2.5. 

Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the CAA to 

designate areas throughout the United States as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS; this 

designation process is described in section 1 07(d)(l) of the CAA. In 1999, EPA and state air 

quality agencies initiated the monitoring process for the 1997 PM25 NAAQS, and, by January 

2001, established a complete set of air quality monitors. On January 5,2005, EPA published 

initial air quality designations for the 1997 PM25 NAAQS (70 FR 944), based on air quality 

monitoring data for calendar years 2001-2003. On April 14,2005, EPA published a final 

supplemental rule amending the agency's initial designations (70 FR 19844). EPA did not 

consider modifications made in this rule to be "re-designations" because the changes were made 

before April 5, 2005, the effective date ofthe initial designations. As a result ofthe final 

supplemental rule, PM2.5 nonattainment designations are in effect for 39 areas, comprising 208 
90f53 

counties within 20 states (and the District of Columbia) nationwide, with a combined population 

of about 88 million people. The Libby nonattainment area which is the subject of this 

rulemaking is included in the list of areas not attaining the 1997 PM2.S NAAQS. 

On October 17,2006, EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM25 NAAQS to 35 f-lg/m3 and 

retained the level of the annual PM25 standard at 15.0 f-lg/m3(71 FR 61144). On November 13, 

2009 EPA designated areas as either attainment/unclassified or nonattainment with respect to the 

revised 24-hour NAAQS (74 FR 58688). In the November 2009 designation action, EPA 

established a deadline of December 14,2012 for states to submit attainment plans for areas 

designated as nonattainment for the revised 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Of relevance to the proposed rulemaking herein, the notice for the November 2009 action 

clarified designations for the 1997 PM2.5NAAQS by relabeling the existing designation tables to 

identify designations for the annual NAAQS, and by providing a separate table identifying 

designations for the 1997 24-hour NAAQS (i.e. 65 f-lg/m\ In that table, the Libby 

nonattainment area is designated as attaining the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

B. Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule 

On April 25, 2007, EPA issued the Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (72 FR 20586). The implementation rule describes the CAA framework 

and requirements for developing state PM2.5 attainment plans. An attainment plan must include a 

demonstration that a nonattainment area will meet applicable NAAQS within the timeframe 

provided in the statute. This demonstration must include modeling (40 CFR 51.1007) that is 
10 of 53 

perfonned in accordance with EPA modeling guidance (EPA-4541B-07-002, April 2007). It 

must also include supporting technical analyses and descriptions of all relevant adopted federal, 

state, and local regulations and control measures that have been implemented by the proposed 

attainment date. 

For the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, an attainment plan must show that a nonattainment area will 

attain the standard by 2010. Alternatively, ifthe area is not expected to meet the NAAQS by 

2010, a state may propose an attainment-date extension for up to five years based on the severity 

ofthe nonattainment problem and on the availability and feasibility of pollution control measures 

(CAA section 172(a)(2». 

For each nonattainment area, the state must demonstrate that it has adopted all 

RACT/RACM needed to show that the area will attain the PM2.5 standards "as expeditiously as 

practicable." The implementation rule provided guidance for making these RACM and RACT 

detenninations (72 FR 20616-21). Any measures that are necessary to meet these requirements 

which are not already either federally promulgated or part of the state's SIP must be submitted in 

enforceable fonn as part of a state's attainment plan. 

The implementation rule also included policies on pollutants that comprise total PM2.5. 

Five main types of pollutants contribute to fine particle concentrations: direct PM2.5, sulfur 

dioxide (S02), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ammonia, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). All 

but direct PM2.5 is considered to be "precursors" to PM2.5 fonnation. The effect ofreducing 

emissions of each ofthese five types of pollutants varies by area, depending on PM2.5 
11 of 53 

composition, emission levels, and other area-specific factors. For this reason, the 

implementation rule established policies regarding what states should include in their PM2.5 

attainment plans for evaluating these pollutants. 

Under these policies, sources of direct PM2.5 emissions (including organic particles, 

elemental carbon and inorganic particles) and S02 must be evaluated for emission reduction 

measures in all PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Sources of NOx must be evaluated for emission 

reduction measures in each area unless the state and EPA demonstrate that NOx is not a 

significant contributor to PM2.5 concentrations in a specific area. Neither VOC nor ammonia 

sources are required to be evaluated for emission reduction measures in an area unless the state 

or EPA demonstrates that either of these pollutant types significantly contributes to PM2.5 

concentrations. To reverse any of the presumptive precursor policies, the implementation rule 

provided guidance on the types of analyses that may be included in a technical demonstration. 

The implementation rule also provided guidance on other elements of a state's attainment 

plan, including but not limited to, consideration of emission inventories, contingency measures, 

and motor vehicle emissions budgets used for transportation conformity purposes. 

IV. What Is Included in Montana's Submittal? 

A. Background 

Libby, Montana, a small rural community, is located in Lincoln County in the 

northwestern part of the State. Libby sits in the narrow, triangular Kootenai valley at an 

elevation of 2, 1 00 feet. The nonattainment area is dominated by three major mountain ranges 
120f53 

that limit the air-shed: (1) the Rocky Mountain and Flathead Ranges on the eastern boundary; (2) 

the Purcell Range, which roughly bisects the area from north to south; and (3) the Selkirk and 

Cabinet Ranges on the western boundary. The vast majority of the area surrounding Libby is 

National Forest managed by the U.S. Forest Service. Based on the 2000 census and a growth 

rate through 2005 of3.71 %, Libby's population is estimated at 2,674. 

The highest PM25 concentrations in Libby generally occur during the winter months of 

November through February. The winter concentrations are related to stagnant weather 

conditions dominated by light winds and strong temperature inversions. These meteorological 

conditions can trap emissions within the valley for many days or weeks. 

Air quality data recorded during 2001-2003 at the PM2.

5 monitor at the Libby Courthouse 

Annex showed violations of the annual PM2 5 standard. Libby was designated nonattainment for 

PM25 under section 107(d)(3) of the CAA, on AprilS, 2005 (40 CFR part 81). The air quality 

planning requirements for PM25 nonattainment areas are set out in Title I subpart 1 ofthe Act.! 

Historically, Libby was designated nonattainment for PMIO by operation oflaw on 

November 15, 1990 (56 FR 56694,56794, November 6, 1991), under CAA section 107(d)(4)(B) 

and was classified as 'Moderate.' The PM!oattainment plan was approved by EPA on August 

30, 1994 (59 FR 44627). Montana has submitted revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution 

Control Program (herein referred to as the Program) and the Libby and Vicinity PM25 Control 

Plan (herein referred to as the Libby attainment plan) for the purpose of demonstrating 

1 Subpart 1 applies to nonattainment areas generally. 
13 of 53 

attainment of the annual PM25 NAAQS. After public notice, public hearings regarding these two 

submittals were held on February 27, 2006 for the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control 

Program and on March 25, 2008 for the Libby and Vicinity PM25 Control Plan. The Montana 

Board of Environmental Review approved the revised Lincoln County Air Pollution Control 

Program on March 23, 2006 and the Libby attainment plan on March 25, 2008. Montana has 

met the requirements of Section 110(a)(2) for reasonable notice and public hearings. 

B. PMJO SIP Revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program 

Montana submitted revisions to the'PMJO SIP for the Lincoln County Air Pollution 

Control Program for the Libby nonattainment area to improve and strengthen the PMJO 

attainment plan. The revisions include several provisions to regulate solid fuel burning devices 

and require owners and operators to obtain operating permits. Operating permits may only be 

issued for EPA-certified woodstoves or for pellet stoves. Furthermore, only specified materials 

can be burned in these devices, and visible emissions of greater than 20% opacity from them are 

prohibited. Additionally, these provisions allow for air pollution alerts if PMJO or PM2,5 

concentrations averaged over a 4-hour period exceed a level 20 percent below any federal or 

state particulate matter standard. Provisions are also included for penalties for non-compliance 

and contingency measures. 

Additionally, revisions were made for open and outdoor burning regarding prohibited 

materials, major open burning and management burning, minor open burning or residential open 

burning, and special burning. These revisions generally included significant limits on the time 

periods for open burning activities as compared to the existing PMJO SIP. Further restrictions 
l40f53 

also include prohibitions on burning from November 1 to March 31, which is the winter-time 

period when exceedances ofPM2.5typically occur. Lincoln County's Program prohibits burning 

the same materials as the State but is more restrictive because the burning of trade waste, 

Christmas tree waste, leaves, grass clippings and stumps is prohibited within the Air Pollution 

Control District2(herein referred to as the District). The June 26, 2006 submittal also included a 

stringency analysis for the Program showing that the revisions are more stringent than 

comparable State law. 

C. Libby and Vicinity PM25 Control Plan 

The Libby attainment plan provides a demonstration that the annual PM2.5 NAAQS will 

be met by April 2010 through the implementation ofthe Lincoln County Program described in 

section B above. The Libby attainment plan includes an emissions inventory (EI), a woodstove 

air pollution control calculation, and a technical analysis showing that the emissions of PM2.5 will 

be reduced sufficiently to meet the NAAQS. The key components of the Libby attainment plan 

are described as follows: 

1. Ambient air quality monitoring in the Libby area began in 1999 and is conducted using 

Federal Reference Method (FRM) PM2.5samplers at the Courthouse Annex site in downtown 

Libby. Based on monitoring data from the years 2001 to 2003, the 3-year annual design value 

was 15.9 ~g/m3, which is a violation of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In February 2002, speciation 

monitoring was conducted to determine possible PM2.5 emission sources. The results identified 

organic carbon as the main component of wintertime PM25 emissions. Further ambient 

2 The boundaries ofthe District are identical to those for the nonattainment area. 
150f53 

monitoring was conducted from November 2003 to February 2004 to determine the geographic 

distribution of PM25 concentrations. After additional monitoring from various locations beyond 

Libby city limits and meteorological data from Libby Courthouse Annex site, it was determined 

that the Libby Courthouse Annex site represented the worst-case ambient PM2.5 levels in the 

area. 

2. A chemical mass balance study (CMB) was conducted during the winter of 2003-2004 by the 

University of Montana, Center for Environmental Health Sciences (UM-CEHS). The goal ofthe 

CMB study was to identify those emission sources in the Libby area that contributed to elevated 

PM2.5 concentrations. The CMB model runs indicated that emissions from residential wood 

combustion were the major source ofthe fine particles on the PM2.5 filters, averaging 82% during 

the CMB study period (i.e. winter months). Other contributing PM2.5 sources identified by the 

CMB model were automobile exhaust (7%), ammonium nitrate (5%), diesel exhaust (4%), and 

sulfate (2%).3 

3. Carbon 14 (

14C) analysis, as a part ofthe CMB study completed by UM-CEHS, was 

conducted by the University of Arizona's Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory Facility to 

provide further evidence that wood combustion was the major source ofPM25 emissions in 

Libby.4 

4. The Libby base year PM2.5 EI included a quantification of actual PM25 emissions and 

apportioned the emissions on a seasonal and annual basis for point and area sources. The State 

3 Ward, TJ., Rinehart, L.R., Lange, T. The 2003/2004 Libby, Montana PM2.5 Source 

Apportionment Research Study. Aerosol Science and Technology. Vol. 40:166-177. 2006. 

4Ibid. 
160f53 

used calendar year 2005 as the base year for the development of an EI for the Libby area. The EI 

was used to support a proportional rollback model for the emission control plan. The State 

developed infonnation for 2005 that allowed for the calculation ofresidential wood combustion 

and commercial fuel use. 

5. The Libby PMIO SIP as revised also serves as the control plan for emissions ofPM25. 

Controls exist for reducing emissions from re-entrained road dust through aggressive street 

sweeping and flushing, and traction sand durability requirements. Emissions of organic carbon 

are controlled through residential woodstove regulations and outdoor burning restrictions. 

6. A significant part of the PM2,5 control strategies has been the completion of a woodstove 

changeout program. Approximately 1,130 uncertified woodstoves were replaced with EPAcertified woodstoves or pellet fuel burning devices. After the changeout, PM25 emissions have 

been reduced from approximately 138.78 tons/year to 57.21 tons/year, a decrease of 59%. 

PM25 control strategies are primarily focused on residential wood combustion. The control 

strategies also include: air pollution alerts may be declared during the winter months; solid fuel 

burning devices must have an operating pennit; only EPA-certified wood stoves and pellet fuel 

burning devices can obtain pennits; and only permitted pellet fuel devices can operate during air 

pollution alerts. Other control strategies for PM2,5 have included an expanded area for the 

prescribed burning control program and the continuing federal tailpipe standards. 

7. Analysis for RACT/RACM was conducted for the Libby area. EPA's RACT/RACM 

guidance covers three general source categories: stationary, mobile and area (79 FR 20586). The 
170f53 

Libby PM25 CMB study did not identify any emissions from local stationary sources, only a 

minor amount from mobile sources, and a significant amount from an area source category 

residential wood combustion. EPA's area source RACM guidance covers four source categories: 

(1) reduced solvent usage or solvent substitution; (2) controls on charbroiling or other 

commercial cooking operations; (3) controls on woodstoves and fireplaces; and (4) new or 

improved regulations on open burning (79 FR 20586 and 20621). The Libby attainment plan 

concluded that wood combustion control strategies and more stringent rules on open burning 

constituted RACM for area sources. The analysis further noted that the other two categories of 

area sources, commercial users of solvent and commercial cooking, were infrequent in the Libby 

area. The analysis also considered mobile sources, but determined that in light oftheir small 

contribution to PM25 nonattainment, existing federal tailpipe standards and natural turnover rates 

of the local vehicle fleet made additional measures for mobile sources unnecessary. 

8. The Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program is l~gally enforceable by Lincoln County, 

and by the State should Lincoln County fail to administer the program. The Libby attainment 

plan also provides for contingency measures ifthe NAAQS are exceeded after implementation. 

There is one contingency measure for wood burning for space heating purposes if it is 

determined that wood burning emissions contribute to an exceedance ofthe PM2.5 NAAQS, then 

only biomass pellet fuel burners may operate within the District. Other contingency measures 

are included for re-entrained dust and industrial facilities. There is also a review process to 

consider permanent adoption of a contingency measure. 

V. EPA's Analysis of Montana's Submittal 
18 of 53 

A. PMIO SIP Revisions to Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program 

EPA's summary ofthe PMIO SIP revisions is addressed in detail under section IV. B. 

These revisions were made for two purposes: (1) to address PM2.5 attainment plan requirements; 

and (2) to improve and strengthen requirements for continued attainment ofPMIO. The revisions 

are a significant improvement to a plan that was approved by EPA 16 years ago. The Libby area 

has not had an exceedance ofthe PMIO NAAQS since 1993. Furthermore, clarifications were 

made to the language to better explain to the public the requirements ofthe air quality program. 

The revisions removed exemptions and replaced them with requirements for obtaining permits 

for wood burning appliances. These revisions also added enforcement provisions where 

previously none had existed. 

Section 1100) of the Clean Air Act states that a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress toward attainment ofthe NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the 

Act. The Libby area is currently meeting the NAAQS for all criteria pollutants and has not had 

any violations ofthe PM 10 standard for over a decade. Furthermore, the revisions do not relax 

the stringency of any SIP provision; in fact, the revisions generally strengthen the SIP. As a 

result, the PMIO SIP revisions do not interfere with attainment ofthe NAAQS or any other 

applicable requirement ofthe Act. Therefore, section 1100) requirements are satisfied. 

B. Attainment Demonstration 

In accordance with section 172( c) ofthe CAA and the implementation rule, the 

attainment plan submitted by Montana for the Libby area included: (1) emission inventories for 
19 of 53 

the plan's base year (2005) and projection year (2009); and (2) an attainment demonstration 

consisting of: (a) technical analyses that locate, identify, and quantify sources of emissions 

contributing to violations ofthe annual PM25 NAAQS; (b) analyses of future-year emission 

reductions and air quality improvements expected to result from national and local programs, and 

from new measures to meet RACT/ RACM requirements; (c) adopted emission reduction 

measures; and (d) contingency measures. 

C. Analysis of Montana's submittals 

1. Pollutants Addressed and Attainment Date 

In accordance with policies described in the implementation rule, Montana's PM2.5 

attainment plan evaluates emissions of direct PM25, S02 and NOx in the Libby area. Montana 

provided documentation of expeditious attainment ofthe annual PM25 NAAQS in the Libby area 

by April 201 O. Areas that demonstrate attainment by 2010 are considered to have satisfied the 

requirement to show reasonable further progress toward attainment and need not submit a 

separate RFP plan. For similar reasons such areas are also not subject to a requirement for a 

mid-course review. 

Montana's evaluation of emissions is based on the work conducted by UM-CEHS for the 

CMB model runs indicating that emissions from residential wood combustion were the major 

source (82%) ofthe fine particles on the PM2.5 filters. Other PM2.5 sources identified by the 

CMB model were automobile exhaust (7%), ammonium nitrate (5%), diesel exhaust (4%), and 

sulfate (2%). In addition, a Carbon 14 analysis confirmed that wood combustion is the major 

source ofPM2.5 emissions in the Libby area and that emissions of both S02 and NOx are very 
20 of 53 

minor compared to PM2.5 emissions from residential wood combustion. As described in the 

emissions inventory, the sources of S02 are from home heating oil and sources ofNOx are from 

on-road and off-road mobile sources (see further discussion in section V.C.7. on NOx emissions 

from mobile sources). 

2. Monitoring Data 

As shown in the table below, the annual weighted average for 2009 shows that the Libby 

area has met the April 2010 deadline for the 1997 PM2·.5NAAQS. The trend in annual average 

concentrations is downward and coincides with the implementation ofthe wood stove changeout 

program. This is based on quality-controlled and quality-assured monitoring data from 2005­

2009 that is available in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). 

Table V.2.-1 

! 

! 

Year 

Annual Weighted Average 

(lJ.g/m3 

) 

2005 15.8 

I 2006 15.2 

i 2007 13.0 

2008 12.9 

2009 10.7 I 

3. Emission Inventory 

CAA section 172(c)(3) states that for nonattainment areas, the State shall prepare a 

statewide emission inventory no later than three years after designation. The baseline emission 

inventory for calendar year 2005 or another suitable year shall be used for attainment planning 

(40 CFR 51.1008(b». EPA promulgated the Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) (40 CFR 

part 51, subpart A) in order to consolidate the various reporting requirements that already exist, 

including those requirements outlined in the PM2.5 implementation rule. The AERR requires 
21 of 53 

states to report state-wide emissions every three years. Montana prepared a statewide emission 

inventory for 2005. This inventory included annual totals of emissions of criteria pollutants and 

their precursors. The State used data from this statewide inventory to create an emission 

inventory specific to the Libby area. 

Monitoring data for 2005 showed an exceedance of the PM2.5 annual standard. The year 

2005 is a suitable year for attainment planning because an emission inventory for this year is 

representative of ambient emission levels that led to the exceedance ofthe annual standard. The 

2005 emission inventory showed that residential wood burning comprised 82% of the direct 

PM2.5 emissions during the winter. The next largest direct source, road dust, was 11 %, followed 

by locomotive emissions at 3.4%. The remaining criteria pollutant emissions were very minor, 

including the precursors ofPM2.5 ( i.e. NOx and SOz). Background values ofPM2.5 were 

accounted for by the State using monitored data collected at remote stations far away from 

emissions sources in the Libby area. EPA notes that the State used a conservative emission 

inventory approach for projecting future growth for the 2010 attainment year which involved 

increasing the vehicle emissions by 2.1 % (the population growth rate) from the 2005 base year 

inventory, and not taking any credit for potential emission reductions that may have been 

available from fleet turnover and the Federal tailpipe standards for vehicles. Condensable 

particulate matter was not considered in the emission inventory because of a lack of sources in 

the Libby area. 

4. Modeling 
22ofS3 

CAA Section 172(c) requires states with nonattainment areas to submit an attainment 

demonstration. A PM25 attainment demonstration consists of (l) analyses which estimate 

whether selected emissions reductions will result in ambient concentrations that meet the 

NAAQS and (2) a set of control measures which will result in the required emissions reductions. 

Montana's analysis of future~year emissions reductions and air quality improvements was 

based on a proportional rollback model for showing attainment of the standard and a roll forward 

model demonstrating attainment in the future. The proportional models were applied in 

conjunction with the findings from chemical mass balance and Carbon 14 studies conducted by 

the University of Montana. 

In the particular case of Libby, a proportional model is more appropriate than dispersion 

models. The great majority of periods with elevated PM2.5 concentrations in Libby occur during 

wintertime stagnation conditions. Furthermore, dispersion in Libby is constrained by steep 

terrain. The most suitable approach for stagnation conditions should be determined on a case~ 

by~case basis, (see sections 7.2.8 and 8.3.4.2(b) of the Guideline on Air Quality Models, 40 CFR 

part 51, appendix W), and an alternative model should be selected by the EP A Regional Office 

when a preferred model is less appropriate (see section 3.2.2 of the Guideline). 

The proportional model used the emission inventory for 2005 when there was an 

exceedance of the standard. The decrease in PM2.5 emissions for the Libby area resulting from 

the woodstove changeout program was calculated based on the amount of wood burned by the 

EPA-certified woodstoves and then compared to the amount of emissions resulting from burning 
23 of 53 

the same amount of wood from the uncertified woodstoves that were still in use. The decrease in 

emissions would be an indication of the effectiveness of the control strategy. Montana estimated 

that PM2.S emissions would be reduced by 81.57 tons as a result of the new EPA-certified 

wood stoves installed in Libby households. 

The State projected future annual average PM2.Sconcentrations for Libby at 9.5 /lg/m3

. 

This projection was based on the installation of the new stoves and a 100 percent compliance 

with the wood burning restrictions for Libby_ EPA's guidance is based on emission sources 

complying with state and local restrictions on emission sources (Emissions Inventory Guidance 

for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations, appendix B, EPA-454/R-05-001, August 2005.) The 

guidance defines rule effectiveness (RE) as a method to account for the reality that not all 

emission sources are in compliance 100% of the time. 

The guidance provides a listing of the factors that are most likely to affect RE. EP A 

used a conservative 70% RE instead of a 100 percent compliance to determine if Libby would 

still reach attainment of the PM2.5 standard. EPA estimated that using the more conservative 

compliance percentage for wood burning restrictions, the future value for Libby would still be 

below the PM2.5 standard of 15 /lg/m3

• As stated above in Table V.2.-1 the Libby area 2009 

annual average is currently 10.7 /lg/m3. 

5. RACTIRACM 

Determination ofRACTIRACM is a three-step process: (1) identifying potential 
24 of 53 

measures that are reasonable; (2) modeling to identify the attainment date that is as expeditious 

as practicable; and (3) selecting RACTIRACM. Identification of potential measures should 

ordinarily be supported by an inventory of emissions of directly emitted PM2.5 and of precursors 

from the relevant sources and source categories; the technologically feasible control measures for 

each source or source category; and, for each measure, the control efficiency, possible emission 

reductions by pollutant, estimated cost per ton, and the date by which the measure was or could 

be implemented; and other relevant information. 

For the first step, identification of potential measures that are reasonable, Montana 

supported its RACTIRACM analysis with the emissions inventory and the CMB study. The 

RACTIRACM analysis first noted that there are no major stationary sources of PM2.5 in the 

Libby area. It also noted that minor stationary sources are currently regulated under Montana's 

minor source program, which requires permits and a Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT) review. As discussed in the implementation rule, if state or federal rules already 

regulate a given sector, it is reasonable for a state to look to unregulated sectors for 

RACTIRACM measures. Furthermore, the implementation rule permits the state to use reason in 

the extent of its effort to identify potential control measures. For example, the rigor of the 

analysis may depend on the relative contribution of a particular pollutant to the PM25 

nonattainment problem (72 FR 20613). As shown by the CMB study, stationary sources are a 

very minor contributor to PM2.5 nonattainment in Libby. Similarly, the RACT/RACM analysis 

reasoned that mobile sources are currently regulated, make only a minor contribution to the 

nonattainment problem, and the overall emissions will continue to be reduced through fleet 

turnover. Thus, the first step focused on measures for area sources. 
25 of 53 

The analysis further noted that two types of area sources (commercial users of solvents 

and commercial charbroilers or other commercial cooking operations) were infrequent in the 

Libby area. The analysis also discussed re-entrained road dust, which the CMB study did not 

identify as a contributor to PM2.5 nonattainment, and noted that there were existing SIP 

provisions to control road dust. As to home heating oil, a source of S02, the CMB study found 

only a 2% contribution to PM2.5 nonattainment for all sulfates combined. Thus, the RACM 

analyses focused on the remaining area sources of wood burning devices and open burning and 

identified several control measures to be included in the attainment plan. 

For the second step, as discussed in more detail in section V.C.4, Montana modeled 

attainment by 20 I0 based on adoption of these reasonable control measures. Finally, for the 

third step, based on the analysis, Montana selected and adopted RACM for wood burning 

devices and open burning. For wood burning devices, the State developed and implemented a 

woodstove changeout control strategy. The woodstove changeout permanently removed 1,130 

old, uncertified woodstoves and replaced them with EPA-certified woodstoves or pellet stoves. 

Additionally, the State adopted measures that require permits for solid fuel burning devices 

(including woodstoves) and restrict installation and operation ofthese devices to three 

categories: pellet stoves, devices with a catalytic emissions control system, and devices with a 

non-catalytic emissions control system. For the latter two, emission limits are imposed. 

RACM measures were also included for major open burning, management burning, 

residential burning, and special burning. The PM2.5 attainment plan includes BACT and permits 
26 of 53 

for an expanded area, which is the entire Air Pollution Control District, for all of these different 

types of burning activities. Additionally, these burning activities were restricted to shorter time 

periods. 

In summary, the State evaluated, by source category, sources of direct PM25, S02 and 

NOx for RACT/RACM control measures. The State's evaluation of sources of S02 and NOx 

resulted in their decision that no additional controls are necessary to attain the NAAQS based on 

the absence of major sources or area sources that can be cost effectively or reasonably controlled. 

The State therefore adopted RACM for direct PM2.5. In accordance with Section 172(c) of the 

CAA, Montana has adopted all RACT/RACM needed to attain the standards as expeditiously as 

practicable. EPA has reviewed Montana's RACT/RACM analysis and has determined that the 

state reasonably identified potential control measures, modeled the attainment date that is as 

expeditious as practicable and reasonably selected RACTI RACM for the Libby area. 

6. Contingency Measures 

In conformance with Section 172(c)(9) ofthe CAA, the implementation rule requires that 

PM2.5attainment area plans include contingency measures. These measures must be fully 

adopted or otherwise ready for quick implementation, should contain trigger mechanisms and an 

implementation schedule, should be measures not included in the SIP control strategy, and 

should provide the equivalent of one year ofRFP. Once triggered, a contingency measure 

should take effect without further action by the State or EPA. 
27 of 53 

The Libby SIP contains contingency measures for residential wood burning, re-entrained 

dust, and industrial facilities. If it is determined that residential wood burning contributes to an 

exceedance ofthe PM2.5 NAAQS, then only biomass pellet fuel burners may operate within the 

District. If re-entrained dust contributes to noncompliance, then the existing regulations (which 

currently only apply in a limited area) are made applicable to the entire Air Pollution Control 

District. Finally, if an industrial facility contributes to noncompliance, the Montana Department 

of Environmental Quality (MTDEQ) will initiate contingency measures to reduce emissions. 

Once a contingency measure is initiated, it must remain active until the Libby SIP demonstration 

is revised and resubmitted to EPA for approvaL 

The contingency measures for residential wood burning and re-entrained dust meet the 

requirements of the implementation rule. The contingency measure for major point sources 

would require further action by MTDEQ to determine whether additional controls are necessary. 

However, the contingency measures for residential wood burning and re-entrained dust are 

sufficient to meet the requirements of the CAA, including equivalence to one year ofRFP. 

7. Transportation Conformity Requirements 

Transportation conformity is required under CAA section 1 76(c) (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) to 

ensure that transportation plans, transportation improvement programs (TIPs) and federally 

supported highway and transit projects are consistent with ("conform to") the state air quality 

implementation plan. Transportation conformity applies to areas that are designated 

nonattainment, and to those areas redesignated to attainment after 1990 with a CAA section 
28 of 53 

175A maintenance plan ("maintenance areas"), for transportation-related criteria pollutants: 

carbon monoxide (CO), NOx and particulate matter (PM25 and PMlO). 

EPA's transportation conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) establishes the criteria 

and procedures for determining whether transportation activities conform to the SIP. One 

requirement ofthe rule is that transportation plans, TIPs, and projects must satisfy a regional 

emissions analysis for the relevant pollutants and precursors (40 CFR 93.118, 119). However, 

section 93.1 09(m) of this rule states that an area is not required to satisfy a regional emissions 

analysis for a pollutant or precursor ifthe SIP demonstrates that motor vehicle emissions of that 

pollutant or precursor are an insignificant contributor to the area's air quality problem. In 

today's notice, EPA is proposing to find that motor vehicle emissions ofPM2.5 and NOx are 

insignificant contributors to Libby's PM2,5 nonattainment problem. If this proposal is finalized, 

PM2.5 and NOx motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) would not be established and a 

regional emissions analysis would not be required for either PM2,5 or NOx in any future 

conformity determination in Libby. Please note, however, that this proposed action would not 

apply to PM2,5 hot-spot analyses for individual projects, ifsuch an analysis is required in the 

future for transportation conformity purposes. 

There are specific transportation conformity provisions that EPA proposes to determine 

as applicable to the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. As provided in more detail below and in 40 

CFR 93.1 09( m), these specific conformity provisions are addressed when EPA finds that 

emissions from motor vehicles in the Libby PM25 nonattainment area are an insignificant 
290f53 

contributor to the areas' nonattainment problem for a relevant NAAQS and/or precursor. 40 

CFR 93.109(m) states: 

"(m) Areas with insignificant motor vehicle emissions. Notwithstanding the other 

paragraphs in this section, an area is not required to satisfy a regional emissions 

analysis for §93.118 and/or §93.119 for a given pollutant/precursor and NAAQS, if 

EPA finds through the adequacy or approval process that a SIP demonstrates that 

regional motor vehicle emissions are an insignificant contributor to the air quality 

problem for that pollutant/precursor and NAAQS. The SIP would have to demonstrate 

that it would be unreasonable to expect that such an area would experience enough 

motor vehicle emissions growth in that pollutant/precursor for a NAAQS violation to 

occur. Such a finding would be based on a number of factors, including the percentage 

ofmotor vehicle emissions in the context ofthe total SIP inventory, the current state of 

air quality as determined by monitoring data for that NAAQS, the absence of SIP motor 

vehicle control measures, and historical trends and future projections ofthe growth of 

motor vehicle emissions. A conformity determination that meets other applicable 

criteria in Table 1 of paragraph (b) of this section is still required, including regional 

emissions analyses for §93.l18 and/or §93.119 for other pollutants/precursors and 

NAAQS that apply. Hot-spot requirements for projects in CO, PMIO, and PM2.5 areas 

in §93 .116 must also be satisfied, unless EPA determines that the SIP also demonstrates 

that projects will not create new localized violations and/or increase the severity or 

number of existing violations of such NAAQS. If EPA subsequently finds that motor 

vehicle emissions of a given pollutant/precursor are significant, this paragraph would 
30 of 53 

no longer apply for future conformity determinations for that pollutant/precursor and 

NAAQS." 

To consider making such an insignificance finding, EPA evaluated the provisions of40 

CFR 93.1 09(m) against the relevant information contained in the SIP attainment plan, the SIP 

revision's associated technical support document (TSD), and additional information as 

developed by EPA. We evaluated the following factors in determining whether on-road direct 

PM2.5 and NO" emissions are insignificant contributors to the area's PM2.5 air quality problem; 

(1) the percentage ofmotor vehicle emissions in the context ofthe total SIP inventory; (2) the 

current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for that NAAQS; (3) the absence of 

SIP motor vehicle control measures; and (4) historical trends and future projections of the growth 

of motor vehicle emissions. Our evaluation and conclusions are as follows: 

A. The percentage of PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions in the context ofthe total SIP 

inventory. 

This factor, with regard to PM2.5 emissions, is addressed in two areas of the SIP revision 

documentation. Table 27 .12.11.4B (HPM25 Annual Demonstration of Compliance") ofthe 

Libby attainment plan provides relevant information with regard to 2003-2004 CMB 

percentages by source category, percent reduction in emissions due to control strategies, 

estimated growth in emissions over the 2005 to 2010 time period, and 2010 compliance year 

contributions. The dominant CMB source was residential woodstoves at 82% with motor 

vehicle tailpipe emissions at 7% oftotal PM2.5 mass and diesel exhaust at 4% ofthe total PM2.5 

mass. 
3 I of 53 

The contribution ofmotor vehicle PM2.5 emissions is also documented in Table S.IA 

("Seasonal PM 2.5 Emissions in Libby by Source Category") ofthe SIP's TSD. Table S.IA 

presents estimated emissions based on metric tons and percentage of the inventory for 2005, by 

season; we have provided these motor vehicle tailpipe PM2.5 emissions, as percent oftotal PM2.5 

emissions, in Table V.7-1 below. We note that in Table 5.IA of the SIP's TSD, the inventory 

is dominated by wood stove emissions in all four seasons. 

Table V.7.-1 Motor Vehicle PM2.5Emissions Percentage of Total Inventory for 2005 

(Ilfi . . ) a 19ures are In metnc tons 

Season Motor Vehicle PM25 

Emissions 

Total Inventory PM2.5 

Emissions 

Motor Vehicle 

Emissions % ofTotal 

Winter 0.48 80.63 0.59 

Spring 0.55 46.43 1.18 

Summer 0.66 13.66 4.83 

Fall 0.51 97.67 0.52 

Total Year 2.2 238.38 0.92 

As shown in Table V.7.-1 above, motor vehicle tailpipe PM25 emissions represent an 

annual average of only 0.92 % ofthe total PM2.5 inventory. That is, motor vehicle emissions are 

less than one percent ofthe inventory over the course of a year. During the summer, motor 

vehicle emissions make up close to five percent ofthe inventory, but motor vehicle emissions are 

only slightly higher during the summer than during other seasons. The motor vehicle emissions 

percentage is much greater during the summer compared with other seasons primarily because 

total PM25 emissions are significantly reduced during the summer compared to other seasons; 

summer is the season with the fewest emissions from woodstoves. The information provided in 

the State's submittal supports a conclusion that regional PM2.5 on-road mobile source emissions 
32 of 53 

are a minimal percentage in the context of the total PM25 emissions inventory. Therefore, this 

factor supports the proposed finding that on-road PM2.5 emissions are insignificant for the Libby 

PM2.5 nonattainment area. 

B. 	The current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for the PM25 

NAAQS. 

This factor is addressed as shown in the table below. From the State's SIP revision and 

section V.B.2 above, from 2007 to 2009 the Libby area continues to demonstrate attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, the trend in annual average concentrations is 

downward and coincides with the implementation of the woodstove changeout program. This 

data is based on quality-controlled and quality-assured monitoring data from 2005-2009 that are 

available in the EPA AQS. This factor supports the proposed finding that on-road PM2.5 

emissions are insignificant for the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. 

Table V.2.-1 

I 

I 

'--' 

PM2.5 Annual Weighted 

Year Average 

(l-lg/m3) 

2005 15.8 

2006 15.2 

2007 13.0 

2008 12.9 

2009 10.7 
33 of 53 

C. The absence of SIP motor vehicle control measures for PM2.5. 

The Libby PM2.5 attainment plan relies on a 59% reduction in residential wood stove 

emissions to reach attainment of the annual PM25 NAAQS and took no credit for any emission 

reductions in the motor vehicle tailpipe and diesel exhaust categories (e.g. Federal tailpipe 

emission standards and fleet turnover). The State further described these assumptions in 

sections 27.12.7.3 (HFederal Tailpipe Standards Control Program") and 27.12.11.4 (HPM25 2010 

Demonstration of Compliance") ofthe Libby attainment plan. EPA also notes there is no State 

or local mandated motor vehicle emission control requirements (e.g., inspection and 

maintenance program, fuels, or transportation control measures) for the Libby PM2.5 

nonattainment area. Therefore, this factor supports the proposed finding that on-road PM2.5 

emissions are insignificant for the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. 

D. Historical trends and future projections of the growth of motor vehicle PM2.

5 

emissions. 

Libby's annual PM2.5 2001-2003 design value was 15.9 f,lgim3

. In November 2003 

through February 2004 air quality data was collected in Libby to support CMB modeling. This 

CMB modeling showed that residential wood smoke was the primary source ofPM2.5in Libby. 

Table 27.12.l1.4B in the Libby attainment plan shows that, when the results of the CMB 

modeling are applied to the air quality data from 2001-2003, residential wood smoke contributed 

13.0 f,lgim3 (82%) of the 2001-2003 annual PM25 design value, motor vehicle tailpipe emissions 

contributed 1.1 f,lg/m3 (7%), and diesel exhaust emissions contributed 0.7 f,lgim3 f,lgim3 (4%). 

Based on the results of this modeling Montana based its attainment strategy for the area on a 

woodstove change-out program. 
34 of 53 

The SIP assumes that the woodstove change-out program will reduce those emissions by 

59% in 2010. The SIP also assumes that motor vehicle tailpipe emissions and diesel exhaust 

emissions would grow by 2.1 % between 2005 and 2010, which is equal to the expected 

population growth rate during that period. The SIP does not account for any reductions in motor 

vehicle emissions or diesel exhaust that would occur due to fleet turnover to new lower emission 

motor vehicles, on-road diesel vehicles or off-road equipment. Table 27.12.11.4B in the Libby 

attainment plan shows that in 2010 the predicted annual average PM2.5 concentration would be 

8.37 J.lg/m3

• The table also shows that residential wood smoke is expected to contribute 5.44 

J.lg/m3 (65%) in 2010, motor vehicle tailpipe emissions would contribute 1.12 J.lg/m3 (13%), and 

diesel exhaust emissions would contribute 0.71 J.lg/m3 (8%). As can be seen, on a percentage 

basis the contribution ofmotor vehicle emissions and diesel exhaust increases; however, overall 

PM2.5 concentrations are expected to decrease by 53% to 8.37 J.lg/m3

, the contribution of wood 

smoke emissions is expected to decrease by 59%, and the total contribution of emissions from 

motor vehicles and diesel exhaust to PM2.5 mass in 2010 is expected to increase by only 0.03 

J.lg/m3 between 2005 and 2010. This increase in mass is due to the assumptions that emissions 

from these sources increase at the same rate as population growth and that no emissions 

reductions from fleet turnover are included in the calculations. Both of these are conservative 

assumptions. 

EPA notes that the contribution of motor vehicle emissions of 13% to PM2.5 mass in 2010 

represents the projected chemical mass balance of PM25 and not an emission inventory 

projection. The SIP includes a base year PM2.5 inventory (Table 5.lA) for 2005. That inventory 
35 of 53 

soows that motor vehicle emissions of PM2,5 are 2.20 tpy and that total PM2.5 emissions in the 

base year are 238.39 tpy. Therefore, the motor vehicle emissions in the base year are slightly 

less than I % of the total direct PM2.5 emissions. On the surface this may seem to be in conflict 

with the results of the CMB modeling, which shows that motor vehicle exhaust contributed about 

7% ofthe PM2.5 mass in the base year. However, it should be noted that the chemical mass 

balance data and the PM2,5 data collected at the Libby Courthouse Annex represents only one 

receptor within the City of Libby, and only for the period of late 2003 through early 2004. While 

this location is believed to be representative of Libby's air quality, numerous factors influence 

the local particulate matter concentrations and air quality. Local scale meteorology (wind speed, 

wind direction, temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, and solar radiation at a 

minimum), traffic patterns, and precipitation are a few examples of these factors which vary 

throughout the city. Accepting that variable conditions exist throughout Libby, as well as the 

inherent uncertainty associated with ambient air monitoring, the difference that exists between 

PM2.5 monitoring data at one receptor and a city-wide emission inventory appears to be 

plausible. 

We also note that the actual location ofthe monitor may have exposed it to additional 

influence from motor vehicle emissions. We have not performed an in-depth analysis, but we do 

note that the monitor is located directly adjacent to U.S. Highway 2, the main north/south 

highway through Libby. Although motor vehicle PM25 emissions are shown to be minimal in 

the State's emissions inventory (ref. Table S.IA: "Seasonal PM25 Emissions in Libby by Source 

Category" and Table V.7.-1 above), motor vehicle emissions may have shown a greater than 
36 of 53 

anticipated contribution on the chemical mass balance analysis due to the monitor's close 

proximity to Highway 2. 

Overall, this factor supports the proposed finding that on-road PM2.5 emissions are 

insignificant for the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. In summary, all four factors support the 

proposed finding. After weighing these four factors described in 40 CFR 93.1 09(m) and 

evaluated above, EPA proposes to find that on-road PM2.5 emissions are insignificant for the 

Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. We tum to applying the four factors to on-road NOx emissions. 

E. 	The percentage of NOx motor vehicle emissions in the context ofthe total SIP 

inventory. 

The Libby attainment plan focuses on directly emitted PM2.5 and controls of PM25 

emissions from woodstoves and does not address any motor vehicle NOx emissions other than to 

indicate in Table 27 .12.11.4B "PM2.5 Annual Demonstration of Compliance" that the CMB data 

show that ammonium nitrate was only 5% ofthe mass found on the filters. EPA, therefore, drew 

upon other relevant, available data to evaluate whether NOx motor vehicle emissions in the 

Libby PM2.5nonattainment area are significant and require that a NOx motor vehicle emissions 

budget be established for transportation conformity purposes or whether on-road NOx emissions 

could be found insignificant based on the criteria in 40 CFR 93.1 09(m). 

EPA reviewed relevant information from EPA's National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data 

for 2005 that were used for the 2009 final designations for the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (74 
37 of 53 

FR 58688, November 13,2009).5 However, since the NEI data were for Lincoln County as a 

whole, we needed to assess how much ofthe Lincoln County on-road NOx inventory could be 

apportioned to the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. Our methodology was to calculate how 

many vehicle miles traveled (VMT) the Libby PM25 nonattainment area contributes to Lincoln 

County's total VMT and to assign that same proportion ofthe total Lincoln County on-road NOx 

emissions to the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area, as explained further below. We then needed to 

determine what percentage this was of total NOx from the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. 

Specific emissions data for Lincoln County, MT, which includes the Libby PM2.5 

nonattainment area, are presented in Table V.7.-2 below and are from EPA's PM25 24-hour 2006 

NAAQS final designations information. 

. t T a e bl V 7 2 ­ (All emISSIOn fi19ures are In ons per year )

I County Major VOC NOx S02 NH3 PM2.5 OC EC S04 N03 PMFine 

Category 

• Lincoln Fires 6106 310 277 425 2199 1286 219 20 10 664 

I Lincoln Non­ 338 2403 169 1 76 16 55 0 0 4 

Road 

i Lincoln On-Road 366 545 15 23 11 3 6 0 0 2 

Lincoln Other­ 871 138 74 57 453 108 16 5 1 323 

Stationary 

Total 7681 3395 535 506 2738 1412 296TI:L 11 I 994 

I 

The "On-Road" or motor vehicle, 2005 NEI emissions were calculated by EPA for 

Lincoln County based on a county annual total of VMT of 231 ,246,800. This VMT figure, 

5 The 2005 NEI data from EPA's PM2.5 24-hour 2006 NAAQS final designations information are 

available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttnlnaags/pm/pm25 2006 techinfo.html. 
380f53 

which represents data for the entire county, is also referenced in our 2006 PM25 24-hour 

NAAQS final designations information.6 

Based on the 2005 NEI data referenced above in Table V.7.-2, Lincoln County's total 

annual VMT of231,246,800 results in approximately 545 tpy of on-road NOx• To calculate the 

estimated on-road NOx emissions for the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area, we first needed to 

determine what percentage of Lincoln County's total VMT is attributed to the Libby PM2,5 

nonattainment area. We then applied that VMT percentage to the total Lincoln County on-road 

NOx emissions to get the estimated on-road NOx emissions for the Libby PM2,5 nonattainment 

area. The total VMT for the Libby PM2,5 nonattainment area, 54,877,360, came from the 

MTDEQ.7 This is 23.73% of Lincoln County's total VMT (i.e., 54,877,360 VMT from Libby 

divided by 231,246,800 VMT from Lincoln County as a whole). It is reasonable to assume that 

the Libby PM25 non attainment area contributes this same percentage of on-road NOx emissions 

to the total Lincoln County on-road NOx emissions. Therefore, we applied this 23.73% to the 

Lincoln County total of 545 tpy ofon-road motor vehicle NOx emissions, which results in 

approximately 129.33 tpy of on-road NOx emissions for the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. In 

lieu ofother specific data, EPA considers this approach a reasonable estimate ofthe on-road NOx 

emissions for the Libby PM2,5 nonattainment area. 

Once we had a figure for the number oftons of on-road NOx emissions from Libby, the 

next step in our analysis was to determine what percentage ofthe total anthropogenic NOx this 

6 See http://www.epa.gov/ttnfnaaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html; Factor 4.B "Vehicle Miles 

Traveled". 
390f53 

represents. Again, since the NEI data available were for Lincoln County as a whole, we needed 

to assess how much ofthe Lincoln County total anthropogenic NOx could be apportioned to the 

Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. To do so, we needed to establish what NOx emissions were 

from anthropogenic sources in the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area other than from on-road 

motor vehicle tailpipes. To develop these particular emissions figures, we assumed that the 

percentage of Lincoln County's anthropogenic NOx coming from Libby would be the same as 

the percentage of Lincoln County's anthropogenic PM2.5 emissions coming from Libby, as 

described below. 

First, we determined the anthropogenic NOx emissions for Lincoln County from the 

"Non-Road" and "Other Stationary" source categories. We used the data from Table V.7.-2 

above and eliminated the "Firest!8 and "On-Road" emissions categories from the Lincoln County 

2005 NEI data (see Table V.7.-3 below): 

T a e bl V 7 ..-3 (All emISSIons are In tons per year ) 

County Major 

Category 

VOC NOx S02 NH3 PM2.5 OC EC S04 N03 PM 

Fine 

Lincoln NonRoad 

338 2403 169 1 76 16 55 0 0 4 

Lincoln OtherStationary 

871 138 74 57 453 108 16 5 1 323 

Total 1209 2541 243 58 529 124 71 5 1 327 

The total anthropogenic NOx in Lincoln County from sources other than on-road is 2541 tpy. 

7 VMT data was communicated in a February 26,2010, email from Jim Carlin ofMTDEQ to 

Tim Russ ofEPA Region 8. 
40 of 53 

Next, we summed-up the PM25 emissions from the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area from 

the State's SIP emission inventory Table S.lA, but did not include emissions from fires (i.e., 

PM2.5 emissions from "Large Prescribed Burning" and "General Burning" were not included 

from the State's Table S.lA); see Table V.7.-4 below. 

Table V.7.-4: Libby Anthropogenic PM2.5 Emissions 


(As adapted from Table S.IA "Seasonal PM25 Emissions in Libby by Source Category" of the 


L'bb)y A' SIP E . . I )
 I ttalnment miSSIOn nventory~ 

• 

Sources Winter Spring Summer Fall 

Wood stoves 

Residential/Com. 

66.65 20.74 5.08 58.76 

Paved Roads 

Fugitive Dust 

8.92 2.57 3.23 9.61 

Large Prescribed 

Burning 

--­ --­ - - --

General Burning --­ --­ --­ --­ Locomotives 2.72 2.72 2.72 2.72 

Unpaved Roads 

Fugitive Dust 

1.22 1.34 1.53 1.2 

i Propane Heating 

Residential/Com. 

0.13 0.04 0.01 0.11 

Oil Heating 

Residential/Com. 

0.48 0.15 0.04 0.42 

Aircraft 0.0 0.03 0.03 0.0 

Road & Building 

Construction Dust 

0.02 0.36 0.36 0.36 

Motor Vehicle 

Tailpipe 

0.48 0.55 0.66 0.5\ 

Total (Metric 

Tons) 

80.62 28.50 13.66 73.69 

Total Short Tons 

(2000 Ibs. per ton) 

88.88 31.42 15.06 81.24 

Total Annual AnthropogenIc Short Tons of PM2.5 EmIssIons = 216.60 tons. 

Based on the data in Table V.7.-4 above, the total annual anthropogenic short tons of 

PM2.

5 emissions (without including emissions from the "Motor Vehicle Tailpipe" category) from 

8 The "Fires" category of the 200S NEI relates to wildfires, prescribed bums and such. This 

correlates to the "Large Prescribed Burning" and "General Burning" categories in the State's 

Table S.IA. 
41 of 53 

"Non-Road" and "Other Stationary" sources in the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area are estimated 

as 214.17 tons per year. 

The Libby PM25 nonattainment area's annual emissions ofPM25 from "Non-Road" and 

"Other Stationary" anthropogenic sources is 214.17 tpy, whereas these sources emit 529 tpy for 

Lincoln County as a whole (see Table V.7.-3 above). Therefore, Libby's share of Lincoln 

County's PM25 emissions from "Non-Road" and "Other Stationary" anthropogenic sources is 

approximately 40.48%. 

We then added Lincoln County NOx emissions from the "Non-Road" and "Other 

Stationary" sources categories, 2541 tpy (see Table V.7-3 above), and attributed 40.48% ofthose 

emissions to the Libby PM2.5nonattainment area's NOx "Non-Road" and "Other Stationary" 

sources categories, which results in 1028.6 tpy. To summarize, EPA estimated the Libby PM2.5 

nonattainment area's on-road NOx motor vehicle emissions as 129.33 tpy, and the non-road and 

other stationary sources' NOx emissions as 1028.6 tpy. Therefore, the total estimated annual 

anthropogenic NOx emissions from all ofthese source categories are estimated to be 1157.93 tpy 

for the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. The approximate contribution of annual on-road NOx 

motor vehicle emissions (129.33 tpy) to the total estimated NOx annual anthropogenic emissions 

from all sources (1157.93 tpy) in the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area is 11.17% ofthe total 

inventory. 

EPA indicated in its July 1,2004 Transportation Conformity final rule (69 FR 40004) 

that mobile source emissions of approximately 10% may be considered insignificant, but did not 
42 of 53 

make 10% a specific threshold. While the 11.7% figure calculated for on-road NOx in the Libby 

PM2.5nonattainment area is slightly greater than this, in this same rulemaking EPA explained: 

"This example also illustrates the reason EPA believes it is important to have flexibility 

in implementing this provision. Although the commenter specifically mentions 10% as 

the threshold for finding motor vehicle emissions insignificant, EPA clarifies that this 

figure is a general guideline only. Depending on the circumstances, we may find that 

motor vehicle emissions that make up less than 10% of an area's total inventory are still 

significant. Conversely, we may also find that motor vehicle emissions in excess of 10% 

are still insignificant, under certain circumstances relating to the overall composition of 

the air quality situation. In general, the percentage of motor vehicle emissions in the 

area's total inventory is an important criterion for determining whether motor vehicles are 

a significant or insignificant contributor to an area's air quality problem, yet there are 

other criteria that EPA will examine when making this finding, as described in the 

regulatory text for § 93.1 09(k)." (69 FR 40062)9 

As stated in the 2004 preamble, 10 percent is a guideline only. As described below, EPA 

considered other factors that lead EPA to propose that motor vehicle emissions ofNOx are an 

insignificant regional contributor to the PM25 nonattainment problem. 

F. 	 The current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for PM2.5NAAQS. 

This factor is addressed with the ambient PM25 air quality data presented in section 

V.7.B above which demonstrate the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area is attaining the PM2.5 annual 
43 of 53 

Area/County/State PM2.5 

Composition 

Data 

Sulfate 

(Ilmg/m3) 

Nitrate 

(Ilmg/m3) 

Carbon 

(Il mg/m3) 

Crustal 

(Ilmg/m3 ) 

Total 

(Ilmg/m3) 

Nitrate 

Percent 

Carbon 

Percent 

UbbyfLincolnlMT Total 

Concentration 

(Cold) 

1.4 0.8 41.9 0.3 44.4 2 94 

Regional 

Concentration 

(Cold) 

0.9 0.4 2.4 0.2 3.9 10 62 

Urban 

Concentration 

(Cold) 

05 0.4 395 0.1 40.5 1 98 

I 

Total 

Concentration 

(Warm) 

1.2 0.0 6.7 0.8 8.7 0 77 

Regional 

Concentration 

(Warm) 

1.0 0.0 2.5 Ll 4.6 0 54 

Urban 

Concentration 

(Warm) 

0.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 4.4 0 95 

Total 

Concentration 

(Annual 

Average) 

1.0 0.1 12.8 0.4 

i 

14.3 1 90 

NAAQS. Additional data, relevant to NOx or in this case nitrates derived from NOx emissions, 10 

were provided by EPA with the 2009 final designations for the 24-hour 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

This information, as provided in Table V.7-5 below, is from EPA's PM2.5 24-hour 2006 NAAQS 

final designations and is located at: http://www.epa.gov/ttnlnaaqs/pmlpm25 2006 techinfo.html 

Table V 75- PM2.5 ComposltlOn Data fIor L'bb 1 'y, MT 

I 

I 

As can be seen in Table V.7-5 above, nitrates (as derived from NOx) are a very small 

component ofthe PM2,5 composition found in the Libby PM2,5 nonattainment area. Therefore, 

NOx as derived from motor vehicle tailpipe emissions also is a very small component. This 

9 EPA redesignated the insignificance provision ofthe transportation conformity rule from 40 

CFR 93.l09(k) to 40 CFR 93.109(m) in its March 24,2010 "PM Amendments" final rule (75 FR 

14260). 
44 of 53 

factor thus supports the proposed finding that on-road NO" emissions are insignificant for the 

Libby PM25 nonattainment area. 

G. 	 The absence of SIP motor vehicle control measures for NO". 

As discussed in section V.7.C above, the Libby PM2.5 attainment plan took no credit for 

any emission reductions in the motor vehicle tailpipe and diesel exhaust categories (e.g. Federal 

tailpipe emission standards and fleet turnover). The State further described these assumptions in 

sections 27.12.7.3 ("Federal Tailpipe Standards Control Program") and 27.12.11.4 ("PM25 2010 

Demonstration of Compliance") ofthe Libby attainment plan. EPA also notes there is no State 

or local mandated motor vehicle emission control requirements (e.g., inspection and maintenance 

program, fuels, or transportation control measures) for the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. 

Therefore this factor supports the proposed finding that on-road NO" emissions are insignificant 

for the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. 

H. 	 Historical trends and future projections of the growth ofNO" motor vehicle 

emissions. 

As noted in our discussion in section V.7.D above, the Libby attainment plan uses a 59% 

reduction in residential woodstove emissions to reach attainment of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

and took no credit for any emission reductions in the motor vehicle tailpipe and diesel exhaust 

categories. The State further described these assumptions in sections 27.12.7.3 ("Federal 

Tailpipe Standards Control Program") and 27.12.11.4 ("PM2.5 2010 Demonstration of 

Compliance") ofthe Libby attainment plan. EPA notes that the State used a conservative 

10 Nitrogen oxides react in the atmosphere to form nitrates. For our purposes, the impact of 
45 of 53 

emission inventory approach for projecting the 2010 attainment year future growth which 

involved merely increasing the vehicle emissions by 2.1 % (the population growth rate) from the 

2005 base year inventory, and not taking any credit for potential emission reductions that may 

have been available from fleet turnover and the Federal tailpipe standards for vehicles. In 

addition, as we noted above, there are no State or local mandated motor vehicle emission control 

requirements (e.g., inspection and maintenance program) for the Libby PM25 nonattainment 

area. 

This factor supports the proposed finding that on-road NOx emissions are insignificant for 

the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. After weighing these four factors described in 40 CFR 

93. 1 09(m) and evaluated above, EPA proposes to find that on-road NOx emissions are 

insignificant for the Libby PM25 nonattainment area. 

I. Conclusion. 

In view of our evaluation presented above per 40 CFR 93.1 09(m), EPA is proposing to 

find that direct PM25 and NOx motor vehicle emissions are an insignificant contributor to the air 

quality issues associated with the PM2.5 annual NAAQS in the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area; 

thus, motor vehicle emission budgets for on-road direct PM2S and NOx would not be established 

by this rulemaking. Based on our evaluation of the four factors described in 93. 1 09(m), EPA 

proposes to conclude that it would be unreasonable to expect that the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment 

area would experience enough motor vehicle emissions growth such that a PM25 annual NAAQS 

violation would occur. 

NOx emissions is measured as the amount ofnitrates found at the PM2.5monitor. 
46 of 53 

VI. Proposed Action 

The EPA has reviewed Montana's SIP revision for attaining the 15f,lg/m3 annual PM2.5 

NAAQS for the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to approve the State of 

Montana's revisions to the Lincoln County Air Pollution Control Program to be included in 

Montana's SIP, submitted on June 26, 2006, and the Libby PM2.5 attainment plan, submitted on 

March 26, 2008. Action was not taken earlier on the June 26, 2006, submittal at the request of 

the State of Montana to delay action until the submittal of the Libby PM2.5attainment plan at a 

later date. EPA has determined that the SIP meets applicable requirements ofthe CAA, as 

described in the Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule. Specifically, EPA has determined 

that Montana's SIP includes an attainment demonstration and adopted state regulations and 

programs needed to support the determination that the Libby PM2.5 nonattainment area will 

continue attaining the annual PM25 NAAQS. Finally, EPA is proposing to find on-road, directly 

emitted PM2.

5 and NOx in the Libby, Montana nonattainment area insignificant for regional 

transportation conformity purposes. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866, (58 Federal Register 51735 (October 4, 1993)) the 

Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is "significant" and therefore subject to the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the requirements ofthe Executive Order. 

The Order defines "significant regulatory action" as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: 

(1) have an annual effect on the economy of $1 00 million or more or adversely affect in a 

material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 
47 of 53 

environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) 

create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another 

agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 

programs or the rights and obligations ofrecipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the 

Executive Order." The OMB has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 

review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 ET seq. This action proposes to approve the SIP 

revisions submitted by the State ofMontana. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RF A) generally requires an agency to prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking 

requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 

small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

This proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because SIP approvals and disapprovals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D ofthe 
48 of 53 

Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements, but simply approve or disapprove 

requirements that the state is already imposing. Therefore because the Federal SIP approval does 

not create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities. Moreover, due to the nature ofthe Federal-state 

relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute Federal 

inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base 

its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 

255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II ofthe Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 104-4, establishes 

requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, 

and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally 

must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with "Federal mandates" that may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, 

in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $1 00 million or more in anyone year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 ofthe UMRA 

generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 

and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the 

objectives ofthe rule. The provisions ofsection 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent 

with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the 

least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes 

with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes 
49 of 53 

any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, 

including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small 

governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 

input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental 

mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the 

regulatory requirements. 

EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in 

expenditures of $1 00 million or more for state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

the private sector in anyone year. This Federal action proposes to partially approve and partially 

disapprove pre~existing requirements under state or local law, and to disapprove a redesignation 

request, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or 

tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action. Thus, today's rule is not 

subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 ofthe UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled "Federalism" (64 FR43255, August 10,1999), requires 

EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure "meaningful and timely input by state and local 

officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications." "Policies 

that have federalism implications" is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that 

have "substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government 
50 of 53 

and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 

government. " 

This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will 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. This rule merely proposes to partially approve and partially 

disapprove state rules implementing a Federal standard, and to disapprove a redesignation 

request, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 

established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 

policies that have tribal implications. This proposed rule does not have tribal implications, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal 

governments, 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. 

This action does not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. 
51 of 53 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks 

and Safety Risks 

Protection o/Children/rom Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be economically significant as 

defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk 

that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory 

action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 

potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. 

EP A interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that 

are based on health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the 

Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 because it proposes approve a state rule implementing a Federal program. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because 

it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. 
52 of53 

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

("NTTAA"), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 

(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTT AA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus standards. 

This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not 

considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

nitrogen, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq 
53 of 53 

Air Quality Implementation Plans; Montana; Attainment Plan for Libby, MT PM2.5 

Nonattainment Area and PMlO State Implementation Plan Revisions 

Dated: 

Acting Regional Administrator 

Region 8