Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68699 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0854; FRL–9488–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Adoption of the LibertyClairton Nonattainment Area 1997 Fine 

Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard Attainment 

Demonstration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, 

with one condition, State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(PADEP) on June 17, 2011. These 

revisions include the 1997 fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

attainment plan for the Liberty-Clairton 

nonattainment area (Liberty-Clairton 

Area) including a request for EPA to 

make a determination that the 

appropriate attainment deadline for this 

nonattainment area is April 5, 2015. 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

attainment plan for the Liberty-Clairton 

Area that includes the emissions 

inventories, the reasonably available 

control measures/reasonably available 

control technology (RACM/RACT), 

reasonable further progress (RFP), and 

contingency measures portions of the 

attainment demonstration, and the 

transportation conformity motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) that 

demonstrate attainment of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve the air quality 

modeling submitted to demonstrate 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In 

order for EPA to fully approve the 

modeling analysis, PADEP must update 

the modeling to ensure that the 

modeling results in the demonstration 

continue to be valid, considering the 

reductions from the Cross State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR) rule that will 

replace the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(CAIR) in 2012, and must submit the 

revised modeling to EPA within one 

year after the final conditional approval. 

EPA is also proposing to determine that 

the attainment date for the LibertyClairton Area is April 5, 2015. 

These revisions also add the 

definition of PM2.5, the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 micrograms per 

cubic meter (mg/m3), the 2006 24-hour 

NAAQS of 35 mg/m3 and the related 

references to the list of criteria pollutant 

standards in the Allegheny County 

Department of Health (ACHD) 

regulations. EPA is proposing to 

approve the addition of the definition of 

PM2.5 and inclusion of the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS into 

the ACHD regulations. These actions are 

being taken under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0854 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0854, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Dockets normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– 

0854. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality 

Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market 

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 

and the Allegheny County Health 

Department, Bureau of Environmental 

Quality, Division of Air Quality, 301 

39th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

15201. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacqueline Lewis at (215) 814–2037 or 

by email at lewis.jacqueline@epa.gov, or 

Marilyn Powers at (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

17, 2011, PADEP submitted a revision to 

the Allegheny County portion of the 

Pennsylvania SIP. The SIP revision 

includes an attainment demonstration 

and base-year inventory for the LibertyClairton Area developed by ACHD, 

which includes an analysis of RACM/ 

RACT, RFP, contingency measures to be 

implemented if violations occur after 

attainment or if RFP requirements are 

not met, and MVEBs for purposes of 

transportation conformity. In addition, 

the SIP submittal includes amendments 

to Allegheny County regulations that 

adopt the air quality standards and 

associated definitions necessary to 

implement the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. Throughout this document, 

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

we mean EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the LibertyClairton attainment plan SIP revision? 

A. Attainment Demonstration 

1. Pollutants Addressed 

2. Emission Inventories 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68700 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1 In June 2007, a petition to the EPA 

Administrator was filed on behalf of several public 

health and environmental groups requesting 

reconsideration of four provisions in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule. See Earthjustice, Petition for 

Reconsideration, ‘‘In the Matter of Final Clean Air 

Fine Particle Implementation Rule,’’ June 25, 2007. 

These provisions are (1) the presumption that 

3. Control Strategy 

4. RACM/RACT 

5. Modeling 

6. Determination of the Attainment Date 

7. RFP 

B. MVEBs for Transportation Conformity 

IV. Proposed Actions 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve, with 

one exception, Pennsylvania’s SIP 

revisions submitted to EPA on June 17, 

2011 for the purpose of demonstrating 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for 

the Liberty-Clairton Area. EPA proposes 

to fully approve the attainment 

demonstration for the Liberty-Clairton 

Area that includes the base year 

emissions inventories, RACM/RACT 

analysis, RFP plan, contingency 

measures, and MVEBs that meet the 

applicable requirements of the CAA and 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule in 40 

CFR part 41, subpart Z. EPA proposes to 

conditionally approve the air quality 

modeling analysis portion of the 

attainment demonstration because the 

analysis relies on reductions from the 

CAIR, which was remanded and will be 

replaced by CSAPR in 2012. EPA 

proposes to determine that the 

attainment date for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in the Liberty-Clairton Area is 

April 5, 2015. 

EPA is also proposing to approve 

amendments to ACHD regulations that 

add the definition of PM2.5 and the level 

of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Specifically, EPA 

proposes to approve the addition of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 standard of 15 mg/m3, 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 35 

mg/m3, the related references to the list 

of standards in ACHD Article XXI 

Section 2101.10, and the new definition 

of PM2.5 to ACHD Article XXI Section 

2101.20. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA 

established new NAAQS for PM2.5, 

particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 

microns or less, including an annual 

standard of 15.0 mg/m3 based on a three 

year average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations and a 24-hour (daily) 

standard of 65 mg/m3 based on a three 

year average of the 98th percentile of 24- 

hour concentrations. See, 40 CFR 50.7. 

EPA established these standards after 

considering substantial evidence from 

numerous health studies demonstrating 

that serious health effects are associated 

with exposures to PM2.5 concentrations 

above the levels of these standards. 

Epidemiological studies have shown 

statistically significant correlations 

between elevated PM2.5 levels and 

premature mortality. Other important 

health effects associated with PM2.5

exposure include aggravation of 

respiratory and cardiovascular disease 

(as indicated by increased hospital 

admissions, emergency room visits, 

absences from school or work, and 

restricted activity days), changes in lung 

function and increased respiratory 

symptoms, as well as new evidence for 

more subtle indicators of cardiovascular 

health. Individuals particularly 

sensitive to PM2.5 exposure include 

older adults, people with heart and lung 

disease, and children. See, EPA, Air 

Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, 

No. EPA/600/P–99/002aF and EPA/600/ 

P–99/002bF, October 2004. PM2.5 can be 

emitted directly into the atmosphere as 

a solid or liquid particle (primary PM2.5

or direct PM2.5) or can be formed in the 

atmosphere as a result of various 

chemical reactions from precursor 

emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), 

sulfur oxides (SO2), volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3). 

(72 FR 20586, 20589, April 25, 2007). 

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the 

CAA section 107(d) to designate areas 

throughout the nation as attaining or not 

attaining the NAAQS. On January 5, 

2005 (70 FR 944), EPA published initial 

air quality designations for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS, using air quality 

monitoring data for the three-year 

periods of 2001–2003 or 2002–2004. 

These designations became effective on 

April 5, 2005. On November 13, 2009 

(74 FR 58688), EPA revised the existing 

designation tables in part 81 to clarify 

that the 1997 designations were for both 

the annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), 

EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS by lowering the level to 35 

mg/m3. At the same time, it retained the 

level of the annual PM2.5 standard at 

15.0 g/m3. On November 13, 2009 (74 

FR 58688), EPA designated areas, 

including the Liberty-Clairton Area, 

with respect to the revised 24-hour 

NAAQS. Pennsylvania is now required 

to submit an attainment plan for the 24- 

hour standard no later than three years 

after the effective date of the 

designation, that is, no later than 

December 14, 2012. In this notice, all 

references to the PM2.5 NAAQS are to 

the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard of 65 

mg/m3 and annual standard of 15 mg/m3, 

as codified in 40 CFR 50.7. 

EPA designated the Liberty-Clairton 

Area nonattainment for both the 1997 

annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards. 

See, 40 CFR 81.305. The LibertyClairton Area is located within the 

Pittsburgh Beaver Valley Area, as a 

separate nonattainment area. The 

Liberty-Clairton Area was designated as 

a separate distinctively local-source 

impacted nonattainment area because 

the combination of emissions from the 

local sources in a narrow river valley 

creates a local air quality problem 

uniquely different from the remainder of 

the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area. The 

Liberty-Clairton Area is home to 25,000 

people about 1% the population of the 

Pittsburgh Metropolitan Statistical Area 

(MSA) and includes the boroughs of 

Glassport, Liberty, Lincoln, Port Vue, 

and the City of Clairton. 

EPA is implementing the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS under Title 1, Part D, subpart 

1 of the CAA, which includes section 

172, ‘‘Nonattainment plan provisions.’’ 

Section 172(a)(2) requires that a PM2.5

nonattainment area attain the NAAQS 

‘‘as expeditiously as practicable,’’ but no 

later than five years from the date of the 

area’s designation as nonattainment. 

This section also allows EPA to grant up 

to a five-year extension of an area’s 

attainment date based on the severity of 

the area’s nonattainment and the 

availability and feasibility of controls. 

EPA designated the Liberty-Clairton 

Area as nonattainment for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS effective April 5, 2005, 

and thus the applicable attainment date 

is either: (a) No later than April 5, 2010, 

or (b) no later than April 5, 2015 if EPA 

grant a full five-year extension. Section 

172(c) contains the general statutory 

planning requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas, including the 

requirements for emissions inventories, 

RACM/RACT, attainment 

demonstrations, RFP demonstrations, 

and contingency measures. 

On April 25, 2007, EPA issued the 

Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See, 72 

FR 20586, codified at 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart Z (PM2.5 Implementation Rule). 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule and its 

preamble address the statutory planning 

requirements for emissions inventories, 

RACM/RACT, attainment 

demonstrations including air quality 

modeling requirements, RFP 

demonstrations, and contingency 

measures. This rule also addresses other 

matters such as which PM2.5 precursors 

must be addressed by the state in its 

attainment SIP and applicable 

attainment dates.1 We discuss each of 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68701 

compliance with the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

satisfies the NOX and SO2 RACT requirements for 

electric generating units; (2) the deferral of the 

requirement to establish emission limits for 

condensable particulate matter (CPM) until January 

1, 2011; (3) revisions to the criteria for analyzing the 

economic feasibility of RACT; and (4) the use of 

out-of-area emissions reductions to demonstrate 

RFP. These provisions are found in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule and preamble at 72 FR 20586 

at 20623–20628, 40 CFR section 51.1002(c), 72 FR 

20586, 20619–20620 and 20636, respectively. On 

May 13, 2010, EPA granted the petition with respect 

to the fourth issue. Letter, Gina McCarthy, EPA, to 

David Baron and Paul Cort, Earthjustice, May 13, 

2010. On April 25, 2011, EPA granted the petition 

with respect to the first and third issues but denied 

the petition with respect to the second issue given 

that the deferral period for CPM emissions limits 

had already ended. Letter, Lisa P. Jackson, EPA, to 

Paul Cort, Earthjustice, April 25, 2011. EPA intends 

to publish a Federal Register notice that will 

announce the granting of the latter petition with 

respect to certain issues and to initiate a notice and 

comment process to consider proposed changes to 

the 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule. 

these CAA and regulatory requirements 

for PM2.5 attainment plan in more detail 

below. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

Liberty-Clairton Attainment Plan SIP 

Revision? 

A. Attainment Demonstration 

CAA section 172 requires a state to 

submit a plan for each of its 

nonattainment areas that demonstrates 

attainment of the applicable ambient air 

quality standard as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than the 

specified attainment date. Under the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule, this 

demonstration should consist of four 

parts: 

1. Technical analyses that locate, 

identify, and quantify sources of 

emissions that are contributing to 

violations of the PM2.5 NAAQS; 

2. Analyses of future year emissions 

reductions and air quality improvement 

resulting from already-adopted national, 

state, and local programs and from 

potential new state and local measures 

to meet the RACM/RACT and RFP 

requirements in the area; 

3. Adopted emissions reduction 

measures with schedules for 

implementation; and 

4. Contingency measures required 

under section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. See, 

40 CFR 51.1007 and 72 FR 20586 at 

20605. 

1. Pollutants Addressed 

EPA recognizes NOX, SO2, VOC, and 

NH3 as the main precursor gases 

associated with the formation of 

secondary PM2.5 in the ambient air. 

These gas-phase PM2.5 precursors 

undergo chemical reactions in the 

atmosphere to form secondary 

particulate matter. Formation of 

secondary PM2.5 depends on numerous 

factors including the concentrations of 

precursors; the concentrations of other 

gaseous reactive species; atmospheric 

conditions including solar radiation, 

temperature, and relative humidity; and 

the interactions of precursors with 

preexisting particles and with cloud or 

fog droplets. See, 72 FR 20586 at 20589. 

As discussed previously, a state must 

submit emissions inventories for each of 

the four PM2.5 precursor pollutants. See, 

72 FR 20586 at 20589 and 40 CFR 

51.1008(a)(1). However, the overall 

contribution of different precursors to 

PM2.5 formation and the effectiveness of 

alternative potential control measures 

will vary by area. Thus, the precursors 

that a state should regulate to attain the 

PM2.5 NAAQS can also vary to some 

extent from area to area. See, 72 FR 

20586 at 20589. In the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, EPA did not 

require that all potential PM2.5

precursors must be controlled in each 

specific nonattainment area. See, 72 FR 

20586 at 20589. Instead, for reasons 

explained in the rule’s preamble, a state 

must evaluate control measures for 

sources of SO2 in addition to sources of 

direct PM2.5 in all nonattainment areas. 

See, 40 CFR 51.1002(c) and (c)(1). A 

state must also evaluate control 

measures for sources of NOX unless the 

state and/or EPA determine that control 

of NOX emissions would not 

significantly reduce PM2.5

concentrations in the specific 

nonattainment area. See, 40 CFR 

51.1002(c)(2). In contrast, EPA has 

determined in the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule that a state does not need to 

address controls for sources of VOC and 

NH3 unless the state and/or EPA make 

a technical demonstration that such 

controls would significantly contribute 

to reducing PM2.5 concentrations in the 

specific nonattainment area at issue. 

See, 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(3) and (4). Such 

a demonstration is required ‘‘if the 

administrative record related to 

development of its SIP shows that the 

presumption is not technically justified 

for that area.’’ See, 40 CFR 51.1002(c)(5). 

‘‘Significantly contributes’’ in this 

context means that a significant 

reduction in emissions of the precursor 

from sources in the area would be 

projected to provide a significant 

reduction in PM2.5 concentrations in the 

area. See, 72 FR 20586 at 20590. 

Although EPA did not establish a 

quantitative test for determining what 

constitutes a significant change, EPA 

noted that even relatively small 

reductions in PM2.5 levels are estimated 

to result in worthwhile public health 

benefits. 

EPA further explained that a technical 

demonstration to reverse the 

presumption for NOX, VOC, or NH3 in 

any area could consider the emissions 

inventory, speciation data, modeling 

information, or other special studies 

such as monitoring of additional 

compounds, receptor modeling, or 

special monitoring studies. See, 72 FR 

20586 at 20596–20597. These factors 

could indicate that the emissions or 

ambient concentration contributions of 

a precursor, or the sensitivity of ambient 

concentrations to changes in precursor 

emissions, differs for a specific 

nonattainment area from the 

presumption EPA established for that 

precursor in the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule. 

ACHD submitted 2002 baseline 

inventories for each of the four 

precursor emissions and for direct PM2.5

emissions within the Liberty-Clairton 

Area. Its submission did not specifically 

discuss the presumptions in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, however its 

discussion of the emissions inventory 

and control strategy implicitly showed 

that ACHD did not reverse the 

presumptions for NOX, VOC or NH3. 

Therefore, evaluation of control 

measures for VOC and/or NH3 was not 

considered, while NOX was considered, 

and, in accordance with policies 

described in the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, the Liberty-Clairton Area PM2.5

attainment demonstration evaluated 

emissions of direct PM2.5, SO2, and 

NOX. 

2. Emissions Inventories 

CAA section 172(c)(3) requires a state 

to submit a plan provision that includes 

a ‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources of the relevant pollutant.’’ The 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule requires a 

state to include direct PM2.5 emissions 

and emissions of all PM2.5 precursors in 

this inventory, even if it has determined 

that control of any of these precursors 

is not necessary for expeditious 

attainment. See, 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1) 

and 72 FR 20586 at 20648. Direct PM2.5

includes condensable particulate matter. 

See, 40 CFR 51.1000. The PM2.5

precursors are NOX, SO2, VOC, and 

NH3. The inventories should meet the 

data reporting requirements of EPA’s 

Air Emissions Reporting Requirements 

(AERR) (71 FR 69, January 3, 2006) and 

include any additional inventory 

information needed to support the SIP’s 

attainment demonstration and RFP 

demonstration. See, 40 CFR 

51.1008(a)(1) and (2). Baseline 

emissions inventories are required for 

the attainment demonstration and for 

meeting RFP requirements. As 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68702 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

determined on the date of designation, 

the base year for these inventories 

should be the most recent calendar year 

for which a complete inventory was 

required to be submitted to EPA. The 

emissions inventory for calendar year 

2002 or other suitable year should be 

used for attainment planning and RFP 

plans for areas initially designated 

nonattainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

2005. See, 40 CFR 51.1008(b). EPA has 

provided additional guidance for PM2.5

emissions inventories in the ‘‘Emissions 

Inventory Guidance for Implementation 

of Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS 

and Regional Haze Regulations,’’ 

November 2005 (EPA–454/R–05–001). 

The base year and future year baseline 

planning inventories for direct PM2.5

and all PM2.5 precursors for the LibertyClairton Area were included as part of 

this submittal. The base year used for 

the Liberty-Clairton Area SIP was 2002. 

ACHD developed a point source 

inventory comprised of emissions for 

five facilities in the nonattainment area, 

which included two major sources, two 

synthetic minor sources, and one minor 

source. ACHD then made corrections to 

the point source inventory for these 

sources to include the addition of 

condensable PM emissions. 

For the 2002 area sources, ACHD 

provided an inventory that contained 

estimations of emissions by multiplying 

an emission factor by some known 

indicator or activity level for each 

category at the county level. These 

estimates were apportioned to the 

Liberty-Clairton Area based on 

population counts. 

The 2002 Nonroad Mobile Sources 

emissions inventory was prepared with 

EPA’s NONROAD2005 model. This 

model estimates fuel consumption and 

emissions of total hydrocarbons, carbon 

monoxide, NOX, SO2, and PM for all 

nonroad mobile source categories except 

aircraft, locomotives, and commercial 

marine vessels. The National Mobile 

Inventory Model was used to estimate 

emissions of NH3 from sources 

contained in the NONROAD model. The 

2002 Onroad Mobile Sources emissions 

inventory was prepared using EPA’s 

highway mobile source emissions model 

MOBILE 6.2. 

Table 1 below shows the LibertyClairton Area emissions inventory 

summary for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors for the 2002 base year. These 

emissions represent emissions from 

sources only within the fivemunicipality Liberty-Clairton Area, not 

the larger modeled area. 

TABLE 1—BASELINE 2002 EMISSIONS

[Tons/year] 

Liberty-Clairton area (2002) PM2.5 SO2 NOX VOC NH3

Stationary Point Sources ......................................................................... 2201.438 1358.522 5786.190 432.735 299.714 

Area Sources ........................................................................................... 36.506 81.962 80.176 336.467 7.416 

Nonroad Sources ..................................................................................... 23.005 16.170 227.673 119.244 0.078 

Mobile Sources ........................................................................................ 4.918 12.077 283.422 200.841 13.867 

Totals ................................................................................................ 2265.867 1468.731 6377.461 1089.287 321.075 

Table 2 below shows the LibertyClairton Area emissions inventory 

summary for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors for the 2014 future projected 

year. Similar to the baseline inventory, 

these emissions represent sources only 

within the five municipality LibertyClairton Area. 

TABLE 2—FUTURE PROJECTED 2014 EMISSIONS

[Tons/year] 

Liberty-Clairton area (2014) PM2.5 SO2 NOX VOC NH3

Stationary Point Sources ......................................................................... 1328.785 1459.146 5282.002 581.492 255.456 

Area Sources ........................................................................................... 35.464 86.464 86.239 307.013 8.176 

Nonroad Sources ..................................................................................... 21.500 3.034 169.006 83.335 0.093 

Mobile Sources ........................................................................................ 2.749 1.409 134.079 98.997 14.367 

Totals ................................................................................................ 1388.498 1550.053 5671.326 1070.837 278.092 

3. Control Strategy 

To understand the PM2.5 problem in 

the Liberty-Clairton Area, EPA believes 

it is helpful to explain the unique 

topographic and meteorologic 

conditions in the area, as well as the 

geographic location of this area. The 

approximately 12 square kilometer area 

is a subset of Allegheny County, and is 

surrounded by the Pittsburgh-Beaver 

Valley nonattainment area (Pittsburgh 

Area). The Liberty-Clairton Area was 

designated a separate nonattainment 

area from the surrounding Pittsburgh 

Area because, in addition to the regional 

air quality problem, there is a localized 

air quality issue caused by local sources 

and by specific geologic and 

meteorological features of the area. The 

PM2.5 problem in the Liberty-Clairton 

Area is compounded by the sharp 

difference in elevation between the 

industrial and residential areas as well 

as large temperature differences 

between the river valleys and the 

adjacent hilltops. The high hillsides of 

the two rivers in the area create a 

significant river basin with spikes in 

localized PM2.5 concentrations that 

coincide with temperature inversions. 

Two of the eight monitors in the 

combined areas are located within the 

Liberty-Clairton Area, one in Liberty 

Borough (Liberty monitor) and one in 

the city of Clairton (Clairton monitor). 

On many days the Liberty monitor has 

readings very similar to those located in 

the Pittsburgh Area. However, when the 

regional concentrations rise, the Liberty 

monitor rises higher than any other site 

in the region, and after an inversion 

break, the monitor returns to a level 

comparable to, and sometimes less than, 

the concentrations measured at 

surrounding monitors in the Pittsburgh 

Area. The occurrence and severity of 

these high readings at the Liberty 

monitor, caused by local sources and 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68703 

features, required that a control strategy 

for the Liberty-Clairton Area be 

considered separate from, and in 

addition to, the control strategy for the 

larger Pittsburgh Area. 

Direct PM from local sources are at 

the heart of the PM2.5 problem in this 

area, and the control strategy for 

attainment within the nonattainment 

area is to reduce emissions of direct 

PM2.5. Other than regional reductions of 

NOX and SO2 within the surrounding 

Pittsburgh Area, no additional local 

reductions for these pollutants are 

necessary for the Liberty-Clairton Area 

to attain the NAAQS by the attainment 

date. The monitored NOX and SO2

within the Liberty-Clairton Area are 

representative of the monitored 

concentrations of these precursors in the 

larger Pittsburgh Area. The small 

geographic size of the Liberty-Clairton 

Area is such that there is insufficient 

residence time for a local conversion of 

NOX and SO2 to nitrates and sulfates. 

This is indicated by a lack of sizable 

difference in the levels monitored at the 

Liberty monitor with the levels 

monitored at the Lawrenceville monitor 

located in Allegheny County, just north 

of Pittsburgh. Additionally, monitored 

data shows consistent trends at the 

Liberty monitor for sulfates and nitrates 

with those throughout the southwestern 

part of Pennsylvania, with no outlying 

concentrations of NOX and SO2 at the 

Liberty monitor. For the above reasons, 

EPA has determined that it is not 

practical to rely on local NOX and SO2

reductions for purposes of ensuring that 

the Liberty-Clairton Area will attain the 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the attainment date. 

While NOX and SO2 reductions from 

within the nonattainment area are not 

relied upon for the Liberty-Clairton Area 

to attain the PM2.5 standard, EPA 

recognizes that addressing the control 

strategy for NOX and SO2 in the larger 

surrounding nonattainment area may 

result in collateral benefit in the LibertyClairton Area; EPA will address control 

strategies for NOX and SO2 in the 

surrounding nonattainment area when 

EPA takes action on the Pittsburgh Area 

attainment demonstration SIP. 

With respect to control strategies for 

direct PM2.5, ACHD has already required 

implementation of stringent control 

measures for the largest sources of direct 

PM2.5 in the Liberty-Clairton Area, so 

reducing direct PM2.5 further is 

challenging. The majority of direct PM2.5

emissions reductions that the ACHD 

projects are needed for PM2.5 attainment 

in the Liberty-Clairton Area by 2015 

will come from a combination of 

upgrades and shutdowns of batteries 

and quench towers at the U.S. Steel 

Mon Valley Works Clairton (U.S. Steel) 

and Edgar Thomson Plants in response 

to a number of previous visible 

emissions and opacity violations. In 

accordance with a March 2008 consent 

order and agreement between ACHD 

and U.S. Steel, several upgrades and 

shutdowns have taken place or are 

required to take place, including: 

a. Batteries 7, 8, and 9 were 

permanently shut down on April 16, 

2009. The original date for shut down 

was December 31, 2012 in the consent 

order and agreement. The new Battery C 

will replace the production of Batteries 

7, 8, and 9 at significantly lower 

emissions due to newer and cleaner 

technology. This project reduces 

emissions of direct PM2.5 by over 200 

tons per year at a cost of $500 million. 

b. 25 heating walls on Battery 19 will 

be replaced by October 31, 2012. The 

battery will meet its opacity limits by 

December 31, 2012, including, as 

necessary, implementing an advanced 

patching plan. 

In September 2010, ACHD and U.S. 

Steel amended the March 2008 consent 

order and agreement to include the 

construction of new low emission 

quench towers for Batteries 13–15 and 

Batteries 19–20 by December 31, 2013. 

The new quench towers 5A and 7A will 

be used as the primary quench towers 

for Batteries 13–15 and Batteries 19–20, 

respectively. The current quench towers 

5 and 7 will serve as auxiliary quench 

towers. The new quench towers 5A and 

7A will reduce emissions of direct PM2.5

by 593 tons per year. 

Additional reductions are achieved by 

a June 2007 ACHD and U.S. Steel 

consent decree to rebuild the B Battery 

heating walls, which was to be 

completed by June 30, 2010, and 

replacement of 25 heating walls on 

Battery 19 by October 2012 to meet 

opacity limits. Table 3 below 

summarizes the reductions that are 

relied on in the Liberty-Clairton Area 

PM2.5 attainment plan to demonstrate 

attainment by April 5, 2015. 

TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF REDUCTIONS NEEDED FOR THE LIBERTY-CLAIRTON AREA PM2.5 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

[Tons per year] 

Direct PM2.5 NOX SO2

A. 2002 emissions level ............................................................................................................... 2,270.6 229,571.7 587,201.4 

B. 2014 attainment target ............................................................................................................ 1,392.6 108,565.5 132,598.7 

C. Total reductions needed by 2014 (A minus B) ....................................................................... 878.0 121,006.2 454,602.7 

The majority of direct PM2.5 emissions 

reductions that the State projects are 

needed for PM2.5 attainment in the 

Liberty-Clairton Area by 2015 come 

from the combination of upgrades and 

shutdowns of batteries and quenches 

towers at the U.S. Steel Mon Valley 

Clairton Plant. ACHD included in this 

table the reductions of PM2.5 precursor 

pollutants NOX and SO2 that are 

achieved by the regional programs that 

address transported emissions. The NOX

and SO2 projected reductions shown in 

this table come from the CAIR regional 

trading program, and are addressed in 

the regional modeling discussed below. 

The sources from which these NOX and 

SO2 emission reductions are achieved 

are located upwind of the LibertyClairton Area in the Pittsburgh Area. 

4. RACM/RACT 

CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that 

each attainment plan ‘‘provide for the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable (including 

such reductions in emissions from 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology), and shall provide 

for attainment of the national primary 

ambient air quality standards.’’ EPA 

defines RACM as measures that a state 

finds are both reasonably available and 

contribute to attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable in its 

nonattainment area. Thus, what 

constitutes RACM/RACT in a PM2.5

attainment plan is closely tied to that 

plan’s expeditious attainment 

demonstration. See, 40 CFR 51.1010 and 

72 FR 20586 at 20612. States are 

required to evaluate RACM/RACT for 

direct PM2.5 and all of its attainment 

plan precursors. See, 40 CFR 51.1002(c). 

Consistent with subpart 1 of Part D of 

the CAA, EPA is requiring a combined 

approach to RACM and RACT for PM2.5

attainment plans. Subpart 1, unlike 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68704 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

2EPA’s modeling guidance can be found in 

‘‘Guideline on Air Quality Models’’ in 40 CFR part 

51, appendix W and ‘‘Guidance on the Use of 

Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating 

Attainment of Air Quality Goals for the 8–Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and Regional Haze,’’ 

EPA–454/B–07–002, April 2007. 

subparts 2 and 4, does not identify 

specific source categories for which EPA 

must issue control technology 

documents or guidelines for what 

constitutes RACT, or identify specific 

source categories for state and EPA 

evaluation during attainment plan 

development. See, 72 FR 20586 at 

20610. Rather, under subpart 1, EPA 

considers RACT to be part of an area’s 

overall RACM obligation. Because of the 

variable nature of the PM2.5 problem in 

different nonattainment areas, EPA 

determined not only that states should 

have flexibility with respect to RACT 

and RACM controls, but also that in 

areas needing significant emission 

reductions to attain the standards, 

RACT/RACM controls on smaller 

sources may be necessary to reach 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable. See, 72 FR 20586 at 20612, 

20615. Thus, under the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, RACT and RACM 

are those reasonably available measures 

that contribute to attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable in the 

specific nonattainment area. See, 40 

CFR 51.1010 and 72 FR 20586 at 20612. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

requires that attainment plans include 

the list of measures a state considered 

and information sufficient to show that 

the state met all requirements for the 

determination of what constitutes 

RACM/RACT in its specific 

nonattainment area. See, 40 CFR 

51.1010. In addition, the rule requires 

that the state, in determining whether a 

particular emissions reduction measure 

or set of measures must be adopted as 

RACM/RACT, consider the cumulative 

impact of implementing the available 

measures and to adopt as RACM/RACT 

any potential measures that are 

reasonably available considering 

technological and economic feasibility 

if, considered collectively, they would 

advance the attainment date by one year 

or more. Any measures that are 

necessary to meet these requirements 

which are not already either federally 

promulgated, part of the state’s SIP, or 

otherwise creditable in SIPs must be 

submitted in enforceable form as part of 

a state’s attainment plan for the area. 

See, 72 FR 20586 at 20614. 

ACHD undertook a process to identify 

and evaluate potential reasonably 

available control measures that could 

contribute to expeditious attainment of 

the PM2.5 standard for the LibertyClairton Area. These RACM/RACT 

analyses address control measures for 

sources of direct PM2.5 only. The control 

measures for sources of SO2 or NOX

were not addressed because, as 

explained earlier, the area is too small 

and conditions are not appropriate for 

SO2 or NOX from sources located within 

the nonattainment area to be able to 

convert to PM2.5. ACHD’s RACM/RACT 

analysis focused on point, area and 

mobile source controls. To identify 

potential RACM/RACT in the 12 square 

kilometer nonattainment area, ACDH’s 

review of potential measures from two 

major sources (U.S. Steel Clairton Plant 

and Koppers Industries, Inc. Clairton 

Plant), and one minor source (Mid 

Continent Coal and Coke Company) is 

summarized below. 

For the U.S. Steel Clairton Plant, 

many alternatives were considered for 

the coke batteries and quench towers. 

For the Coke batteries, there were very 

few alternatives were available, since 

some of the nation’s strictest standards 

are already in place for this facility. Of 

the alternatives considered, none were 

considered technically feasible for 

integration into the process. For the 

quench towers, among the many 

alternatives considered were short 

towers with single baffles, wet low 

emission quench, coke stabilization 

quenching process, and Kress indirect 

cooling system. However, they were all 

found to be unacceptable due to the cost 

effectiveness, potential magnitude and 

timing of emissions reductions and 

availability of space. For the Koppers 

Industries Inc. Clairton Plant, 

alternatives were considered for the tar 

refining process and the manufacturing 

of the rod pitch. For both the tar refining 

process and manufacturing of the rod 

pitch, the alternatives considered 

resulted in no additional emissions 

reductions. For the Mid Continent Coal 

and Coke Company, the total PM2.5

emissions are no more than five tons per 

year, mostly resulting from unpaved 

roads. The emission reductions benefit 

from the implementation of dust 

suppressants would produce only 

insignificant emission reductions and 

would not advance the attainment date 

by one year or more even if combined 

with other control measures. After 

completing its RACM/RACT analysis for 

stationary, area and mobile sources of 

direct PM2.5, ACHD concluded that no 

additional reasonable controls are 

available that would advance the 

attainment date by one year. 

Based on our review of potential 

RACM/RACT in the Liberty-Clairton 

Area PM2.5 attainment plan, we agree 

that there are no additional reasonably 

available control measures that 

individually, or collectively, would 

advance attainment of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in the Liberty-Clairton 

nonattainment area by one year or more, 

and propose to approve the RACM/ 

RACT determination submitted by 

PADEP. 

5. Modeling 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

requires states to submit an attainment 

demonstration based on modeling 

results. Specifically, 40 CFR 51.1007(a) 

states that for any area designated as 

nonattainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS, 

the state must submit an attainment 

demonstration showing that the area 

will attain the annual and 24-hour 

standards as expeditiously as 

practicable. The demonstration must 

meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 51 

and appendix W of this part and must 

include inventory data, modeling 

results, and emission reduction analyses 

on which the state has based its 

projected attainment date. The 

attainment date justified by the 

demonstration must be consistent with 

the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1004(a). 

The modeled strategies must be 

consistent with requirements in 40 CFR 

51.1009 for RFP and in 40 CFR 51.1010 

for RACT and RACM. The attainment 

demonstration and supporting air 

quality modeling should be consistent 

with EPA’s PM2.5 modeling guidance.2

See also, 72 FR 20586 at 20665. 

Air quality modeling is used to 

establish emissions attainment targets, 

the combination of emissions of PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors that the area can 

accommodate without exceeding the 

NAAQS and to assess whether the 

proposed control strategy will result in 

attainment of the NAAQS. Air quality 

modeling is performed for a base year 

and compared to air quality monitoring 

data in order to evaluate model 

performance. Once the performance is 

determined to be acceptable, future year 

changes to the emissions inventory are 

simulated to determine the relationship 

between emissions reductions and 

changes in ambient air quality 

throughout the air basin. 

The procedures for modeling PM2.5 as 

part of an attainment SIP are contained 

in EPA’s ‘‘Guidance on the Use of 

Models and Other Analyses for 

Demonstrating Attainment of Air 

Quality Goals for the 8-Hour Ozone and 

PM2.5 NAAQS and Regional Haze.’’ This 

guidance encourages states to take a 

nine-step approach when preparing a 

modeling analysis to demonstrate 

attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

nine steps include formulation of a 

conceptual description of the 

nonattainment problem, development of 

a modeling protocol, use of an 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68705 

appropriate model using appropriate 

meteorological episodes and a modeling 

domain to establish initial and 

boundary conditions, generation of 

meteorological and air quality inputs, 

generation of emissions inputs, 

evaluation of the performance of the air 

quality model, and performance of 

future year modeling that includes 

control strategies, followed by 

application of the attainment test. 

ACHD’s conceptual description of its 

PM2.5 nonattainment problem is 

provided in Appendix C (Modeling 

Protocol) of its attainment SIP. The 

unique meteorologic and geologic 

features of the area was also discussed 

briefly in section A.3 of this notice. 

Episodes of poor air quality often occur 

within the Liberty-Clairton Area during 

periods of strong nocturnal inversions. 

When this occurs, air dispersion is often 

minimized, allowing emissions to 

‘‘build up’’ within the river valleys, and 

contributing to episodes of poor air 

quality that leads to high PM2.5 design 

values. Many times, PM2.5

concentrations in the Liberty-Clairton 

Area are significantly higher than 

concentrations in the nearby city of 

Pittsburgh. Using source apportionment 

modeling for the Liberty and 

Lawrenceville monitors in Allegheny 

County, ACHD’s analysis found that the 

Liberty monitor’s PM2.5 concentrations 

are impacted by regional loading based 

on similarities in both monitor’s 

speciation data and that sources near 

the Liberty monitor are responsible for 

the speciation differences observed 

between the two monitors. 

The Liberty-Clairton PM2.5 SIP 

utilized two components in its 

attainment demonstration modeling: a 

regional photochemical grid model and 

a local scale model with sufficient 

resolution to examine the impacts of 

local emission sources. Model results 

were used in a relative rather than an 

absolute sense. Following this 

methodology, the ratio of the model’s 

future to current (baseline) predictions 

at both of the nonattainment area’s 

PM2.5 monitors determines if the 

controls in the Liberty-Clairton Area are 

likely to lead to attainment with the 

1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS. 

The regional modeling demonstration 

for the Liberty-Clairton Area used the 

Community Multiscale Air Quality 

(CMAQ) model. The CMAQ modeling 

was performed by the Bureau of Air 

Quality Analysis and Research, New 

York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (DEC) 

using Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility 

Union Regional Planning Organization 

(MANE–VU) inventory with a base year 

of 2002. Regional controls for SO2 and 

NOX in the MANE–VU inventory were 

based on the CAIR. Local sources in the 

Liberty-Clairton Area create steep 

gradients in PM2.5 concentrations than 

cannot be adequately resolved by the 

CMAQ model, which uses grid cells that 

are roughly 12 square kilometers— 

approximately the total area of the 

Liberty-Clairton Area. Local scale 

meteorology is also not well simulated 

by the CMAQ model due to steep 

topography within the Liberty-Clairton 

Area that often contributes to strong 

temperature inversions and complex 

flow patterns within the valleys. 

ACHD’s analysis of its PM2.5 monitors 

within Allegheny County showed 

significant local impacts at the LibertyClairton Area. To better simulate the 

local source impacts within the 

nonattainment area, ACHD used the 

California PUFF (CALPUFF) air quality 

dispersion modeling system. 

The CALPUFF modeling system uses 

CALMET, a diagnostic 3-dimensional 

meteorological model, and CALPOST, a 

post processing program. The CALPUFF 

model, which uses a much finer scale 

than the regional model, was used to 

help better resolve local topographic 

features that influence emission 

dispersion and address spatial 

relationships between local sources and 

the monitors in the Liberty-Clairton 

Area. The CALPUFF grid spacing for the 

150 km regional source analysis domain 

was one kilometer and 100 meters for 

the 20 kilometer local scale analysis 

domain. The CALMET processor was 

used to recreate some of the more 

complex atmospheric flows in the 

Liberty-Clairton Area. 

The MANE–VU regional analysis used 

northeastern United States emissions 

inventories for all source classifications. 

The year 2002 was used for the baseline 

emissions inventory and 2014 for the 

projected inventory for the LibertyClairton Area. Regional projections used 

on-the-books/on-the-way (OTB/OTW) 

controls through the 2012 timeframe. 

Since no additional projections were 

available at the time, and since LibertyClairton controls focus on direct PM2.5

emissions, the inventory was limited to 

direct PM2.5 emissions and was 

developed from both the regional 

MANE–VU projections for 2012 for 

precursors and non-point PM2.5

emissions in combination with ACHD’s 

local projections for 2014 for stationary 

point PM2.5 emissions. A more detailed 

inventory, limited to PM2.5, was 

developed by the ACHD for the 

extended Liberty-Clairton Area as part 

of its CALPUFF modeling analysis. This 

inventory was developed from both the 

MANE–VU inventories and projections, 

which were based on CAIR, along with 

ADCH’s inventories for stationary point 

sources. 

The monitored attainment test for 

PM2.5 utilizes both PM2.5 and individual 

PM2.5 component species. The 

attainment test for PM2.5 is the 

Speciated Modeled Attainment Test 

(SMAT). In SMAT, a separate relative 

response factor (RRF) is calculated for 

each PM2.5 component. These RRF 

values are then multiplied by the base 

year concentrations for each monitor 

within the nonattainment area to 

determine if an area is projected to 

attain the NAAQS. 

The Liberty-Clairton Area has two 

PM2.5 monitoring sites, the Liberty 

monitor and the Clairton monitor. 

Speciation data from the Liberty 

monitor was used for the Clairton 

monitor since this site does not collect 

speciation data. Annual and 24-hour 

PM2.5 concentrations for both the 

Liberty and Clairton monitors were 

calculated from the quarterly base-year 

averaged monitor concentrations and 

the RRFs calculated from THE CMAQ 

MODEL and CALPUFF for each PM2.5

component. Results for the annual and 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are summarized 

in Table 4 which shows that the 

projected 2014 annual and 24-hour 

design values for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

TABLE 4—MODELED PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES

Monitor 

Annual standard 24-Hour standard 

2014 Projected 1997 NAAQS 2014 Projected 1997 NAAQS 

Liberty ..................................................... 14.3 μg/m3 ................... 15.0 μg/m3 ................... 42 μg/m3 ...................... 65 μg/m3. 

Clairton ................................................... 11.8 μg/m3 ................... 15.0 μg/m3 ................... 27 μg/m3 ...................... 65 μg/m3. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68706 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

EPA’s modeling guidance states that 

additional analyses are recommended to 

determine if attainment will be likely, 

even if the modeled attainment test is 

‘‘passed.’’ The guidance recommends 

supplementary analyses in all cases. 

EPA’s modeling guidance describes how 

to use a photochemical grid model and 

additional analytical methods to 

complete a weight of evidence (WOE) 

analysis to estimate if emissions control 

strategies will lead to attainment. A 

WOE analysis is a supporting analysis 

that helps to determine if the results of 

the photochemical modeling system are, 

or are not, correctly predicting future air 

quality. 

All models, including the CMAQ 

model, have inherent uncertainties. 

Over or under prediction may result 

from uncertainties associated with 

emission inventories, meteorological 

data, and representation of PM2.5

chemistry in the model. Therefore, EPA 

modeling guidance provides for the 

consideration of other evidence to 

address these model uncertainties so 

that proper assessment of the 

probability to attain the applicable 

standards can be made. EPA modeling 

guidance states that those modeling 

analyses that show that attainment with 

the NAAQS will be reached in the 

future with some margin of safety (i.e., 

estimated concentrations below 14.5 mg/ 

m3 for annual PM2.5 and 62 mg/m3 for 

24-hour PM2.5) need more limited 

supporting material. 

Due to the fact that the modeling 

results presented in Table 4 fall below 

the aforementioned ‘‘weight of 

evidence’’ thresholds established by 

EPA, a limited supplemental analysis 

was deemed necessary to support the 

2014 attainment demonstration. ACHD 

provided a WOE demonstration that 

consisted of an analysis of monitor 

trends, local and national emission 

control programs, population trends and 

monitoring concentrations during 

periods of low production. ACHD 

included a summary of various local 

and regional emission control programs 

being implemented in the Area, 

although some of these control measures 

may extend beyond the Liberty-Clairton 

Area and therefore, may have a lesser 

impact. Emission control programs used 

for WOE include Pennsylvania’s wood 

boiler regulation, a wood stove change 

out program in southwest Pennsylvania, 

EPA’s CSAPR as it was proposed, 

Allegheny County’s diesel fuel engine 

retrofit program, local and state antiidling campaigns and Allegheny 

County’s program to reduce diesel 

particulate emissions. The additional 

reductions from these programs were 

used as further evidence supporting 

ACHD’s conclusion that its SIP 

modeling demonstrates compliance 

with the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Based on the technical information 

provided in the Liberty-Clairton Area 

attainment demonstration SIP revision, 

EPA concludes that the modeling and 

WOE analyses demonstrate attainment 

of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by the 

attainment date proposed as part of this 

notice (April 5, 2015). The 

demonstration shows that the LibertyClairton Area will attain the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS by 2015, which is 

as expeditiously as practical considering 

the area’s elevated 2002 base year 

design values of 21.4 mg/m3 for the 

annual NAAQS and 63 mg/m3 for the 

24-hour NAAQs at the Liberty monitor 

and the reasonably available control 

measures discussed above. ACHD’s 

modeled 2014 design values for the 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 

24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS are expected to 

be below 15.0 mg/m3 and 65 mg/m3, 

respectively, indicating the 

nonattainment area satisfies the CAA 

requirement that SIPs provide for 

attainment of the NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date. 

However, because the regional CMAQ 

modeling relied upon EPA’s CAIR 

program, EPA is requiring ACHD to 

provide an additional analysis to 

confirm model results, in light of EPA’s 

promulgation of CSAPR on August 8, 

2011 (76 FR 48208), to replace the 

remanded CAIR rule. While ACHD’s SIP 

submittal predated EPA’s promulgation 

of CSAPR, to ensure that the modeling 

demonstration is still valid, ACHD must 

update the analysis it included in 

section 13.3 of its attainment plan to 

include CSAPR instead of CAIR, and 

review and update, if appropriate, its 

modeling technical support document 

(TSD). To ensure that the analysis in the 

June 17, 2011 submittal is valid during 

the implementation of CSAPR, the 

results, with CSAPR, must show at least 

the same concentrations that resulted 

from the modeling demonstration with 

CAIR. EPA is, therefore, conditionally 

approving the modeling portion of the 

Liberty-Clairton Area attainment 

demonstration SIP. Final approval of the 

modeling demonstration portion of the 

SIP is contingent on ACHD’s reanalysis 

of the elements included in section 13.3 

of its attainment demonstration and the 

associated TSD to show that 

implementation of CSAPR provides at 

least equivalent model concentrations in 

the Liberty-Clairton Area as was shown 

in its June 17, 2011 submittal. 

More detailed information about the 

modeling and our evaluation are 

available in the modeling TSD available 

in the docket for this rulemaking. 

6. Determination of the Attainment Date 

CAA Section 172(a)(2) provides that 

an area’s attainment date ‘‘shall be the 

date by which attainment can be 

achieved as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than five years 

from the date such area was designated 

nonattainment, except that the 

Administrator may extend the 

attainment date to the extent the 

Administrator determines appropriate, 

for a period no greater than 10 years 

from the date of designation as 

nonattainment considering the severity 

of nonattainment and the availability 

and feasibility of pollution control 

measures.’’ Because the effective date of 

designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

is April 5, 2005 (See 70 FR 944), the 

initial attainment date for PM2.5

nonattainment areas is as expeditiously 

as practicable, but not later than April 

5, 2010. For any area that is granted a 

full five-year attainment date extension 

under CAA section 172, the attainment 

date would be not later than April 5, 

2015. Section 51.1004 of the PM2.5

Implementation Rule addresses the 

attainment date requirement. Section 

51.1004(b) requires a state to submit an 

attainment demonstration justifying its 

proposed attainment date and provides 

that EPA will approve an attainment 

date when we approve that 

demonstration. 

States that request an extension of the 

attainment date under CAA section 

172(a)(2) must provide sufficient 

information to show that attainment by 

April 5, 2010 is impracticable due to the 

severity of the nonattainment problem 

in the area and the lack of available and 

feasible control measures to provide for 

earlier attainment. See, 40 CFR 

51.1004(b). States must also 

demonstrate that all RACM and RACT 

for the area are being implemented to 

bring about attainment of the standard 

by the most expeditious alternative date 

practicable for the area. See, 72 FR 

20586 at 20601. 

In the course of evaluating whether 

the attainment date for the LibertyClairton Area should be extended, EPA 

has considered several factors. First, 

EPA has considered the technical basis 

supporting the attainment 

demonstration, including whether the 

emissions inventories and air quality 

modeling, are adequate. As discussed 

previously, EPA is proposing to approve 

the emissions inventories and 

conditionally approve the air quality 

modeling on which the Liberty-Clairton 

1997 PM2.5 attainment demonstration 

and other provisions are based. Second, 

EPA has considered whether the SIP 

submittal provides for expeditious 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68707 

attainment through the implementation 

of all RACM and RACT. As discussed in 

section A.4, EPA is proposing to 

approve the RACM/RACT 

demonstration in the Liberty-Clairton 

PM2.5 attainment demonstration. Third, 

EPA has considered whether the 

emissions reductions that are relied on 

for attainment are creditable. As 

discussed in section A.3, the LibertyClairton Area attainment demonstration 

relies on upgrades and shutdowns at the 

U.S. Steel Plant for reductions of PM2.5, 

and regional reduction programs to 

achieve NOX and SO2 reductions, that 

are needed to attain the 1997 PM2.5

standards in the Liberty-Clairton Area 

by April 5, 2015. Finally, EPA must 

determine whether the attainment 

demonstration provides sufficient 

information to show that attainment by 

April 5, 2010 is impracticable due to the 

severity of the nonattainment problem 

in the area and the lack of available and 

feasible control measures to provide for 

earlier attainment. See, 40 CFR 

51.1004(b). 

The Liberty-Clairton Area SIP 

submittal provides sufficient 

information to show that attainment by 

April 5, 2010 is impracticable due to the 

severity of the nonattainment problem 

in the area and the lack of available and 

feasible control measures to provide for 

earlier attainment. In particular, this 

submission includes sufficient modeling 

data to support a finding that the 

attainment date for the Liberty-Clairton 

Area should be April 5, 2015, and that 

the area qualifies for the full five-year 

extension of the attainment date 

allowable under section 172(a)(1). 

Furthermore, the SIP submittal provides 

for expeditious implementation of the 

available control programs. The 

implementation schedule for the 

controls is expeditious, while taking 

into account the time necessary for 

purchase and installation of the 

required control technologies. 

Based upon the above considerations, 

EPA is proposing to determine that a 

five-year extension of the attainment 

date is appropriate given the severity of 

the nonattainment problem in the 

Liberty-Clairton Area, and the 

unavailability and infeasibility of 

additional control measures and, 

therefore, EPA is proposing to extend 

the attainment date in the LibertyClairton Area to April 5, 2015. 

7. RFP 

CAA section 172(c)(2) requires that 

plans for nonattainment areas shall 

provide for RFP. RFP is defined in 

section 171(1) as ‘‘such annual 

incremental reductions in emissions of 

the relevant air pollutant as are required 

by this part or may reasonably be 

required by the Administrator for the 

purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable 

date.’’ For any area for which a state 

requests an extension of the attainment 

date beyond 2010, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule requires submittal 

of an RFP plan at the same time as the 

submittal of the attainment 

demonstration. For areas for which the 

state requests a date extension to 2015, 

such as the Liberty-Clairton Area, the 

RFP plan must demonstrate that, in the 

applicable milestone years of 2009 and 

2012, emissions in the area will be at a 

level consistent with generally linear 

progress in reducing emissions between 

the base year and the attainment year. 

See, 40 CFR 51.1009(d). States may 

demonstrate this by showing that 

emissions for each milestone year are 

roughly equivalent to benchmark 

emissions levels for direct PM2.5 and 

each PM2.5 attainment plan precursor 

addressed in the plan. The steps for 

determining the benchmark emissions 

levels to demonstrate generally linear 

progress are provided in 40 CFR 

51.1009(f). Establishment of RFP 

milestones involves a determination of 

the total reductions that are needed for 

attainment, determination of the 

attainment year that is as expeditious as 

practicable, and the fraction of 

reductions that are achieved in each 

milestone year. The RFP plan must 

describe the control measures that 

provide for meeting the RFP milestones 

for the area, the timing of 

implementation of those measures, and 

the expected reductions in emissions of 

direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 attainment plan 

precursors. See, 40 CFR 51.1009(c). 

For Liberty-Clairton, as discussed in 

section A.3, the total reductions needed, 

878 tons of PM2.5, have been identified 

in the modeling, and 2015 is the 

attainment date that is as expeditious as 

practicable. Benchmark levels are 

therefore required for milestone years 

2009, 2012, and 2014. Table 5 below 

summarizes the benchmark emission 

reductions for each milestone year. 

Controlled emissions levels for direct 

PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 were below the 

benchmarks for 2009, demonstrating 

that the Liberty-Clairton Area has met 

its RFP targets for that year. For 2012, 

the projected controlled emissions 

levels for direct PM2.5 are only slightly 

above the benchmark (by about 16 

percent) and the projected controlled 

levels for NOX and SOX are substantially 

below the benchmarks. For direct PM2.5, 

these emissions include three additional 

minor sources that were not included in 

the modeling inventory shown in 

Table 1. 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF RFP NEEDED FOR THE LIBERTY-CLAIRTON PM2.5 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

Pollutant Milestone year 

Benchmark 

emissions 

(tons/year) 

Cumulative 

emission 

reductions 

(tons/year) 

Percent of 

emission 

reductions 

needed for 

attainment 

PM2.5 ................................................................................................................ 2002 2,270.6 ........................ ........................

2009 1,968.8 301.8 34 

2012 1,849.9 420.7 48 

2014 1,392.6 878.0 100 

NOX .................................................................................................................. 2002 229,571.7 ........................ ........................

2009 120,414.1 109,157.6 90 

2012 108,565.5 121,006.2 100 

2014 108,565.5 121,006.2 100 

SO2 .................................................................................................................. 2002 587,201.4 ........................ ........................

2009 141,772.8 445,428.6 98 

2012 132,598.7 454,602.7 100 

2014 132,598.7 454,602.7 100 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68708 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

As explained in section III.A.3 of this 

proposed rulemaking action, the control 

strategy for attainment in the LibertyClairton Area is to reduce emissions of 

direct PM2.5. Other than regional 

reductions of NOX and SO2 within the 

surrounding Pittsburgh Area, no 

additional local reductions for these 

pollutants are necessary to attain by the 

attainment date. As such, in accordance 

with the PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the 

pollutants to be addressed in the RFP 

plan are those pollutants that are subject 

to control measures in the attainment 

plan. Nevertheless, ACHD submitted 

milestone years and benchmark levels 

for NOX and SO2 from within the larger 

Pittsburgh Area that show generally 

linear progress for RFP in that area. 

EPA has reviewed the RFP 

demonstration for PM2.5 and has 

determined that it was prepared 

consistently with the applicable EPA 

regulations and policies. As can be seen 

from Table 5, EPA finds that, overall, 

the projected controlled emissions 

levels represent generally linear 

progress from the baseline year to the 

attainment year, and propose to find 

that the Liberty-Clairton PM2.5

attainment demonstration SIP provides 

for reasonable further progress as 

required by CAA section 172(c)(2) and 

40 CFR 51.1009. 

8. Contingency Measures 

Under CAA section 172(c)(9), all 

PM2.5 attainment plans must include: 

(a) Contingency measures to be 

implemented if an area fails to meet RFP 

(RFP contingency measures); and (b) 

contingency measures to be 

implemented if an area fails to attain the 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date (attainment contingency 

measures). These contingency measures 

must be fully adopted rules or control 

measures that are ready to be 

implemented relatively quickly without 

significant additional action by the 

state. See, 40 CFR 51.1012. They must 

also be measures not relied on in the 

plan to demonstrate RFP or attainment 

and should provide SIP-creditable 

emissions reductions equivalent to 

approximately one year of the emissions 

reductions needed for RFP. See, 72 FR 

20586 at 20642–43. Finally, the SIP 

should contain trigger mechanisms for 

the contingency measures and specify a 

schedule for their implementation. 

Contingency measures may include 

federal, state and local measures already 

adopted and implemented or scheduled 

for implementation that provide 

emissions reductions in excess of the 

reductions needed to provide for RFP or 

expeditious attainment. EPA has 

approved numerous SIPs under this 

interpretation. See, direct final rule 

approving Indiana ozone SIP revision 

(62 FR 15844, April 3, 1997); final rule 

approving Illinois ozone SIP revision 

(62 FR 66279, December 18, 1997); 

direct final rule approving Rhode Island 

ozone SIP revision (66 FR 30811, June 

8, 2001); final rule approving District of 

Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia 

ozone SIP revisions (66 FR 586, January 

3, 2001); and final rule approving 

Connecticut ozone SIP revision (66 FR 

634, January 3, 2001). The state may use 

the same measures for both RFP and 

attainment contingency, if the measures 

will provide reductions in the relevant 

years. However, should measures be 

triggered for failure to make RFP, the 

state would need to submit replacement 

contingency measures for attainment 

purposes. 

The contingency measures in the 

Liberty-Clairton attainment 

demonstration for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS meet the above requirements. 

These measures include emission 

reduction measures specified in the 

consent order and agreement between 

the ACHD and U.S. Steel and are listed 

in Table 6. In order to determine the 

reductions equivalent to one year’s 

worth of RFP, ACHD started with the 

2002 baseline emissions for the LibertyClairton Area (2270.6 tons/year), and 

subtracted the projected 2014 PM2.5

emissions for the Area (1,392.6 tons/ 

year), as taken from Table 5. The result 

(878 tons/year) is then divided by the 

number of years it takes to reach 

attainment. In this case, it is predicted 

that it will take 12 years for the area to 

achieve attainment, however, ACHD 

used 10 years in its calculation of RFP, 

which is acceptable, and calculated the 

targeted reductions for the contingency 

measures to be 87.8 tons per year of 

PM2.5. Within 30 months of receiving 

notice that the area failed to meet RFP 

or attainment, U.S. Steel will implement 

one or more of the measures listed in 

Table 6. The measure chosen will 

depend on the amount needed to 

achieve RFP or attainment for the area. 

Because of the complexity of the 

measures, 30 months to implement one 

or all or these measures is reasonable, 

and is the time frame specified in the 

consent order and agreement. 

TABLE 6—CONTINGENCY MEASURES AND RELATED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS

Process 

PM2.5 2014 

inventory value 

(tons/year) 

PM2.5

contingency 

value (tons/year) 

PM2.5 reduction 

(inventory— 

contingency) 

value (tons/year) 

New Low Emissions Tower for Batteries 1–3 ................................................................. 274.8 102.5 172.3 

Battery 20—Rebuilds, Combustion Stack ....................................................................... 17.5 9.4 8.1 

Battery 20—Rebuilds, Door Leaks .................................................................................. 2.4 1.3 1.1 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 294.7 113.2 181.5 

Areas with an attainment date of 

April 2015 are required to provide 

contingency measures for 2009, 2012, 

and 2015. Due to the shutdown of 

Batteries 7–9 at the U.S. Steel Clairton 

Plant in April 2009, reductions required 

for RFP in 2009 have already been 

achieved. This shutdown provides for 

excess reductions above and beyond 

reductions that would otherwise be 

required during 2009, and the excess 

reductions are sufficient to provide for 

RFP for 2012 and 2015. 

The plan does not calculate the 

emissions reductions that are equivalent 

to one year’s worth of RFP for NOX and 

SO2 in the Liberty-Clairton Area. As 

explained in section A.3, due to the 

uniqueness of this nonattainment area 

and the primary emission sources 

contributing to nonattainment of the 

standard, there is substantial 

information supporting a finding that 

controlling direct PM2.5 emissions in the 

Liberty-Clairton Area will provide for 

attainment of the standard as 

expeditiously as practicable, and local 

reductions of NOX or SO2 will not 

significantly contribute to attainment of 

the standard. As also explained in 

section A.3, it is more appropriate to 

ensure that a control strategy for these 

pollutants be implemented regionally in 

the larger Pittsburgh Area. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68709 

B. MVEBs for Transportation 

Conformity 

CAA section 176(c) requires federal 

actions in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas to conform to the 

goals of SIPs. This means that such 

actions will not: (1) Cause or contribute 

to violations of a NAAQS; (2) worsen 

the severity of an existing violation; or 

(3) delay timely attainment of any 

NAAQS or any interim milestone. 

Actions involving Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) or Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) funding, 

or approval, are subject to the EPA’s 

transportation conformity rule, codified 

at 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Under this 

rule, Metropolitan Planning 

Organizations (MPOs) in nonattainment 

and maintenance areas coordinate with 

state and local air quality and 

transportation agencies, EPA, FHWA, 

and FTA to demonstrate that an area’s 

regional transportation plans (RTPs) and 

transportation improvement programs 

(TIPs) conform to the applicable SIPs. 

This is typically determined by showing 

that estimated emissions from existing 

and planned highway and transit 

systems are less than or equal to the 

motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs or budgets) contained in the 

SIP. 

An MPO must use budgets in a 

submitted but not yet approved SIP, 

after EPA has determined that the 

budgets are adequate. Budgets in 

submitted SIPs may not be used before 

they are found adequate or are 

approved. In order for us to find a 

budget adequate, the submittal must 

meet the conformity adequacy 

requirements of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 

(5). Additionally, motor vehicle 

emissions budgets cannot be approved 

until EPA completes a detailed review 

of the entire SIP and determines that the 

SIP and the budgets will achieve their 

intended purpose (i.e., RFP, attainment 

or maintenance). The budget must also 

reflect all of the motor vehicle control 

measures contained in the attainment 

and RFP demonstrations. See, 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4)(v). 

Direct PM2.5 SIP MVEBs should 

include PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions 

from tailpipes, brake wear, and tire 

wear. States must also consider whether 

re-entrained paved and unpaved road 

dust or highway and transit 

construction dust are significant 

contributors and should be included in 

the direct PM2.5 budget. See, 40 CFR 

93.102(b) and 93.122(f) and the 

conformity rule preamble at 69 FR 

40004, 40031–40036 (July 1, 2004). The 

applicability of emission trading 

between conformity budgets for 

conformity purposes is described in 40 

CFR 93.124(c). 

The SIP submittal includes MVEBs for 

direct PM2.5 and NOX for 2009, 2011, 

and 2012. The direct PM budgets did 

not include road dust emissions from 

paved and unpaved roads, or 

construction related fugitive dust 

emissions, due to the extremely small 

area that the Liberty-Clairton Area 

encompasses. The daily and annual 

MVEBs for the Liberty-Clairton Area are 

shown in Table 7 and Table 8, 

respectively. 

TABLE 7—THE MVEBS FOR THE LIBERTY-CLAIRTON AREA FOR THE 1997 PM2.5 24-HOUR NAAQS ATTAINMENT

DEMONSTRATION

Plan submittal Year MVEBs for 

direct PM MVEBs for NOX

Attainment Plan Demonstration—Daily Standards (Tons/Day) ....................................... 2009 0.0004 0.180 

Attainment Plan Demonstration—Daily Standards (Tons/Day) ....................................... 2011 0.0004 0.146 

Attainment Plan Demonstration—Daily Standards (Tons/Day) ....................................... 2012 0.0004 0.129 

TABLE 8—THE MVEBS OF THE LIBERTY-CLAIRTON AREA FOR THE 1997 PM2.5 ANNUAL NAAQS ATTAINMENT

DEMONSTRATION

Plan submittal Year MVEBs for 

direct PM MVEBs for NOX

Attainment Plan Demonstration—Annual Standards (Tons/Year) .................................. 2009 1.5 72.7 

Attainment Plan Demonstration—Annual Standards (Tons/Year) .................................. 2011 1.4 58.9 

Attainment Plan Demonstration—Annual Standards (Tons/Year) .................................. 2012 1.3 52.4 

EPA has evaluated the adequacy of 

the MVEBs in the attainment 

demonstration for the Liberty-Clairton 

Area, using the evaluation criteria 

detailed in the Transportation 

Conformity Rule as part of our review of 

the budgets’ approvability. The details 

of this review may be found in Section 

II of the MVEBs TSD, available in the 

Docket for this rulemaking. The MVEBs 

for the Liberty-Clairton Area PM2.5

attainment plan are being posted to 

EPA’s conformity Web site concurrently 

with this proposed action. The public 

comment period will end at the same 

time as the public comment period for 

this proposed action. In this case, EPA 

is concurrently processing the action on 

the attainment plan and the adequacy 

process for the MVEBs contained 

therein. In this action, EPA is proposing 

to find the MVEBs adequate, and also 

proposing to approve the MVEBs as part 

of the attainment plan. The MVEBs 

cannot be used for transportation 

conformity until the attainment plan 

and associated MVEBs are approved in 

a final Federal Register notice, or EPA 

otherwise finds the budgets adequate in 

a separate action following the comment 

period. Our action on the LibertyClairton Area MVEBs will also be 

announced on EPA’s conformity Web 

site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/index.htm, 

(once there, click on ‘‘Adequacy Review 

of SIP Submissions’’). 

IV. Proposed Actions 

EPA is proposing to approve, with 

one condition, Pennsylvania’s June 17, 

2011 SIP revision submitted to EPA for 

the purpose of demonstrating 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for 

the Liberty-Clairton Area. EPA proposes 

to determine that the attainment date for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the LibertyClairton Area is April 5, 2015, and 

proposes to fully approve the attainment 

demonstration for the Liberty-Clairton 

Area that includes the base year and 

projected year emissions inventories, 

RFP plan, RACM/RACT analysis, 

contingency measures, and the MVEB. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68710 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

EPA is proposing to conditionally 

approve the air quality modeling 

submitted to demonstrate attainment of 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In order for 

EPA to fully approve the modeling 

analysis, ACHD must revise the 

modeling to ensure that the modeling 

results in the demonstration continue to 

be valid, considering the reductions 

from CSAPR that will replace CAIR in 

2012, and PADEP must submit the 

revised modeling as a SIP revision to 

EPA within one year from the final 

conditional approval, after which EPA 

will conduct rulemaking to fully 

approve the revision. EPA is also 

proposing to approve the addition of the 

definition of PM2.5, the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 standard of 15 mg/m3, the 24-hour 

standard of 35 mg/m3, and the related 

references into the ACHD regulations. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• 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 proposed approval of 

the Liberty-Clairton 1997 PM2.5

attainment demonstration SIP and 

proposed conditional approval of the 

modeling portion of the attainment 

demonstration does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

state, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: October 31, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28765 Filed 11–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 226 

RIN 0648–BA81 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Proposed Rulemaking To 

Revise Critical Habitat for Hawaiian 

Monk Seals 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

public comment period. 

SUMMARY: We, National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS), published a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register on 

June 2, 2011, proposing to revise critical 

habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal 

under the Endangered Species Act and 

requesting information related to the 

proposed action. As part of that 

proposal, we provided a 90-day 

comment period, ending August 31, 

2011. We have received requests for an 

extension of the public comment period. 

In response to these requests, NMFS is 

reopening the public comment period 

for the proposed action. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published June 2, 2011, at 

76 FR 32026, is reopened. Written 

comments on this proposed rule must 

be received by January 6, 2012. 

Comments received between the close of 

the first comment period on August 31, 

2011, and the reopening of the comment 

period November 7, 2011 will be 

considered timely received. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit written 

comments on the proposed rule 

identified by 0648–BA81 by any one of 

the following methods: 

• Electronic Submissions: Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail or hand-delivery: Submit 

written comments to Regulatory Branch 

Chief, Protected Resources Division, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Pacific Islands Regional Office, 1601 

Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1110, Honolulu, 

HI 96814, Attn.: Hawaiian monk seal 

proposed critical habitat. 

Instructions: Comments must be 

submitted to one of these two addresses 

to ensure that the comments are 

received, documented, and considered 

by NMFS. Comments sent to any other 

address or individual, or received after 

the end of the comment period, may not 

be considered. All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information 

(e.g., name, address) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter may be 

publicly accessible. Do not submit 

Confidential Business Information or 

otherwise sensitive or protected 

information. We will accept anonymous 

comments (enter ‘‘NA’’ in the required 

fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

PDF file formats only. The petition, 90- 

day finding, 12-month finding, draft 

biological report, draft economic 

analysis report, draft ESA 4(b)(2) report, 

and other reference materials regarding 

this determination can be downloaded 

via the NMFS Pacific Islands Regional 

Office Web site: http:// 

www.fpir.noaa.gov/PRD/ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS