99790 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1 75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010. 

2 40 CFR 50.17. 

3 40 CFR part 50, appendix T, section 3(b). 

4CAA section 107(d)(1)(A)(i). 

■ Par 4. Section 1.987–9 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(5) and (6) to read 

as follows: 

§ 1.987–9 Recordkeeping requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) The amount of assets and 

liabilities transferred by the owner to 

the section 987 QBU determined in the 

functional currency of the owner and 

the section 987 QBU (to the extent those 

amounts are taken into account in 

applying § 1.987–4 or § 1.987–5). 

(6) The amount of assets and 

liabilities transferred by the section 987 

QBU to the owner determined in the 

functional currency of the owner and 

the section 987 QBU (to the extent those 

amounts are taken into account in 

applying § 1.987–4 or § 1.987–5). 

* * * * * 

■ Par 5. Section 1.987–15 is amended 

by adding paragraph (e) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1.987–15 Applicability date. 

* * * * * 

(e) Recurring transfer group election. 

Sections 1.987–2(f),1.987– 

4(d)(10)(ii)(D), and 1.987–9(b)(5) and (6) 

apply to taxable years beginning after 

[DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER]. 

Douglas W. O’Donnell, 

Deputy Commissioner. 

[FR Doc. 2024–28371 Filed 12–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0417; FRL–12279– 

01–R9] 

Air Plan Conditional Approval; 

California; Bay Area Air Quality 

Management District 

Correction 

In Proposed Rule document 2024– 

27518 beginning on page 94633 in the 

issue of Friday, November 29th, 2024, 

make the following correction: 

On page 94633, in the first column, in 

the DATES section, in the second line, 

‘‘December 30, 2025’’ should read 

‘‘December 30, 2024’’. 

[FR Doc. C1–2024–27518 Filed 12–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 0099–10–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2024–0316; FRL–11777– 

01–R3] 

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 

Redesignation of the Allegheny County 

Nonattainment Area to Attainment and 

Approval of the Area’s Maintenance 

Plan for the 2010 1-Hour Primary Sulfur 

Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

state implementation plan (SIP) revision 

and redesignation request submitted on 

November 14, 2023, by the 

Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection (PADEP) on 

behalf of the Allegheny County Health 

Department (ACHD). The SIP revision 

asks the EPA to redesignate the 

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania area 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the 2010 1-hour primary sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). The revision also 

asks the EPA to approve into the SIP 

Allegheny County’s maintenance plan 

for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2

standard for the Allegheny County area. 

This action is being taken under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 10, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2024–0316 at 

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

talley.david@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

confidential business information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Philip McGuire, Planning & 

Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1600 John 

F Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone 

number is (215) 814–2251. Mr. McGuire 

can also be reached via electronic mail 

at mcguire.philip@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Nonattainment Designation 

On June 22, 2010, the EPA revised the 

primary SO2 NAAQS, establishing a 

new 1-hour primary standard of 75 parts 

per billion (ppb).1 Under the EPA’s 

regulations at title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) part 50, the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is met at a 

monitoring site when the 3-year average 

of the annual 99th percentile of daily 

maximum 1-hour average 

concentrations is less than or equal to 

75 ppb (based on the rounding 

convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

T).2 Ambient air quality monitoring data 

for the 3-year period must meet a data 

completeness requirement. A year meets 

data completeness requirements when 

all four quarters are complete, and a 

quarter is complete when at least 75 

percent of the sampling days for each 

quarter have complete data. A sampling 

day has complete data if 75 percent of 

the hourly concentration values, 

including State-flagged data affected by 

exceptional events which have been 

approved for exclusion by the 

Administrator, are reported.3

Upon promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the CAA requires the 

EPA to designate as nonattainment any 

area that does not meet (or that 

contributes to ambient air quality in a 

nearby area that does not meet) the 

NAAQS.4 On August 5, 2013, the EPA 

designated a portion of Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania (hereafter the 

‘‘Allegheny County NAA’’), as 

nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS, effective October 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 99791 

5 78 FR 47191, August 5, 2013. 

6A list of Pennsylvania’s attainment status 

designations is available at 40 CFR 81.339. 

7 81 FR 14736, March 18, 2016. 

8Both the 2017 attainment plan submittal and 

EPA completeness letter are available in the docket 

for this action and are titled Allegheny County 

September 2017 Attainment Demonstration and 

EPA Letter of Completeness dated October 6, 2017, 

respectively. 

9 83 FR 58206, November 19, 2018. 

10 85 FR 22593, April 23, 2020. 

11Available in the docket for this action as 2014_

SO2_Guidance and at www.epa.gov/sites/default/ 

files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_

nonattainment_sip.pdf. 

12Available in the docket for this action as 

Calcagni Memo and at www.epa.gov/sites/default/ 

files/2016-03/documents/calcagni_memo__

procedures_for_processing_requests_to_

redesignate_areas_to_attainment_090492.pdf. 

4, 2013.5 The designation was based on 

violating air quality monitoring data for 

calendar years 2009–2011. The 

Allegheny County NAA consists of 22 

municipalities including: the Borough 

of Braddock, Borough of Dravosburg, 

Borough of East McKeesport, Borough of 

East Pittsburgh, Borough of Elizabeth, 

Borough of Glassport, Borough of 

Jefferson Hills, Borough of Liberty, 

Borough of Lincoln, Borough of North 

Braddock, Borough of Pleasant Hills, 

Borough of Port Vue, Borough of 

Versailles, Borough of Wall, Borough of 

West Elizabeth, Borough of West 

Mifflin, City of Clairton, City of 

Duquesne, City of McKeesport, 

Elizabeth Township, Forward 

Township, and North Versailles 

Township.6 This action established an 

attainment date five years after the 

effective date for the areas designated as 

nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS 

(i.e., by October 4, 2018). The 

Commonwealth was also required to 

submit an attainment SIP revision for 

the Allegheny County NAA to the EPA 

that meets the requirements of CAA 

sections 110, 172(c) and 191–192 within 

18 months following the October 4, 

2013, effective date of designation (i.e., 

by April 6, 2015). 

B. Relevant Historical SIP Actions 

The EPA did not receive an 

attainment SIP revision for the 

Allegheny County NAA by the April 6, 

2015 deadline and subsequently on 

March 18, 2016, the EPA published a 

finding of failure to submit indicating 

that Pennsylvania did not submit the 

required SO2 attainment plan.7 This 

finding initiated a clock under CAA 

section 179(a) for the potential 

imposition of new source review 

sanctions 18 months after the effective 

date of the finding and the potential 

imposition of highway funding 

sanctions 6 months following that, in 

accordance with CAA section 179(b) 

and 40 CFR 52.31. Additionally, under 

CAA section 110(c), the finding 

triggered a requirement for the EPA to 

promulgate a Federal implementation 

plan (FIP) within two years of the 

effective date of the finding unless, by 

that time, Pennsylvania made the 

necessary complete submittal, and the 

EPA approved the submittal. 

Pursuant to Pennsylvania’s October 3, 

2017 attainment plan submittal, and the 

EPA’s October 6, 2017 letter to 

Pennsylvania finding the submittal 

complete and noting the stopping of the 

sanctions’ deadline, these CAA section 

179(b) sanctions were not imposed as 

Pennsylvania did not miss the original 

deadline.8 The EPA proposed approving 

the SIP revision submittal on November 

19, 2018,9 and issued a final approval 

on April 23, 2020.10 This approval 

ended the requirement for the EPA to 

promulgate a FIP under CAA section 

110(c). On November 14, 2023, PADEP, 

on behalf of ACHD, submitted a revision 

to its SIP for the inclusion of a 

maintenance plan for the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS and requested a 

concurrent redesignation of the 

Allegheny County NAA to attainment 

for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2

NAAQS. 

C. Redesignation to Attainment Criteria 

After a State has submitted a 

redesignation request for a 

nonattainment area, the EPA must 

assess if the statutory criteria identified 

in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) have been 

met to redesignate the area to 

attainment. These conditions include: 

(1) the EPA has determined that the 

applicable NAAQS has been attained; 

(2) the applicable SIP has been fully 

approved by the EPA under CAA 

section 110(k); (3) the EPA has 

determined that the improvement in the 

area’s air quality is due to permanent 

and enforceable reductions in 

emissions; (4) the area has a fully 

approved maintenance plan, including a 

contingency plan, under CAA section 

175A; and (5) the State has met all 

applicable requirements for the area 

under CAA section 110 and part D. The 

EPA has provided direction for how it 

would consider if these conditions have 

been met in the April 23, 2014 

memorandum ‘‘Guidance for 1-Hour 

SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP 

Submissions’’ (2014 SO2 Guidance).11

D. Maintenance Plan Approval Criteria 

CAA section 175A and additional 

EPA guidance, including the September 

4, 1992 memorandum ‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment’’ (Calcagni 

Memo),12 identify the required elements 

for an approvable maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. Under 

CAA section 175A, the plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the EPA approves a 

redesignation request to attainment. 

Eight years after the redesignation, the 

State must submit a revised 

maintenance plan demonstrating that 

attainment will continue to be 

maintained for an additional 10 years 

following the initial 10-year period. To 

address the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain contingency measures, as the 

EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt 

correction of any future 2010 1-hour 

SO2 violations. The Calcagni Memo 

provides further guidance on the 

content of a maintenance plan, 

explaining that a maintenance plan 

should address five requirements: (1) an 

attainment emissions inventory that 

identifies the level of emissions in the 

area which is sufficient to attain the 

NAAQS; (2) a maintenance 

demonstration that shows future 

emissions of a pollutant will not exceed 

the level of the attainment inventory; (3) 

the continued operation of a monitoring 

network that conforms to 40 CFR part 

58; (4) a means for verifying the 

continued attainment of the NAAQS; 

and (5) a contingency plan to correct 

any violation of the NAAQS in the area 

following redesignation of the area. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

The EPA’s evaluation of 

Pennsylvania’s redesignation request 

and maintenance plan is based on 

consideration of the five redesignation 

criteria provided under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E) and relevant guidance, 

including the aforementioned 2014 SO2

Guidance and Calcagni Memo. 

A. Criterion (1)—The Allegheny County 

SO2 Nonattainment Area Has Attained 

the 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) requires 

that the EPA determine if a 

nonattainment area has attained the 

applicable NAAQS in order to 

redesignate the area to attainment. In 

assessing if the area has attained the 

NAAQS, the 2014 SO2 Guidance 

stipulates that the EPA can 

interdependently consider two 

components to support an attainment 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
99792 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

13See 2014 SO2 Guidance, at 62. 

14 Design values are calculated by computing the 

three-year average of the annual 99th percentile 

daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations. An 

SO2 1-hour primary standard design value is valid 

if it encompasses three consecutive calendar years 

of complete data. The data completeness 

requirements were previously described in the 

Nonattainment Designation section I.A. of this 

document above. 

15See Allegheny County EPA Modeling TSD at 

pp. 16–17, available in the docket for this action. 

16See Allegheny County September 2017 

Attainment Demonstration. 

17See 2014 SO2 Guidance, at 50. 

18See ACHD_Email_Source_Characteristics, 

available in the docket for this action. 

19Large, stationary sources specifically include 

US Steel Clairton, US Steel Edgar Thomson, and US 

Steel Irvin, which collectively account for over 99% 

of all point source SO2 emissions within the 

Allegheny County NAA. 

20See Allegheny County September 2017 

Attainment Demonstration, at 15, and ACHD_SO2_

RR_and_MP_App_B_Emissions_Inv, at 2, available 

in the docket for this action. 

21See supra Note 17. 

22See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, at 15. 

23See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP_App_B_

Emissions_Inv, at 2. 

24See Allegheny County September 2017 Attain_

Demo_App_D, at 2, available in the docket for this 

action. 

25See 2014 SO2 Guidance, at 64. 

26 83 FR 58206, November 19, 2018. 

27 85 FR 22593, April 23, 2020. 

determination: air quality monitoring 

data and air quality modeling data.13

The Allegheny County NAA contains 

two operational SO2 monitor sites: the 

Liberty site (Air Quality System (AQS) 

Site ID 42–003–0064) and the North 

Braddock site (AQS Site ID 42–003– 

1301). The Liberty monitor is located 

centrally within the Allegheny County 

NAA and has been in operation since 

1969, while the North Braddock monitor 

is located in the northern segment of the 

Allegheny County NAA and has been in 

operation since 2014. Both monitors 

have been in attainment of the 2010 1- 

hour primary SO2 NAAQS since the 

2019–2021 period, with Liberty 

recording a design value of 63 ppb for 

the 2021–2023 period and North 

Braddock recording a design value of 54 

ppb for the 2021–2023 period.14 Design 

values for the past 10 years are reported 

in Table 1 in this document. Although 

both monitors are currently in 

attainment of the NAAQS, prior analysis 

has determined that neither of these 

monitoring sites are located in the area 

of maximum concentration,15 and as 

such, additional air quality modeling is 

generally needed to estimate SO2

concentrations within the area. 

TABLE 1—2014–2023 SO2 DESIGN VALUES FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY NONATTAINMENT AREA MONITOR SITES

[Parts per billion] 

Monitor site 2012–2014 2013–2015 2014–2016 2015–2017 2016–2018 2017–2019 2018–2020 2019–2021 2020–2022 2021–2023 

Liberty .................................... 101 99 94 97 103 109 85 59 56 63 

North Braddock * ................... 89 71 64 55 61 63 64 58 56 54 

* North Braddock design values from the 2012–2014 and 2013–2015 periods are comprised of less than three years of data as the monitor began operating in 

2014. 

Pennsylvania’s 2017 attainment plan 

contained an attainment demonstration 

which utilized allowable SO2 emission 

limits from stationary sources within 

the Allegheny County NAA to inform 

several modeling analyses for SO2

emissions.16 These modeling analyses 

were based on emissions limits for large, 

stationary sources of SO2, which, if 

enacted, would ensure that the 

Allegheny County NAA would attain 

the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS. 

The 2014 SO2 Guidance states that the 

EPA may make a determination of 

attainment based on this attainment 

plan modeling, eliminating the need for 

separate actual emissions-based 

modeling to support a redesignation 

request—provided that the source 

characteristics are still reasonably 

represented.17 The source 

characteristics are still reasonably 

represented 18 and from 2020–2021, 

large, stationary SO2 sources 19 within 

the Allegheny County NAA were 

meeting their allowable emission limits 

for attainment.20 As such, the 2017 

attainment demonstration modeling 

submitted by Pennsylvania will allow 

for the EPA’s determination of 

attainment. The 2014 SO2 Guidance 

further states that a demonstration that 

the control strategy in the SIP has been 

fully implemented will also be pertinent 

for making the determination of 

attainment.21 Pennsylvania has 

submitted information detailed in its 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan to confirm that the control strategy 

outlined in the SIP has been fully 

implemented. The specific measures 

identified in the control strategy include 

upgrades to the Vacuum Carbonate Unit 

equipment at the U.S. Steel (USS) 

Clairton Plant, the implementation of a 

tail gas recycling project at the USS 

Clairton Plant, and a new stack and 

combined flue system for select boilers 

at the USS Edgar Thomson Plant.22

Additionally, lower permitted SO2

emission rates were implemented for 

nearly all processes at the primary 

stationary SO2 sources in the Allegheny 

County NAA, including the USS 

Clairton Plant, the USS Edgar Thomson 

Plant, the USS Irvin Plant, and Harsco 

Metals. These implemented, permanent 

and federally enforceable control 

measures have aided in reducing the 

actual total emissions from large, 

stationary USS SO2 sources to 2,373 

tons per year (as of 2021),23 which is 

below the revised total emissions limits 

proposed for USS facilities in the 2017 

attainment demonstration modeling 

(2,669 tons per year),24 thus 

contributing to bringing the Allegheny 

County NAA into attainment. 

In this action, the EPA proposes to 

find that the air quality monitoring data 

and air quality modeling data 

demonstrate that the Allegheny County 

NAA has attained the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS. 

B. Criterion (2)—Pennsylvania Has a 

Fully Approved SIP Under Section 

110(k) 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) requires 

that the EPA fully approve the 

applicable implementation plan for the 

area under CAA section 110(k) in order 

to redesignate that area to attainment. 

The EPA has fully approved the 

applicable Pennsylvania SIP for the 

Allegheny County NAA under section 

110(k) of the CAA for all requirements 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. An area cannot be 

redesignated to attainment if a required 

element of the SIP is the subject of a 

disapproval; a finding of failure to 

submit, or failure to implement the SIP; 

or a partial, conditional, or limited 

approval.25 The 2017 attainment plan 

SIP was initially proposed for EPA 

approval on November 19, 2018 26 and 

received final EPA approval on April 

23, 2020.27 The approved elements from 

the 2017 attainment plan include a 2011 

base year emissions inventory, a control 

strategy and air quality modeling 

demonstration, a reasonable available 

control measures/reasonably available 

control technology (RACM/RACT) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 99793 

28 Documentation of this closure is in Guardian_

closure-App_J, available in the docket for this 

action. 

29See Calcagni Memo, at 10. 

30See Allegheny_County_Article_XXI, available 

in the docket for this action and at 

www.alleghenycounty.us/files/assets/county/v/1/ 

government/health/documents/air-quality/article21-air-pollution-control.pdf. 

31 85 FR 22593, April 23, 2020 and 40 CFR 

52.2020(d)(3). 

32See Installation_Permits_with_emission_limitsApp_K, available in the docket for this action. 

33See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, at 16. 34See Calcagni Memo, at pp. 8–12. 

analysis, a reasonable further progress 

(RFP) analysis, contingency measures, 

and nonattainment new source review 

(NNSR) regulations. 

C. Criterion (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement in the Allegheny County 

SO2 Nonattainment Area Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

in Emissions 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires the EPA to 

determine that the air quality 

improvement in the area is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, applicable 

Federal air pollution control 

regulations, and other permanent and 

enforceable reductions. The EPA 

proposes to find that Pennsylvania has 

demonstrated that the requirements of 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) have been 

met. 

Specifically, the implementation of 

multiple permanent and federally 

enforceable control measures at 

stationary point sources of SO2

identified in the EPA-approved 2017 

attainment demonstration aided in a 

substantial decrease in SO2 emissions, 

and consequently lower SO2

concentrations in the Allegheny County 

NAA. These measures include upgrades 

to the Vacuum Carbonate Unit 

equipment at the USS Clairton Plant, 

the implementation of a tail gas 

recycling project at the USS Clairton 

Plant, and a new stack and combined 

flue system for select boilers at the USS 

Edgar Thomson Plant. Furthermore, the 

Guardian Glass Plant ceased operations 

in August 2015 and its operating permit 

was terminated in November 2015.28

The Calcagni Memo states that 

‘‘[e]mission reductions from source 

shutdowns can be considered 

permanent and enforceable to the extent 

that those shutdowns have been 

reflected in the SIP and all applicable 

permits have been modified 

accordingly,’’ and therefore the 

Guardian shutdown is considered 

permanent and enforceable.29 Any 

future operations at this location would 

require a new permit and a new source 

evaluation, as described in ACHD 

Article XXI, sections 2102.04 and 

2103.13.30 Additionally, Emissions 

Reductions Credits for SO2 were not 

requested for the Guardian Glass Plant, 

preventing the transfer or sale of 

associated emission credits to another 

entity in Pennsylvania or some 

surrounding states. 

Allegheny County also established 

lower SO2 emissions limits for nearly all 

processes at the USS facilities in the 

Allegheny County NAA, including USS 

Clairton, USS Edgar Thomson, and USS 

Irvin, as well as the Harsco (Braddock 

Recovery) facility, located on the 

property of USS Edgar Thomson. These 

emissions limits are embedded in the 

installation permits issued by ACHD for 

these facilities and are federally 

enforceable as they have been approved 

into Pennsylvania’s SIP, and they are 

permanent because they cannot be 

altered without an additional SIP 

submittal.31 Details on the imposed 

emissions limits were included as 

copies of the installation permits in 

Appendix K of the 2017 attainment plan 

submittal and are available in the docket 

for this action.32

Collectively, the implemented 

controls and lower permitted SO2

emissions rates resulted in an actual 

decrease of 835 tons of SO2 emitted per 

year from 2011 to 2017. This is 

approximately a 25% reduction from 

2011 levels of 3,418 tons of SO2 emitted 

per year.33 As this reduction comes from 

EPA-approved SIP controls and permitcontrolled emission limits, the EPA 

finds the air quality improvement in the 

Allegheny County NAA to be due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions. 

D. Criterion (4)—The Allegheny County 

SO2 Nonattainment Area Has a Fully 

Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant 

to Section 175A of the CAA 

To redesignate a NAA to attainment, 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) requires 

the EPA to determine that the area has 

a fully approved maintenance plan 

pursuant to section 175A of the CAA. In 

conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the Allegheny County NAA 

to attainment for the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS, the State 

submitted a SIP revision to provide for 

the maintenance of the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the effective date of 

redesignation to attainment. The EPA is 

proposing to find that this maintenance 

plan meets the requirements for 

approval under section 175A of the 

CAA. 

1. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

CAA section 175A sets forth the 

elements of a maintenance plan. Under 

section 175A, the plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the Administrator approves a 

redesignation request to attainment. 

Eight years after the redesignation, the 

State must submit a revised 

maintenance plan demonstrating that 

attainment will continue to be 

maintained for an additional 10 years 

following the initial 10-year period. To 

address the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain contingency measures as the 

EPA deems necessary to assure prompt 

correction of any future 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS violations. The 

Calcagni Memo provides further 

guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan, explaining that a 

maintenance plan should address five 

requirements: the attainment emissions 

inventory, maintenance demonstration, 

monitoring, verification of continued 

attainment, and a contingency plan.34

As is discussed more fully later in this 

section, the EPA is proposing to 

determine that Pennsylvania’s 

maintenance plan meets the 

requirements in CAA section 175A and 

is thus proposing to approve it as a 

revision to the Allegheny County 

portion of the Pennsylvania SIP. 

2. Attainment Emissions Inventory 

In a maintenance plan, states are 

required to submit an emissions 

inventory to identify the level of 

emissions in the area which is sufficient 

to attain and maintain the SO2 NAAQS, 

which is called the attainment 

inventory. This inventory is used as the 

basis for future, projected emission 

inventories that are used to show the 

area will remain in attainment. 

Pennsylvania submitted a 2017 SO2

emissions inventory as the attainment 

inventory with its maintenance plan. 

The year 2017 was selected because it 

was the first year in which emissions 

were at levels required to demonstrate 

attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 

with the exception of emissions 

associated with malfunctions of the 

desulfurization facility at the USS 

Clairton Plant. Additionally, 2017 was a 

year in which a fully reviewed National 

Emission Inventory (NEI) was released. 

The NEI is a comprehensive, triennial 

estimate of emissions. Generally, the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
99794 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

35See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, at 19. 

36See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP_App_B_

Emissions_Inv, at pp. 1–2. 

37See EI_TSD_ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, available 

in the docket for this action. 

38EPA Fires: www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch13/ 

related/firerept.pdf. 

39EPA BEIS: www.epa.gov/air-emissionsmodeling/biogenic-emission-inventory-system-beis. 

40See Allegheny County Energy Center 

Termination Letter, available in the docket for this 

action. 

41See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, at 22 and ACHD_

SO2_RR_and_MP_App_B_Emissions_Inv. 

42See Calcagni Memo, at 9. 

attainment year is selected as a year 

within the attaining design value period 

(i.e., 2019–2021). However, alternate 

years from 2018–2022 were less ideal 

than 2017 for the attainment year for a 

variety of factors, including excess 

emissions from sources due to 

equipment breakdowns, atypical 

emissions during the COVID pandemic, 

and incomplete emissions compilations 

for recent years. Additional details for 

choosing 2017 as the attainment year are 

available in the submitted redesignation 

request.35

For the 2017 attainment year 

inventory, Pennsylvania directly used 

point and area source emissions 

reported in the 2017 NEI, except for 

corrections identified in Appendix B of 

the submitted redesignation request.36

The point source emissions for the 

Allegheny County NAA were verified 

against the EPA’s emissions inventory 

system (EIS) and the EPA found them to 

be acceptable.37 Area source emissions 

were estimated based on the relative 

percentage of the Allegheny County 

population residing in the Allegheny 

County NAA and the resulting factor 

allocated the appropriate fraction of the 

County’s total emissions to the 

Allegheny County NAA. 

Nonroad and onroad mobile source 

emissions for 2017 were obtained from 

the EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Simulator (MOVES) model, specifically 

the MOVES3 version. PADEP executed 

the MOVES3 modeling runs for nonroad 

mobile sources and utilized a contractor 

to run the model for onroad mobile 

source emissions. 

Natural SO2 emission sources, such as 

fires and biogenics, were also compiled. 

Fire emissions data was pulled from the 

EPA’s Fires 38 inventory, while biogenic 

emissions from soils and vegetation 

were predicted by the Biogenic 

Emission Inventory System 39 (BEIS) 

model. 

Projection inventories predicted from 

the attainment inventory demonstrate 

that the area will continue to remain in 

attainment during the maintenance 

period. Pennsylvania developed 2026 

and 2035 emission projections for the 

interim and maintenance plan end year, 

respectively. Projected emissions for 

these years—as well as the base year 

inventory—are available in Table 2 in 

this document. Projected emissions for 

point and area sources were estimated 

from the 2017 base year emissions and 

growth factors developed by the MidAtlantic Regional Air Management 

Association, Inc., and other sources. 

These growth factors are developed 

based on forecasts from various 

databases and tools, including the 

Energy Information Administration’s 

Annual Energy Outlook 2022, 

Pennsylvania Industry Employment 

2018–2028 Long-Term Projections, 

National Inventory Collaborative 2016v1 

Emissions Modeling Platform, and the 

Federal Aviation Administration’s 

Terminal Area Forecast. Projected 

emissions were subject to the same 

corrections utilized in the 2017 base 

year inventory for consistency. 

Furthermore, point sources with 

implemented enforceable controls or 

shutdowns since the 2017 base year 

were excluded from the 2026 and 2035 

projections. Specifically, the Koppers 

Clairton tar refining facility ceased 

operation in 2017 and its permit expired 

in 2021. Additionally, Coke Batteries 1, 

2, and 3 at the USS Clairton Plant 

ceased operation in March 2023. 

Conversely, projections for the 2026 and 

2035 inventories included the permitted 

plantwide SO2 emissions limit of 23.89 

tons/year for a new major source 

facility—the Invenergy Allegheny 

Energy Center. However, the permit for 

this facility was terminated on 

November 9, 2023,40 and construction 

of this facility is not expected to 

proceed at this time. As such, the actual 

emissions in 2026 and 2035 should be 

even lower than the anticipated values 

reported in the maintenance year 

projections. Nonroad and onroad mobile 

source emissions for the projected years 

2026 and 2035 were also obtained from 

the MOVES3 version. MOVES3 

modeling runs were once again 

executed by PADEP for nonroad mobile 

source emissions and by the contractor 

for onroad mobile source emissions. 

Additional details on some of the 

assumptions and inputs to the model 

are available in the redesignation 

request and its associated Appendix B.41

Fire and biogenic sources are typically 

not projected for future case scenarios 

and therefore emissions were held 

constant from 2017 to 2026 and 2035. 

TABLE 2—EMISSIONS INVENTORIES FOR THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY NONATTAINMENT AREA

[Tons per year] 

Sector 

2017 Actual 

emissions 

(base year) 

2026 Projected 

emissions 

(interim year) 

2035 Projected 

emissions 

(maintenance year) 

Point Sources .................................................................................................. 2,556 2,511 2,472 

Area Sources ................................................................................................... 22 26 27 

Nonroad Mobile Sources ................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Onroad Mobile Sources ................................................................................... 5 2 2 

Fires ................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Biogenics ......................................................................................................... 0 0 0 

Total .......................................................................................................... 2,583 2,539 2,501 

3. Maintenance Demonstration 

The Calcagni memo describes two 

ways for a State to demonstrate 

maintenance of the NAAQS for a period 

of at least 10 years following the 

redesignation of the area: (1) the State 

can show that future emissions of a 

pollutant will not exceed the level of the 

attainment inventory, or (2) the State 

can model to show that the future mix 

of sources and emission rates will not 

cause a violation of the standard.42

Pennsylvania’s projected actual 

emissions for the interim year of 2026 

and for the maintenance year of 2035 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 99795 

43See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, at 27. 

44See ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP, at 28–31. 45Specific schedules and associated procedures 

for the adoption and implementation of regulatory 

and non-regulatory measures are available in the 

ACHD_SO2_RR_and_MP document at pp. 29–30. 

are both below the total attainment 

inventory, which is acceptable for 

showing maintenance in the Allegheny 

County NAA. 

4. Monitoring Network 

The 2014 SO2 Guidance indicates that 

once an area has been redesignated to 

attainment, the state should continue to 

operate an appropriate air quality 

monitoring network as provided under 

40 CFR part 58 to verify the attainment 

status of the area. ACHD has committed 

to continued operation of its SO2

monitoring network in the Allegheny 

County NAA to verify the attainment 

status. Also, ACHD will continue to 

submit an annual monitoring network 

plan to the EPA for approval, in 

accordance with 40 CFR 58.10. No 

changes will be made to the existing 

network unless pre-approved by the 

EPA. 

5. Verification of Continued Attainment 

The 2014 SO2 Guidance states that 

each air agency should ensure that it has 

the legal authority to implement and 

enforce all measures necessary to attain 

and maintain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

The air agency’s submittal should 

indicate how it will track the progress 

of the maintenance plan for the area 

either through air quality monitoring or 

modeling. 

Article XXI, section 2101.07(a) grants 

the ACHD legal authority to implement 

and enforce all measures necessary to 

maintain the 2010 1-hour primary SO2

NAAQS. In addition, ACHD has 

indicated it will track the progress of the 

maintenance plan through an integrated 

approach utilizing monitoring data and 

emissions inventories. 

As previously indicated, ACHD will 

continue to operate its SO2 monitoring 

network to verify the attainment status 

of the Allegheny County NAA. 

Monitored concentrations will serve as 

the primary indicator for verifying 

continued attainment and will also act 

as the triggering mechanism for 

contingency measures. 

ACHD will also use emissions 

inventories—developed annually by 

ACHD for point sources and triennially 

by PADEP for area and mobile sources— 

and compare these inventories to the 

2017 attainment inventory for assessing 

continued attainment. It is anticipated 

that future inventories will remain 

below the levels of the attainment 

inventory. However, if future 

inventories exceed the attainment 

inventory levels, ACHD will conduct a 

study to evaluate if the increased 

emissions have caused increased 

monitored concentrations within the 

Allegheny County NAA and, if so, 

ACHD will determine if any additional 

emission control measures should be 

enacted. Emissions data will not serve 

as a triggering mechanism for 

contingency measures for two reasons. 

Primarily, increased emissions may not 

directly affect monitored 

concentrations, as SO2 concentrations 

can be impacted by meteorological 

conditions. Additionally, emissions 

inventory reporting is slower than 

monitoring data reporting, and the use 

of emissions data as a contingency 

initiator would not provide for a prompt 

response to any potential NAAQS 

violations. 

Under ACHD’s new source review 

program, any major new sources or 

modifications to existing sources that 

would affect emissions must provide a 

modeling demonstration that illustrates 

new emissions will not cause or 

contribute to a violation of the 2010 1- 

hour primary SO2 NAAQS, as described 

in ACHD Article XXI, section 

2102.04(b). ACHD will not approve any 

modifications that would lead to 

expected violations of the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS in the Allegheny 

County NAA. 

The EPA proposes to find that these 

proposed measures will provide for 

verifying continued attainment within 

the Allegheny County NAA. 

6. Contingency Measures 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that a maintenance plan include such 

contingency measures as the EPA deems 

necessary to assure that the State will 

promptly correct a violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. 

The maintenance plan should identify 

the contingency measures to be adopted, 

a schedule and procedure for adoption 

and implementation, and a time limit 

for action by the State. A State should 

also identify specific indicators to be 

used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

implemented. The maintenance plan 

must also include a requirement that a 

State will continue to implement all 

measures with respect to control of the 

pollutant that were contained in the SIP 

before redesignation of the area to 

attainment. 

ACHD has committed to continuing 

implementation of all measures 

indicated in the SIP after redesignation 

of the Allegheny County NAA.43

Furthermore, ACHD has identified 

triggering indicators for its contingency 

measures, a schedule for implementing 

these potential measures, and has 

specified multiple potential options to 

correct any NAAQS violation.44

Fully validated and quality assured 

SO2 monitoring data will serve as the 

primary trigger for any responses to 

prevent or correct a NAAQS violation in 

the Area. ACHD has established both 

warning level and action level responses 

with specific triggering indicators for 

each. 

Warning level responses are subdivided into two tiers. A first-level 

warning will occur when the 99th 

percentile daily maximum 1-hour SO2

concentration exceeds 75 ppb at any 

monitor site in the Allegheny County 

NAA in a single calendar year. This 

first-level warning will prompt an 

ACHD study to determine if the trigger 

indicates a trend toward increasing SO2

concentrations in the Allegheny County 

NAA. If there seems to be a rising trend 

in SO2 concentrations, the study will 

examine if the trend is likely to 

continue and if so, the needed measures 

that could reverse the trend. A secondlevel warning will occur when the 

average of two consecutive years of 99th 

percentile daily maximum 1-hour SO2

concentrations exceeds 75 ppb at any 

monitor in the Allegheny County NAA. 

This second-level warning will result in 

ACHD evaluating the chance of a 

violation of the NAAQS and the need 

for supplemental control measures to be 

activated. Both first- and second-level 

warnings will allow for ACHD to 

consider the early adoption of measures 

to permit the expeditious 

implementation of these measures in the 

event of a NAAQS violation. This early 

adoption could allow for 

implementation of the measures within 

30 to 90 days following the potential 

occurrence of a NAAQS violation. 

An action level response will occur 

when the 1-hour design value, based on 

the average of three consecutive years of 

99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour 

SO2 concentrations, violates the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS at any monitor site in 

the Allegheny County NAA. This 

response will include the adoption and 

implementation of additional control 

measures as needed to promptly correct 

the violation. If regulatory measures are 

selected, these measures will conform to 

all Federal, State, and local rules and 

regulations. Both non-regulatory and 

regulatory measures are expected to be 

implemented within one year following 

a violation of the NAAQS.45

ACHD has specified multiple 

potential regulatory and non-regulatory 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
99796 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

46USS Mon Valley Works collectively refers to 

the USS Clairton, Edgar Thomson, and Irvin Plants 

located within the Allegheny County NAA. 

47See Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) SIP Call and 

amendments to the NOX SIP Call (64 FR 26298, May 

14, 1999 and 65 FR 11222, March 2, 2000), and the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update (81 

FR 74504, October 26, 2016). 

48 80 FR 46494, August 5, 2015. 

49 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992. 

contingency measures for this 

maintenance plan—including both areawide and USS Mon Valley Works 

measures.46 Selection will be based on 

several factors, including but not 

limited to, the degree of the violation, 

the emission reduction potential, and 

cost. ACHD has identified nonregulatory, area-wide measures such as 

wood burning-related programs and 

alternative fuel promotions as potential 

options for correcting a NAAQS 

violation. Additionally, ACHD has 

proposed USS Mon Valley Works 

regulatory measures, including but not 

limited to, additional desulfurization 

controls for coke oven gas at USS 

Clairton, additional fugitive controls at 

USS Mon Valley Works plants, and 

restrictions on fuel usage at USS Mon 

Valley Works plants. All of these 

measures can be individually 

implemented or in conjunction with 

others to ensure correction of any 

NAAQS violation. 

The EPA proposes to find that 

ACHD’s submitted maintenance plan 

meets the requirements set forth in CAA 

section 175A and EPA guidance and is 

proposing to approve the maintenance 

plan as a revision to the Pennsylvania 

SIP. 

E. Criterion (5)—Pennsylvania Has Met 

All Applicable Requirements Under 

Section 110 and Part D of Title I of the 

CAA 

In accordance with section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA, to 

redesignate the Allegheny County NAA 

to attainment, Pennsylvania must meet 

all requirements applicable to the 

Allegheny County NAA under CAA 

section 110 (general SIP requirements) 

and part D of title I of the CAA (SIP 

requirements for nonattainment areas). 

1. Section 110 General Requirements for 

SIPs 

Pursuant to CAA section 110(a)(1), 

whenever new or revised NAAQS are 

promulgated, the CAA requires States to 

submit a plan (i.e., SIP) for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of such NAAQS. Section 

110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA contains 

the general requirements for a SIP, also 

known as ‘‘infrastructure’’ requirements. 

These requirements include, but are not 

limited to, the following: submittal of a 

SIP that has been adopted by the state 

after reasonable public notice and 

hearing; provisions for establishment 

and operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)) and provisions for the 

implementation of part D requirements 

(New Source Review (NSR) permit 

programs); provisions for air pollution 

modeling; and provisions for public and 

local agency participation in planning 

and emission control rule development. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs 

contain certain measures to prevent 

sources in a state from significantly 

contributing to air quality problems in 

another state. To implement this 

provision, the EPA has required certain 

states to establish programs to address 

the interstate transport of air 

pollutants.47 The section 110(a)(2)(D) 

requirements for a state are not linked 

with a particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification in that 

state. The EPA has concluded that the 

requirements linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classifications are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. Thus, the EPA has 

concluded that the CAA’s interstate 

transport requirements should not be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. 

In addition, the EPA has concluded 

other section 110 elements—those that 

are neither connected with 

nonattainment plan submissions nor 

linked with an area’s attainment 

status—are not applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. The area 

will still be subject to these 

requirements after the area is 

redesignated. The section 110 and part 

D requirements which are linked with a 

particular area’s designation and 

classification are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. This approach is consistent 

with the EPA’s existing policy on 

applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of 

conformity and oxygenated fuels 

requirements, as well as with section 

184 ozone transport requirements. See 

Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and 

final rules (61 FR 53174–53176, October 

10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 2008); 

Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final 

rule (61 FR 20458, May 7,1996); and 

Tampa, Florida, final rule (60 FR 62748, 

December 7, 1995). See also the 

discussion on this issue in the 

Cincinnati, Ohio, redesignation (65 FR 

37890, June 19, 2000), and in the 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, redesignation 

(66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001). 

The EPA approved elements of 

Pennsylvania’s June 15, 2014 SO2

infrastructure SIP submittal on August 

5, 2015.48 As explained previously, 

certain general requirements of CAA 

section 110(a)(2) are statewide 

requirements that are not linked to the 

nonattainment status of the Allegheny 

County NAA and are therefore not 

‘‘applicable requirements’’ for the 

purpose of reviewing Pennsylvania’s 

redesignation request. Because 

Pennsylvania satisfies the general SIP 

elements and requirements set forth in 

CAA section 110(a)(2) applicable to and 

necessary for SO2 redesignation, the 

EPA proposes to conclude that 

Pennsylvania has satisfied the criterion 

of section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) related to 

section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. 

2. Part D Requirements 

In addition to the CAA section 110 

requirements, section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) 

requires that the state meet all the 

requirements applicable to the 

nonattainment area ‘‘under part D of 

this subchapter’’ for the nonattainment 

area to be redesignated. Both section 

107 and part D are within subchapter 1 

of the CAA. Part D, entitled ‘‘Plan 

Requirements for Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ consists of six subparts, of 

which only subparts 1 and 5 are 

applicable to SO2 nonattainment areas. 

Subpart 1 (sections 171 through 179B) 

contains provisions that can apply to all 

nonattainment areas for all criteria 

pollutants, while subpart 5 (sections 191 

through 192) contains additional 

provisions for SO2, NOX, or lead 

nonattainment areas. The requirements 

applicable to this redesignation are 

discussed below. 

a. Subpart 1 Requirements 

1. Section 172 Requirements 

CAA section 172 requires states with 

nonattainment areas to submit plans 

that provide for timely attainment of the 

NAAQS. More specifically, CAA section 

172(c) contains general requirements for 

nonattainment plans. A thorough 

discussion of these requirements is 

found in the General Preamble for 

Implementation of title I.49

As noted in the General Preamble, 

certain attainment-related planning 

requirements under section 172(c) no 

longer have meaning for an area that is 

already attaining the NAAQS, and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 99797 

50 85 FR 22593, April 23, 2020. 

51Available in the docket for this action as 

Nichols_Memo and at www.epa.gov/sites/default/ 

files/2015-07/documents/101494m.pdf. 

52 58 FR 3776, January 11, 1993. 

53This provision has been revised to include 

particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or 

equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5). See 40 

CFR 93.102(b)(1). 

therefore are not applicable for purposes 

of redesignation. For example, for an 

area that is already attaining the 

NAAQS, there would be nothing for the 

State to provide to show reasonable 

further progress to attainment in that 

area. Similarly, the CAA section 172 

requirements for the attainment 

demonstration, implementation of 

reasonably available control measures, 

including reasonably available control 

technology, and contingency measures 

that are triggered if an area fails to meet 

RFP or fails to attain are also not 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

With respect to CAA section 172(c)(3), 

Pennsylvania was required to submit an 

actual current emissions inventory with 

its attainment plan. Pennsylvania had 

submitted a base year inventory with its 

attainment plan SIP on October 3, 2017 

and the EPA approved this element on 

April 23, 2020.50

2. Section 173 Requirements 

Section 173 of the CAA includes 

requirements for permit programs that 

are required in a nonattainment area for 

new sources as required by section 

172(c)(5), known as nonattainment new 

source review (NNSR). However, the 

EPA has a longstanding interpretation 

that because the NNSR permit program 

is replaced by the PSD permit program 

upon an area’s redesignation to 

attainment, nonattainment areas seeking 

redesignation to attainment do not need 

a fully approved part D NNSR program 

to be redesignated. A more detailed 

rationale for this view is described in a 

memorandum from Mary Nichols, 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ 51

Nevertheless, the EPA notes that the 

ACHD’s Article XXI Rules and 

Regulations for Air Pollution Control 

have SIP-approved NNSR and PSD 

programs found in section 2102.06 for 

NNSR and section 2102.07 for PSD. 

Allegheny County has incorporated by 

reference Pennsylvania’s NNSR 

provisions at 25 Pa. Code 127.201– 

127.218 and also Pennsylvania’s PSD 

regulations found at 25 Pa. Code 

127.81–127.83. Pennsylvania’s PSD 

regulations merely incorporate by 

reference the Federal PSD regulations 

found at 40 CFR part 52. Allegheny 

County has therefore addressed all 

required provisions for the permitting of 

sources in NAAs, including NNSR. See 

40 CFR 52.2020(c). Pennsylvania’s PSD 

program will become applicable for SO2

in the Allegheny County NAA upon 

redesignation to attainment. 

3. Section 175A Requirements 

CAA section 175A requires that states 

seeking redesignation of an area to 

attainment submit a ‘‘maintenance 

plan’’ containing certain elements. 

Pennsylvania included a maintenance 

plan for the Allegheny County NAA 

with its November 14, 2023 

redesignation request, which the EPA is 

proposing to approve in conjunction 

with the redesignation, and it is 

discussed in detail in section II, 

Criterion (4) of this document. 

4. Section 176 Requirements 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

that Federal actions conform to the air 

quality planning goals in the applicable 

SIP. The requirement to determine 

conformity applies to transportation 

plans, programs, and projects that are 

developed, funded, or approved under 

title 23 of the United States Code and 

the Federal Transit Act (transportation 

conformity) as well as to all other 

Federally-supported or funded projects 

(general conformity). Section 176(c) of 

the CAA also requires that states 

establish criteria and procedures to 

ensure that Federally-supported or 

funded transportation plans, 

transportation improvement programs 

(TIPs) and projects conform to the goals 

of the applicable SIP. This is referred to 

as a transportation conformity SIP. In 

the preamble to the January 1993 

proposed transportation conformity 

rule, the EPA stated that, ‘‘Based on 

available emissions information, EPA 

believes highway and transit motor 

vehicles are not significant sources of 

lead or sulfur dioxide. Therefore, 

transportation plans, TIPs, and projects 

are presumed to conform to the 

applicable implementation plans for 

these pollutants.’’ 52 In November 1993, 

the EPA finalized its transportation 

conformity regulations. One section of 

those regulations addressed the 

geographic applicability of the 

transportation conformity regulations. 

The regulation stated at that time that, 

‘‘The provisions of this subpart apply 

with respect to emissions of the 

following criteria pollutants: Ozone, 

carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and 

particles with an aerodynamic diameter 

less than or equal to a nominal 10 

micrometers (PM10).’’ 53 Based on this 

provision, transportation conformity 

does not apply in nonattainment or 

maintenance areas for SO2. Therefore, a 

transportation conformity SIP is not 

required for SO2 nonattainment and 

maintenance areas and is not necessary 

for an SO2 nonattainment area to be 

redesignated to attainment, and the 

EPA’s transportation conformity rules 

do not apply to SO2 for the Allegheny 

County NAA. 

5. Section 179 Requirements 

Section 179(a) of the CAA addresses 

potential sanctions for the failure of a 

State to submit certain required SIP 

elements by statutory deadlines. The 

EPA is not aware of any missing or 

incomplete Allegheny County planning 

elements subject to Section 179(a) of the 

CAA. 

b. Subpart 5 Requirements 

The subpart 5 requirements, which 

consist of sections 191 and 192 of the 

CAA, are specific provisions applicable 

to SO2, NO2 or lead nonattainment 

areas. Section 191 of the CAA requires 

states with areas designated 

nonattainment for SO2, NO2 or lead after 

November 15, 1990, to submit within 18 

months of the designation an 

implementation plan meeting the 

requirements of part D. The substance of 

the required plans is established by 

section 172(c). Section 192 sets forth 

attainment dates for nonattainment 

areas under section 191. 

For SO2, section 192(a) requires that 

attainment plans provide for attainment 

of the primary standard as expeditiously 

as possible, but no later than five years 

from the date of the nonattainment 

designation. The EPA designated the 

Allegheny County NAA as 

nonattainment on August 5, 2013, with 

an attainment date of October 4, 2018. 

However, because the EPA is reviewing 

a redesignation request under section 

107(d)(3)(E), rather than a determination 

of attainment under section 179(c), the 

determination of whether the Area 

attained by the attainment date set forth 

in section 192 is not applicable to this 

action proposing approval of 

Pennsylvania’s redesignation request. 

Based on the above, the EPA is 

proposing to find that Pennsylvania has 

satisfied the applicable requirements for 

the redesignation of the Allegheny 

County NAA under section 110 and part 

D of title I of the CAA. 

III. Environmental Justice Concerns 

Within its redesignation request and 

maintenance plan, ACHD provided 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
99798 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

supplemental information regarding 

environmental justice considerations 

within the Allegheny County NAA. 

Utilizing the Environmental Justice 

Index (EJI) tool developed by ACHD’s 

Bureau of Assessment, Statistics, & 

Epidemiology, ACHD identified areas 

within the Allegheny County NAA with 

higher environmental health risks. The 

EJI tool uses Allegheny County-specific 

factors to evaluate environmental justice 

concerns, including the following 

indicators: race, education, median 

household income, housing vacancy, 

lead paint risk, greenness, air quality, 

and flood risk. Six municipalities 

within the Allegheny County NAA were 

designated as ‘‘highest need’’ areas 

according to EJI, while seven other 

municipalities were designated as ‘‘high 

need’’ areas. ACHD has indicated that 

its SO2 monitoring network provides 

enhanced surveillance in vulnerable 

communities, and the two current SO2

monitors in the Allegheny County NAA 

are located within or directly downwind 

of areas labeled as ‘‘highest need.’’ 

Furthermore, ACHD states that the 

controls specified in its 2017 attainment 

demonstration as well as the shutdowns 

denoted in the maintenance 

demonstration illustrate the greatest 

emissions reductions in the ‘‘highest 

need’’ areas. 

As explained in the EJ Legal Tools to 

Advance Environmental Justice 2022 

document, the CAA provides states with 

the discretion to consider 

environmental justice in developing 

rules and measures related to 

redesignation requests and maintenance 

plans. In this instance, ACHD exercised 

this discretion, as is described above in 

summary. In reviewing ACHD’s 

analysis, the EPA defers to ACHD’s 

reasonable exercise of its discretion in 

considering EJ in this way. The EPA is 

taking proposed action to approve the 

SIP revision because it meets minimum 

requirements pursuant to the CAA and 

relevant implementing regulations. The 

EPA also finds that ACHD’s 

consideration of EJ analyses in this 

context is reasonable. The EPA 

encourages air agencies generally to 

evaluate environmental justice 

considerations of their actions and 

carefully consider impacts to 

communities. The EJ analyses submitted 

by the air agency were considered but 

were not the basis for the EPA’s 

decision making and the SIP met the 

minimum applicable requirements, as 

explained above. 

IV. Proposed Action 

The EPA’s review of this material 

indicates that the Allegheny County 

NAA has met the criteria necessary 

under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the 

EPA to redesignate the Area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS. The 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

Pennsylvania redesignation request for 

the Allegheny County NAA, which was 

submitted on behalf of ACHD on 

November 14, 2023. Final approval of 

Pennsylvania’s redesignation request 

would change the legal designation of 

the portion of Allegheny County 

designated nonattainment at 40 CFR 

81.339 to attainment for the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS. The EPA is also 

proposing to approve ACHD’s 

maintenance plan, which is designed to 

ensure that the potentially redesignated 

Allegheny County NAA will continue to 

maintain the SO2 NAAQS. The 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 redesignation of 

an area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of the 

maintenance plan under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

required by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

impose any new requirements, but 

rather results in the application of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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); and 

• 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 Clean Air Act; 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. The EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA 

further defines the term fair treatment to 

mean that ‘‘no group of people should 

bear a disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

ACHD evaluated environmental 

justice considerations as part of its SIP 

submittal even though the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require an 

evaluation. The EPA’s evaluation of 

ACHD’s environmental justice 

considerations is described above in the 

section titled, ‘‘Environmental Justice 

Considerations.’’ The analysis was done 

for the purpose of providing additional 

context and information about this 

rulemaking to the public, not as a basis 

of the action. The EPA is taking action 

under the CAA on bases independent of 

ACHD’s evaluation of environmental 

justice. Due to the nature of the action 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2024 / Proposed Rules 99799 

1CEQ, Freedom of Information Act Procedures; 

Final Rule, 42 FR 65158 (Dec. 30, 1977). 

2CEQ, Revision of Freedom of Information Act 

Regulations, 75 FR 48585 (Sept. 10, 2010). 

3Template for Agency FOIA Regulations 

(February 22, 2017), https://www.justice.gov/oip/ 

template-agency-foia-regulations. 

4See, e.g., E.O. 13563, Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review, (Jan. 18, 2011) (‘‘regulations 

[must be] accessible, consistent, written in plain 

language, and easy to understand’’), 76 FR 3821 

(Jan. 21, 2011). 

5Federal Plain Language Guidelines (1st rev. May 

2011), https://www.plainlanguage.gov/media/

FederalPLGuidelines.pdf. 

6 Department of Justice, Freedom of Information 

Act Guidelines (March 15, 2022), https://

www.justice.gov/media/1212566/dl. 

being taken here, this action is expected 

to have a neutral to positive impact on 

the air quality of the affected area. In 

addition, there is no information in the 

record upon which this decision is 

based that is inconsistent with the 

stated goal of Executive Order 12898 of 

achieving environmental justice for 

people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

In addition, this proposed 

rulemaking, for the redesignation and 

approval of the maintenance plan for 

the Allegheny County NAA, 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 the EPA notes 

that it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Adam Ortiz, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2024–28536 Filed 12–10–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY 

40 CFR Parts 1515 and 1516 

[CEQ–2024–001] 

RIN 0331–AA02 

Freedom of Information Act and 

Privacy Act Regulations 

AGENCY: Council on Environmental 

Quality. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) is 

proposing to amend its Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) regulations to 

incorporate amendments to the FOIA set 

forth in the FOIA Improvement Act of 

2016; to conform to guidance for Federal 

agencies from the Department of Justice; 

to make them easier for the public to 

understand and use; and to better reflect 

CEQ’s current policy and practice. 

These proposed regulations reaffirm 

CEQ’s commitment to providing the 

fullest possible disclosure of records to 

the public. In addition, CEQ is 

proposing to amend its regulations 

implementing the Privacy Act of 1974 

(the Privacy Act) to make them easier 

for the public to understand and use 

and to better reflect CEQ’s current 

policy and practice. The proposed 

regulations would also make 

administrative changes, including 

reorganizing, renumbering, and 

renaming the sections of CEQ’s current 

FOIA and Privacy Act regulations. 

DATES: Send comments on or before 

January 10, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number [CEQ– 

2024–0001], by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Visit 

https://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Fax: 202–456–6546. 

• Mail: Council on Environmental 

Quality, 730 Jackson Place NW, 

Washington, DC 20503. 

Instructions: Your submission must 

include the agency name, ‘‘Council on 

Environmental Quality,’’ and the docket 

number for this rulemaking, [CEQ– 

2024–0001]. CEQ will post your 

comment without change, including any 

personal information you provide, to 

https://www.regulations.gov. Do not 

submit any information you consider to 

be private information, privileged or 

confidential commercial or financial 

information, or other information the 

disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. 

Docket: For access to the docket, visit 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Samuel Roth, Associate General 

Counsel, 202–395–5750, 

Samuel.E.Roth@ceq.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. The FOIA 

The FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552, provides a 

right of access to certain records that 

Federal agencies maintain and control. 

The FOIA directs each Federal agency to 

publish regulations that describe how 

the agency will process FOIA requests it 

receives from members of the public. 

CEQ first adopted its FOIA 

regulations in 1977.1 In 2010, CEQ 

amended its regulation to reflect 

legislative amendments to the FOIA, a 

2009 Presidential Memorandum 

regarding FOIA policy, and additional 

guidance from the Department of Justice 

(DOJ) and the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB).2 CEQ’s current FOIA 

regulation is codified at 40 CFR part 

1515. 

CEQ is proposing to revise and 

republish its FOIA regulation in its 

entirety in order to make several 

improvements to the current rule. First, 

CEQ is proposing updates to reflect a 

number of important changes to the 

FOIA made by the FOIA Improvement 

Act of 2016 (Pub. L. 114–185). Section 

3(a) of the Act directs each agency to 

review its FOIA regulations and update 

them to implement the changes set forth 

in the Act. Second, CEQ is proposing to 

include a number of provisions to 

improve the usefulness and readability 

of its FOIA regulations consistent with 

DOJ’s 2017 revised Template for Agency 

Regulations (the Template).3 CEQ 

modeled this proposed rule on the 

Template, which also incorporates the 

FOIA Improvement Act of 2016’s 

amendments to the FOIA. 

Third, CEQ is proposing updates to 

better convey the FOIA’s and CEQ’s 

requirements to members of the public 

who are interested in CEQ’s operations 

and activities, so they can easily 

understand and use CEQ’s FOIA 

process.4 Specifically, CEQ referred to 

the Plain Writing Act of 2010 and the 

Federal Plain Language Guidelines 5 in 

preparing the proposed rule. 

Finally, the proposed rule reflects 

updates to CEQ’s FOIA policies and 

procedures, as well as the practical 

experience of CEQ’s FOIA staff. As it 

does under its current regulations, CEQ 

would administer the FOIA under the 

proposed regulations with a 

presumption of openness, consistent 

with the Memorandum of the Attorney 

General dated March 15, 2022.6

B. The Privacy Act 

The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, 

governs each Federal agency’s 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1