[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5103-5104]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01732]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12796-004]

City of Wadsworth, Ohio; Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment

January 23, 2015.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 380 (Order No.
486, 52 Federal Register [FR] 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed the application for a major original license for the 50-
megawatt Robert C. Byrd Hydroelectric Project (RC

Byrd Project or project), located on the Ohio River at the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dam (RC Byrd Locks
and Dam), approximately 12.7 miles south of the confluence of the Ohio
River and the Kanawha River, 9 miles south of the Town of Gallipolis,
Gallia County, Ohio, and prepared a Final Environmental Assessment
(FEA) for the project. The proposed project would occupy 7.6 acres of
federal land administered by the Corps.
    The FEA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental
impacts of the proposed project and concludes that licensing the
proposed project, with appropriate environmental protective measures,
would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly
affect the quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the FEA is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
202-502-8659.
    You may also register online at www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    For further information, contact Gaylord Hoisington by telephone at
202-502-6032 or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01732 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1755]
[DOCID:fr13ja09-115]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2009-04]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATE: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before January 23, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2008-
0743 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria G. Delgado, ANM-113, (425) 227-
2775, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Ave., SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; or Ralen Gao, ARM-200,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAA,
Office of Rulemaking, 800 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 7, 2009.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2008-0743.
    Petitioner: L-3 Communications Integrated Systems.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 26.47.
    Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner requests an exemption
from the requirements of Sec.  26.47 for several Boeing Model 727, 747,
and 747SP airplanes and McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-32 (VC-9C) and DC-
9-32F (C-9A, C-9B) airplanes, modified in accordance with certain
supplemental type certificates (STCs). Section 26.47 requires holders
of, and applicants for, an STC to develop damage tolerance data for
airplane alterations and repairs. Section 26.47 is intended to apply to
airplanes operating under parts 121 or 129. The airplanes, which the
petitioner is seeking exemption for, are not currently operating in the
United States under parts 121 or 129, nor is there any plan to do so in
the future.

[FR Doc. E9-383 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 215 (Monday, November 7, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68699-68710]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28765]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton 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
([micro]g/m\3\), the 2006 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ 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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    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 previously-listed 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<PHONE_NUMBER> or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Marilyn Powers at (215) 814-
2308, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton attainment plan
SIP revision?
    A. Attainment Demonstration
    1. Pollutants Addressed
    2. Emission Inventories

    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 [micro]g/m\3\, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standard of 35 [micro]g/m\3\, 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 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a
three year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations and a
24-hour (daily) standard of 65 [micro]g/m\3\ 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 [micro]g/m\3\. At
the same time, it retained the level of the annual PM2.5
standard at 15.0 g/m\3\. 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 [micro]g/m\3\ and annual standard of 15 [micro]g/m\3\,
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 Liberty-Clairton 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

these CAA and regulatory requirements for PM2.5 attainment
plan in more detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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
Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton 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 five-municipality 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 Liberty-Clairton 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
Liberty-Clairton 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

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 Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton 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

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
Liberty-Clairton 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA'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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

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 Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton 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
Liberty-Clairton 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Annual standard                        24-Hour standard
             Monitor             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    2014 Projected        1997 NAAQS        2014 Projected        1997 NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liberty.........................  14.3 [mu]g/m\3\...  15.0 [mu]g/m\3\...  42 [mu]g/m\3\.....  65 [mu]g/m\3\.
Clairton........................  11.8 [mu]g/m\3\...  15.0 [mu]g/m\3\...  27 [mu]g/m\3\.....  65 [mu]g/m\3\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 [mu]g/m\3\ for annual
PM2.5 and 62 [mu]g/m\3\ 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 anti-
idling 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 Liberty-
Clairton 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 [mu]g/m\3\ for the annual
NAAQS and 63 [mu]g/m\3\ 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 [mu]g/
m\3\ and 65 [mu]g/m\3\, 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
Liberty-Clairton 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

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 Liberty-Clairton 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
Liberty-Clairton 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Percent of
                                                                     Benchmark      Cumulative       emission
                    Pollutant                     Milestone year     emissions       emission       reductions
                                                                    (tons/year)     reductions      needed for
                                                                                (tons/year)     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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in section III.A.3 of this proposed rulemaking action,
the control strategy for attainment in the Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                PM2.5 reduction
                                                               PM2.5 2014           PM2.5         (inventory--
                          Process                            inventory value     contingency      contingency)
                                                               (tons/year)      value (tons/      value (tons/
                                                                                year)             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.

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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                MVEBs for
                      Plan submittal                              Year            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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                MVEBs for
                      Plan submittal                              Year            direct PM       MVEBs for NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attainment Plan Demonstration--Annual Standards (Tons/                  2009               1.5              72.7
 Year)....................................................
Attainment Plan Demonstration--Annual Standards (Tons/                  2011               1.4              58.9
 Year)....................................................
Attainment Plan Demonstration--Annual Standards (Tons/                  2012               1.3              52.4
 Year)....................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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
Liberty-Clairton 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 Liberty-Clairton 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.

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 [micro]g/m\3\, the 24-hour standard of 35 [micro]g/m\3\,
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