Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, Alabama: Clean Air Interstate Rule, 48478-48480 [E9-22904]
Download as PDF
48478
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
federalism implications’’ is defined in
the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, because it
merely disapproves certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP
and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9,
2000), because the SIP EPA is proposing
to disapprove would not 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. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Executive
Order has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it is not
an economically significant regulatory
action based on health or safety risks
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This proposed
SIP disapproval under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act
will not in-and-of itself create any new
regulations but simply disapproves
certain State requirements for inclusion
into the SIP.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) because it is not a
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:41 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No.
104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
The EPA believes that this action is
not subject to requirements of Section
12(d) of NTTAA because application of
those requirements would be
inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629
(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority
to address environmental justice in this
proposed action. In reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve or
disapprove state choices, based on the
criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to disapprove certain State
requirements for inclusion into the SIP
under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act and will not inand-of itself create any new
requirements. Accordingly, it 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon Monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 8, 2009.
Lawrence E. Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E9–22806 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2007–0359; FRL–8960–8]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans, Alabama: Clean
Air Interstate Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a portion of the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Alabama, through the Alabama
Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM), on March 7,
2007. This action proposes to approve
the portion of the March 7, 2007,
submittal that addresses State reporting
requirements under the Nitrogen Oxide
(NOX) SIP Call and the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) found in 40 CFR
51.122 and 51.125 as amended by the
CAIR rulemakings. Specifically, in this
action EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to Chapter 335–3–1 ‘‘General
Provisions.’’ In previous rulemakings,
EPA took action on the other portions of
the March 7, 2007, SIP submittal, which
included revisions to Chapters 335–3–5,
and 335–3–8 (October 1, 2007, 72 FR
55659) and Chapter 335–3–17 (March
26, 2009, 74 FR 13118). Although the
DC Circuit Court found CAIR to be
flawed, the rule was remanded without
vacatur and thus remains in place.
Thus, EPA is continuing to approve
CAIR provisions into SIPs as
appropriate. CAIR, as promulgated,
requires States to reduce emissions of
sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOX that
significantly contribute to, or interfere
with maintenance of, the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
for fine particulates and/or ozone in any
downwind state. CAIR establishes
budgets for SO2 and NOX for States that
contribute significantly to
E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM
23SEP1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
nonattainment in downwind States and
requires the significantly contributing
States to submit SIP revisions that
implement these budgets. States have
the flexibility to choose which control
measures to adopt to achieve the
budgets, including participation in EPAadministered cap-and-trade programs
addressing SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions. This action is
being taken pursuant to section 110 of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before October 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2007–0359, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
3. Fax: 404–562–9019.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2007–
0359,’’ Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms.
Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2007–
0359.’’ EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
https://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
through https://www.regulations.gov or
e-mail, information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:40 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
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. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street,
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9042.
Ms. Harder can also be reached via
electronic mail at harder.stacy@epa.gov.
For information pertaining to the
Alabama State SIP, please contact Mr.
Zuri Farngalo, by phone at (404) 562–
9152, or electronic mail at
farngalo.zuri@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR?
III. What Is EPA’s Analysis of Alabama’s
Submission?
IV. Proposed Action
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
48479
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To
Take?
EPA is proposing to approve a SIP
revision submitted by ADEM, on March
7, 2007, pertaining to rules for CAIR.
The revisions include changes to
Chapter 335–3–1 ‘‘General Provisions.’’
Specifically, ADEM is amending Section
335–3–1–.14 ‘‘Emissions Reporting
Requirements Relating to Budgets for
NOx Emissions,’’ and adding a new
Section 335–3–1–.16 ‘‘Emissions
Reporting Requirements Relating to
Budgets for SO2 and NOX Emissions.’’
These revisions became State effective
on April 3, 2007.
II. What Is the Regulatory History of
CAIR?
EPA published CAIR on May 12, 2005
(70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA
determined that 28 States and the
District of Columbia contribute
significantly to nonattainment and
interfere with maintenance of the
NAAQS for fine particles (PM2.5) and/or
8-hour ozone in downwind States in the
eastern part of the country. As a result,
EPA required those upwind States to
revise their SIPs to include control
measures that reduce emissions of SO2,
which is a precursor to PM2.5 formation,
and/or NOX, which is a precursor to
both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For
jurisdictions that contribute
significantly to downwind PM2.5
nonattainment, CAIR sets annual Statewide emission reduction requirements
(i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual Statewide emission reduction requirements
for NOX. Similarly, for jurisdictions that
contribute significantly to 8-hour ozone
nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide
emission reduction requirements or
budgets for NOX for the ozone season
(May 1st to September 30th). Under
CAIR, States may implement these
reduction requirements by participating
in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs or by adopting any other
control measures.
EPA was sued by a number of parties
on various aspects of CAIR, and on July
11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit issued
its decision to vacate and remand both
CAIR and the associated CAIR Federal
Implementation Plans (FIP) in their
entirety. North Carolina v. EPA, 531
F.3d 836 (DC Cir. Jul. 11, 2008).
However, in response to EPA’s petition
for rehearing, the Court issued an order
remanding CAIR to EPA without
vacating either CAIR or the CAIR FIPs.
North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176
(DC Cir. Dec. 23, 2008). The Court
E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM
23SEP1
48480
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules
thereby left CAIR in place in order to
‘‘temporarily preserve the
environmental values covered by CAIR’’
until EPA replaces it with a rule
consistent with the Court’s opinion. Id.
at 1178. The Court directed EPA to
‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’ consistent with
its July 11, 2008, opinion, but declined
to impose a schedule on EPA for
completing that action. Id.
According to 40 CFR 51.125, each
state submitting a CAIR SIP revision
must provide for emissions reporting
requirements of SO2 and NOX emissions
data. EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to Alabama’s Section 335–3–
1–.14 and addition of Section 335–3–1–
.16 to fulfill this requirement.
Consistent with 40 CFR 51.121, these
rule revisions allow the State to make
the transition from the NOX budget
trading program (NOX SIP Call) to the
CAIR NOX ozone season trading
program, beginning with the 2009 ozone
season. Alabama’s NOX budget trading
program does not apply to any ozone
season after the 2008 ozone season.
This proposed action is consistent
with the Court’s decision in North
Carolina v. EPA discussed above. While
the Court identified several issues with
CAIR, the rule was not vacated because
of the loss of environmental benefit
generated by the rule. As EPA works to
remedy CAIR to satisfy the Court, CAIR
remains in effect, including its trading
programs. Currently, Alabama’s NOX
SIP Call trading program ends after the
2008 ozone season, and so to continue
the environmental benefits of the
trading program, consistent with CAIR
and the Court’s opinion, Alabama must
revise its SIP, as proposed, to transition
into the CAIR NOX trading program.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
aforementioned revisions, specifically,
Chapter 335–3–1, Sections 335–3–1–.14,
and 335–3–1–.16 into the Alabama SIP.
These revisions were submitted by
ADEM on March 7, 2007, and are
consistent with EPA regulations, policy,
and guidance.
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
Act 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 proposed
action merely approves state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:41 Sep 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: September 11, 2009.
J. Scott Gordon,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9–22904 Filed 9–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2005–TX–0032; FRL–8958–
6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Texas;
Revisions to the New Source Review
(NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP);
Flexible Permits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing disapproval
of submittals from the State of Texas,
through the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to revise
the Texas SIP to include a new type of
NSR permitting program, Flexible
Permits (the Texas Flexible Permits
State Program or the Program). EPA
proposes disapproval of the Texas
Flexible Permits State Program because
it does not meet the Minor NSR SIP
requirements nor does it meet the NSR
SIP requirements for a substitute Major
NSR SIP revision. We are proposing
action under section 110, part C, and
part D, of the Federal Clean Air Act (the
Act or CAA). EPA is taking comments
on this proposal and intends to take a
final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
November 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2005–TX–0032 by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• U.S. EPA Region 6 ‘‘Contact Us’’
Web site: https://epa.gov/region6/
r6coment.htm. Please click on ‘‘6PD’’
(Multimedia) and select ‘‘Air’’ before
submitting comments.
• E-mail: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell at
spruiell.stanley@epa.gov.
• Fax: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell, Air
Permits Section (6PD–R), at fax number
214–665–7263.
• Mail: Mr. Stanley M. Spruiell, Air
Permits Section (6PD–R), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
• Hand or Courier Delivery: Stanley
M. Spruiell, Air Permits Section (6PD–
R), Environmental Protection Agency,
E:\FR\FM\23SEP1.SGM
23SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 23, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48478-48480]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22904]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0359; FRL-8960-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, Alabama: Clean
Air Interstate Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a portion of the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Alabama,
through the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), on
March 7, 2007. This action proposes to approve the portion of the March
7, 2007, submittal that addresses State reporting requirements under
the Nitrogen Oxide (NOX) SIP Call and the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) found in 40 CFR 51.122 and 51.125 as amended by
the CAIR rulemakings. Specifically, in this action EPA is proposing to
approve revisions to Chapter 335-3-1 ``General Provisions.'' In
previous rulemakings, EPA took action on the other portions of the
March 7, 2007, SIP submittal, which included revisions to Chapters 335-
3-5, and 335-3-8 (October 1, 2007, 72 FR 55659) and Chapter 335-3-17
(March 26, 2009, 74 FR 13118). Although the DC Circuit Court found CAIR
to be flawed, the rule was remanded without vacatur and thus remains in
place. Thus, EPA is continuing to approve CAIR provisions into SIPs as
appropriate. CAIR, as promulgated, requires States to reduce emissions
of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOX that
significantly contribute to, or interfere with maintenance of, the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for fine particulates
and/or ozone in any downwind state. CAIR establishes budgets for
SO2 and NOX for States that contribute
significantly to
[[Page 48479]]
nonattainment in downwind States and requires the significantly
contributing States to submit SIP revisions that implement these
budgets. States have the flexibility to choose which control measures
to adopt to achieve the budgets, including participation in EPA-
administered cap-and-trade programs addressing SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season emissions. This
action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2007-0359, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
3. Fax: 404-562-9019.
4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0359,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2007-0359.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at https://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 through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Stacy Harder, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number
is (404) 562-9042. Ms. Harder can also be reached via electronic mail
at harder.stacy@epa.gov. For information pertaining to the Alabama
State SIP, please contact Mr. Zuri Farngalo, by phone at (404) 562-
9152, or electronic mail at farngalo.zuri@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR?
III. What Is EPA's Analysis of Alabama's Submission?
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
EPA is proposing to approve a SIP revision submitted by ADEM, on
March 7, 2007, pertaining to rules for CAIR. The revisions include
changes to Chapter 335-3-1 ``General Provisions.'' Specifically, ADEM
is amending Section 335-3-1-.14 ``Emissions Reporting Requirements
Relating to Budgets for NOx Emissions,'' and adding a new Section 335-
3-1-.16 ``Emissions Reporting Requirements Relating to Budgets for
SO2 and NOX Emissions.'' These revisions became
State effective on April 3, 2007.
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR?
EPA published CAIR on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA
determined that 28 States and the District of Columbia contribute
significantly to nonattainment and interfere with maintenance of the
NAAQS for fine particles (PM2.5) and/or 8-hour ozone in
downwind States in the eastern part of the country. As a result, EPA
required those upwind States to revise their SIPs to include control
measures that reduce emissions of SO2, which is a precursor
to PM2.5 formation, and/or NOX, which is a
precursor to both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For
jurisdictions that contribute significantly to downwind
PM2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual State-wide emission
reduction requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual
State-wide emission reduction requirements for NOX.
Similarly, for jurisdictions that contribute significantly to 8-hour
ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction
requirements or budgets for NOX for the ozone season (May
1st to September 30th). Under CAIR, States may implement these
reduction requirements by participating in the EPA-administered cap-
and-trade programs or by adopting any other control measures.
EPA was sued by a number of parties on various aspects of CAIR, and
on July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit issued its decision to vacate and remand both CAIR and
the associated CAIR Federal Implementation Plans (FIP) in their
entirety. North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (DC Cir. Jul. 11, 2008).
However, in response to EPA's petition for rehearing, the Court issued
an order remanding CAIR to EPA without vacating either CAIR or the CAIR
FIPs. North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. Dec. 23, 2008). The
Court
[[Page 48480]]
thereby left CAIR in place in order to ``temporarily preserve the
environmental values covered by CAIR'' until EPA replaces it with a
rule consistent with the Court's opinion. Id. at 1178. The Court
directed EPA to ``remedy CAIR's flaws'' consistent with its July 11,
2008, opinion, but declined to impose a schedule on EPA for completing
that action. Id.
According to 40 CFR 51.125, each state submitting a CAIR SIP
revision must provide for emissions reporting requirements of
SO2 and NOX emissions data. EPA is proposing to
approve revisions to Alabama's Section 335-3-1-.14 and addition of
Section 335-3-1-.16 to fulfill this requirement. Consistent with 40 CFR
51.121, these rule revisions allow the State to make the transition
from the NOX budget trading program (NOX SIP
Call) to the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program,
beginning with the 2009 ozone season. Alabama's NOX budget
trading program does not apply to any ozone season after the 2008 ozone
season.
This proposed action is consistent with the Court's decision in
North Carolina v. EPA discussed above. While the Court identified
several issues with CAIR, the rule was not vacated because of the loss
of environmental benefit generated by the rule. As EPA works to remedy
CAIR to satisfy the Court, CAIR remains in effect, including its
trading programs. Currently, Alabama's NOX SIP Call trading
program ends after the 2008 ozone season, and so to continue the
environmental benefits of the trading program, consistent with CAIR and
the Court's opinion, Alabama must revise its SIP, as proposed, to
transition into the CAIR NOX trading program.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the aforementioned revisions,
specifically, Chapter 335-3-1, Sections 335-3-1-.14, and 335-3-1-.16
into the Alabama SIP. These revisions were submitted by ADEM on March
7, 2007, and are consistent with EPA regulations, policy, and guidance.
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 Act 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
proposed 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 11, 2009.
J. Scott Gordon,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9-22904 Filed 9-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P