Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of the Birmingham 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 70091-70105 [2011-29183]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
County in the Birmingham Area for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40
CFR part 81, from nonattainment to
attainment.
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
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
this reason, these proposed actions:
• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory
action[s]’’ subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are 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.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Do 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 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
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 2, 2011.
Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2011–29176 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0043–201110; FRL–
9490–6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of
the Birmingham 2006 24-Hour Fine
Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area
to Attainment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On June 17, 2010, the State of
Alabama, through the Alabama
Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM), Air Division,
submitted a request for EPA to
redesignate the Birmingham fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment
area (hereafter referred to as the
‘‘Birmingham Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS); and to approve a State
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70091
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
containing a maintenance plan for the
Area. The Birmingham 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 nonattainment area is comprised
of Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their
entireties and a portion of Walker
County. EPA is proposing to approve
the redesignation request for the
Birmingham Area, along with the
related SIP revision, including
Alabama’s 2009 emissions inventory for
the Area and Alabama’s plan for
maintaining attainment of the PM2.5
standard in the Area. EPA is also
proposing to approve the motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and PM2.5 for the year
2024 for the Birmingham Area. These
actions are being proposed pursuant to
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and its
implementing regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2011–0043, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0043,
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–2011–
0043. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70092
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
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. 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
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 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.
Joel
Huey of the Regulatory Development
Section, in the Air Planning Branch,
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Joel
Huey may be reached by phone at (404)
562–9104, or via electronic mail at
huey.joel@epa.gov.
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
Table of Contents
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to
take?
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the request?
VI. What is EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s
proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the
Birmingham Area?
VII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy
determination for the proposed NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the
Birmingham area?
VIII. What is EPA’s analysis of the proposed
2009 base year emissions inventory for
the Birmingham area?
IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan SIP
Revision Including Proposed Approval
of the 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for
the Birmingham Area
X. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed
actions?
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is
proposing to take?
EPA is proposing to take the following
three separate but related actions, some
of which involve multiple elements: (1)
To redesignate the Birmingham Area to
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, provided EPA approves the
emissions inventory submitted with the
maintenance plan; (2) to approve, under
CAA section 172(c)(3), the emissions
inventory submitted with the
maintenance plan; and (3) to approve
into the Alabama SIP, under section
175A of the CAA, Alabama’s 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan,
including the associated MVEBs (EPA is
also notifying the public of the status of
EPA’s adequacy determination for the
Birmingham Area MVEBs for the PM2.5
NAAQS). These actions are summarized
below and described in greater detail
throughout this notice of proposed
rulemaking.
First, EPA proposes to determine that,
if EPA finalizes approval of the 2009
baseline emissions inventory for the
Birmingham Area, the Area has met the
requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. In this
action, EPA is proposing to approve a
request to change the legal designation
of Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their
entireties and the designated portion of
Walker County in the Birmingham Area
from nonattainment to attainment for
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As
discussed below, the emissions
inventory is being proposed for
approval today.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s 2009 emissions inventory for
the Birmingham Area (under CAA
section 172(c)(3)). Alabama selected
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2009 as the attainment emissions
inventory year for the Birmingham Area.
This attainment inventory identifies a
level of emissions in the Area that is
sufficient to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and is a current,
comprehensive inventory that meets the
requirements of section 172(c)(3).
Third, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
maintenance plan for the Birmingham
Area as meeting the requirements of
section 175A (such approval being one
of the CAA criteria for redesignation to
attainment status). The recently
promulgated Cross State Air Pollution
Rule (CSAPR),1 requires reductions of
NOX and SO2 associated with power
plants to be permanent and enforceable.
The maintenance plan is designed to
help keep the Birmingham Area in
attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS through 2024. Consistent with
the CAA, the maintenance plan that
EPA is proposing to approve today also
includes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the
year 2024 for the Birmingham Area.
EPA is proposing to approve (into the
Alabama SIP) the 2024 MVEBs that are
included as part of Alabama’s
maintenance plan for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
On a matter related matter to this
third action, EPA is also notifying the
public of the status of EPA’s adequacy
process for the newly-established NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the
Birmingham Area. ADEM submitted
MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 in its original
June 17, 2010, redesignation request. On
May 2, 2011, ADEM submitted
additional revisions to the MVEBs for
the 24-hour redesignation request.2 The
adequacy comment period for the new
Birmingham Area 2024 MVEBs began
on March 24, 2011, with EPA’s posting
of the availability of this submittal on
EPA’s Adequacy Web site (https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/currsips.htm). The adequacy
comment period for these MVEBs closed
on April 25, 2011. No adverse
comments were received during the
adequacy public comment period.
Please see section VII of this proposed
rulemaking for further explanation of
1 See ‘‘Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce
Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and
Ozone in 27 States; Correction of SIP Approvals for
22 States’’ (76 FR 48208, August 8, 2011).
2 On March 2, 2011, ADEM submitted a proposed
revision to the 24-hour NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs
originally submitted on June 17, 2010. The final
MVEBs were submitted on May 2, 2011, with
ADEM’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS redesignation
submittal. A copy of the submittal is included in
the docket for this proposed rulemaking (EPA–R04–
OAR–2011–0043) and can be obtained from the
www.regulations.gov Web site.
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
this process and for more details on the
MVEBs.
Today’s notice of proposed
rulemaking is in response to Alabama’s
June 17, 2010, SIP submittal and
subsequent supplement of May 2, 2011.
Those documents addresses the specific
issues summarized above and the
necessary elements described in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for
redesignation of the Birmingham Area
to attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed actions?
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Fine particle pollution can be emitted
directly or formed secondarily in the
atmosphere. The main precursors of
PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide (SO2), NOX,
ammonia and volatile organic
compounds (VOC). Unless otherwise
noted by the State or EPA, ammonia and
VOCs are presumed to be insignificant
contributors to PM2.5 formation,
whereas SO2 and NOX are presumed to
be significant contributors to PM2.5
formation. Sulfates are a type of
secondary particle formed from SO2
emissions of power plants and
industrial facilities. Nitrates, another
common type of secondary particle, are
formed from NOX emissions of power
plants, automobiles, and other
combustion sources.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated
the first air quality standards for PM2.5.
EPA promulgated an annual standard at
a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter
(mg/m3), based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In
the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated
a 24-hour standard of 65 mg/m3, based
on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On
October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA
retained the annual average NAAQS at
15 mg/m3 but revised the 24-hour
NAAQS to 35 mg/m3, based again on the
3-year average of the 98th percentile of
24-hour concentrations.3 Under EPA
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the
primary and secondary 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the
annual arithmetic mean concentration,
as determined in accordance with 40
CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than
or equal to 35 mg/m3 at all relevant
3 In response to legal challenges of the annual
standard promulgated in 2006, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (DC Circuit) remanded this NAAQS to EPA
for further consideration. See American Farm
Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers
Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (DC Circuit
2009). However, given that the 1997 and 2006
annual NAAQS are essentially identical, attainment
of the 1997 Annual NAAQS would also indicate
attainment of the remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:19 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
monitoring sites in the subject area over
a 3-year period.
On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and
supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 70
FR 19844, EPA designated the
Birmingham Area as nonattainment for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air
quality data for calendar years 2001–
2003. In that action, EPA defined the
1997 PM2.5 Birmingham nonattainment
area to include Jefferson and Shelby
Counties in their entireties and a
portion Walker County. On November
13, 2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA
promulgated designations for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, designating the
Birmingham Area (with the same
boundaries as for the 1997 PM2.5
nonattainment area) as nonattainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
based upon air quality data for calendar
years 2006–2008. That action also
clarified that the Birmingham Area was
classified unclassifiable/attainment for
the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA
did not promulgate designations for the
annual average NAAQS promulgated in
2006 since that NAAQS was essentially
identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. Therefore, the Birmingham
Area is designated nonattainment for
the annual NAAQS promulgated in
1997 and for the 24-hour NAAQS
promulgated in 2006. Today’s action
only addresses the designation for the
24-hour NAAQS promulgated in 2006.
All 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were
designated under subpart 1 of title I,
part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains
the general requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant
governed by a NAAQS and is less
prescriptive than the other subparts of
title I, part D. On April 25, 2007 (72 FR
20664), EPA promulgated its PM2.5
implementation rule, codified at 40 CFR
part 51, subpart Z, in which the Agency
provided guidance for state and Tribal
plans to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS.
This rule, at 40 CFR 51.1004(c),
specifies some of the regulatory impacts
of attaining the NAAQS, as discussed
below.
On May 12, 2005, EPA published the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which
addressed the interstate transport
requirements of the CAA and required
states to significantly reduce SO2 and
NOX emissions from power plants (70
FR 25162). The associated Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs) were
published on April 28, 2006 (71 FR
25328). However, on July 11, 2008, the
DC Circuit Court issued its decision to
vacate and remand both CAIR and the
associated CAIR FIPs in their entirety
(North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836
(DC Cir., 2008)). EPA petitioned for
rehearing, and the Court issued an order
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70093
remanding CAIR to EPA without
vacating either CAIR or the CAIR FIPs
(North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176
(DC Cir., 2008)). The Court left CAIR in
place 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. As a result of
these court rulings, the power plant
emission reductions that resulted solely
from the development, promulgation,
and implementation of CAIR, and the
associated contribution to air quality
improvement that occurred solely as a
result of CAIR in the Birmingham Area
could not be considered to be
permanent.
On August 8, 2011, EPA published
CSAPR in the Federal Register under
the title, ‘‘Federal Implementation Plans
to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27
States; Correction of SIP Approvals for
22 States’’ (76 FR 48208, August 8,
2011) to address interstate transport of
emissions and resulting secondary air
pollutants and to replace CAIR. The
CAIR emission reduction requirements
limit emissions in Alabama and states
upwind of Alabama through 2011, and
CSAPR requires similar or greater
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012
and beyond. The emission reductions
that CSAPR mandates may be
considered to be permanent and
enforceable. In turn, the air quality
improvement in the Birmingham Area
that has resulted from electric
generating units (EGUs) emission
reductions associated with CAIR (as
well as the additional air quality
improvement that would be expected to
result from full implementation of
CSAPR) may also be considered to be
permanent and enforceable. EPA
proposes that the requirement in section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met
because the emission reduction
requirements of CAIR address emissions
through 2011 and EPA has now
promulgated CSAPR which requires
similar or greater reductions in the
relevant areas in 2012 and beyond.
Because the emission reduction
requirements of CAIR are enforceable
through the 2011 control period, and
because CSAPR has now been
promulgated to address the
requirements previously addressed by
CAIR and gets similar or greater
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012
and beyond, EPA is proposing to
determine that the pollutant transport
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70094
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
part of the reductions that led to
attainment in the Birmingham Area can
now be considered permanent and
enforceable. Therefore, EPA proposes to
find that the transport requirement of
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has been
met for the Birmingham Area.
The 3-year ambient air quality data for
2007–2009 indicated no violations of
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Birmingham Area. As a result, on June
17, 2010, Alabama requested
redesignation of the Birmingham Area
to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. The redesignation request
included three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air quality data
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for
2007–2009, indicating that the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS had been achieved
for the Birmingham Area. Under the
CAA, nonattainment areas may be
redesignated to attainment if sufficient,
complete, quality-assured data is
available for the Administrator to
determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements in
section 107(d)(3)(E). From 2007 through
the present, the 24-hour PM2.5 design
values for the Birmingham Area have
declined. While 24-hour PM2.5
concentrations are dependent on a
variety of conditions, the overall
downtrend in PM2.5 concentrations in
the Birmingham Area can be attributed
to the reduction of emissions, as will be
discussed in more detail in section V of
this proposed rulemaking.
III. What are the criteria for
redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation providing the following
criteria are met: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the
applicable NAAQS; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the
area under section 110(k); (3) the
Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and (5) the state containing such
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
area has met all requirements applicable
to the area under section 110 and part
D of title I of the CAA.
EPA has provided guidance on
redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of title I of the
CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 16,
1992, 57 FR 13498, and supplemented
on April 28, 1992, 57 FR 18070) and has
provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following
documents:
1. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’
Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management
Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter
referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni
Memorandum’’);
2. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions
Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act
(CAA) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from
John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, October 28, 1992;
and
3. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR)
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment,’’
Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, October 14, 1994.
IV. Why is EPA proposing these
actions?
On June 17, 2010, the State of
Alabama, through ADEM, requested the
redesignation of the Birmingham Area
to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. EPA’s evaluation indicates that
the Birmingham Area has attained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and meets
the requirements for redesignation set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E), including
the maintenance plan requirements
under section 175A of the CAA. As a
result, EPA is proposing to take the
three related actions summarized in
section I of this notice.
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the
request?
As stated above, in accordance with
the CAA, EPA proposes in today’s
action to: (1) Redesignate the
Birmingham Area to attainment for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2)
approve the Birmingham Area
emissions inventory submitted with the
maintenance plan; and (3) approve into
the Alabama SIP Birmingham’s 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan,
including the associated MVEBs. These
actions are based upon EPA’s
determination that the Birmingham
Area continues to attain the 2006 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met for
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the Birmingham Area, provided EPA
approves the emissions inventory
submitted with the maintenance plan.
The five redesignation criteria provided
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are
discussed in greater detail for the Area
in the following paragraphs of this
section.
Criteria (1)—The Birmingham Area has
attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). EPA is
proposing to determine that the
Birmingham Area continues to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For
PM2.5, an area may be considered to be
attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS if it meets the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and
Appendix N of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring
data. To attain these NAAQS, the 98th
percentile 24-hour concentration, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, Appendix N, is less than or
equal to 35 mg/m3 at all relevant
monitoring sites in the subject area over
a 3-year period. The relevant data must
be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and
recorded in the EPA Air Quality System
(AQS). The monitors generally should
have remained at the same location for
the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
On September 20, 2010, at 75 FR
57186, EPA determined that the
Birmingham Area was attaining the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For that
action EPA reviewed PM2.5 monitoring
data from monitoring stations in the
Birmingham Area for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007–2009. These
data have been quality-assured and are
recorded in AQS. EPA has reviewed
more recent data which indicates that
the Birmingham Area continues to
attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
beyond the submitted 3-year attainment
period of 2007–2009. The 98th
percentiles of the PM2.5 concentrations
for 2007–2010 and the 3-year average of
these values (i.e., design values) are
summarized in Table 1. Data available
to date in AQS for 2011, which have not
yet been certified, indicate the
Birmingham Area continues to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70095
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE BIRMINGHAM 2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 AREA (μG/M3)
98th Percentile 24-hour concentrations
Location
County
Monitor ID
2007
North Birmingham ..............
McAdory .............................
Bruce Shaw Rd. (Providence).
Asheville Road (Leeds) ......
Wylam .................................
Hoover ................................
Pinson High School ............
Corner School Road ...........
Pelham High School ...........
Highland Avenue (Walker
Co.).
3-Year design
values
2008
2009
2010
2007–
2009
2008–
2010
Jefferson ...................
Jefferson ...................
Jefferson ...................
01–073–0023
01–073–1005
01–073–1009
42.8
30.9
31.4
33.5
25.8
27.3
24.4
21.3
22.1
28.7
22.7
18.4
34
26
27
29
23
23
Jefferson ...................
Jefferson ...................
Jefferson ...................
Jefferson ...................
Jefferson ...................
Shelby .......................
Walker .......................
01–073–1010
01–073–2003
01–073–2006
01–073–5002
01–073–5003
01–117–0006
01–127–0002
33.0
37.7
29.8
34.2
32.5
30.9
30.9
24.6
33.5
25.9
26.4
30.0
24.8
24.3
19.1
25.2
20.4
21.3
21.3
21.2
22.1
22.3
25.4
21.6
20.0
18.3
4 20.0
18.8
26
32
25
27
28
26
26
22
28
23
23
23
4 22
22
4 The Pelham High School site did not meet completeness criteria for the third quarter of 2010. However, the maximum third quarter value
from 2008–2010 was 33.6 μg/m3 (which occurred in 2008). If this value were used as the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration for 2010, the 24hour design value for the 2008–2010 period would be 27 μg/m3 and the 2010 design value for the Birmingham Area (from the North Birmingham
site) would be unchanged at 29 μg/m3.
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
The 3-year design value for 2007–
2009 submitted by Alabama for
redesignation of the Birmingham Area is
34 mg/m3, which meets the NAAQS as
described above. Air quality data for
2010 show that the Area continues to
attain the PM2.5 NAAQS, with a 3-year
design value of 29 mg/m3, and that
ambient 24-hour concentrations of PM2.5
continue to decline. As mentioned
above, on September 20, 2010 (75 FR
57186) EPA published a clean data
determination for the Birmingham Area
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In
today’s action, EPA is proposing to
determine that the Area is continuing to
attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA will
not go forward with the redesignation if
the Area does not continue to attain
until the time that EPA finalizes the
redesignation. As discussed in more
detail below, the State of Alabama has
committed to continue monitoring in
this Area in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58.
Criteria (5)—Alabama Has Met All
Applicable Requirements Under Section
110 and Part D of Title I of the CAA;
and Criteria (2)—Alabama Has a Fully
Approved SIP Under Aection 110(k) for
the Birmingham Area
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the state has met
all applicable requirements under
section 110 and part D of title I of the
CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and
that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA proposes
to find that Alabama has met all
applicable SIP requirements for the
Birmingham Area under section 110 of
the CAA (general SIP requirements) for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
purposes of redesignation. Additionally,
EPA proposes to find that the Alabama
SIP satisfies the criterion that it meet
applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under part D
of title I of the CAA (requirements
specific to 2006 24-hour PM2.5
nonattainment areas) in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further,
EPA proposes to determine that the SIP
is fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained which
requirements are applicable to the Area
and, if applicable, that they are fully
approved under section 110(k). SIPs
must be fully approved only with
respect to requirements that were
applicable prior to submittal of the
complete redesignation request.
a. The Birmingham Area Has Met All
Applicable Requirements Under Section
110 and Part D of the CAA
General SIP requirements. Section
110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates
the general requirements for a SIP,
which include enforceable emissions
limitations and other control measures,
means, or techniques; provisions for the
establishment and operation of
appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality; and
programs to enforce the limitations.
General SIP elements and requirements
are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of
title I, part A of the CAA. These
requirements include, but are not
limited to, the following: submittal of a
SIP that has been adopted by the state
after reasonable public notice and
hearing; provisions for establishment
and operation of appropriate procedures
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)) and provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements
(New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs); provisions for air pollution
modeling; and provisions for public and
local agency participation in planning
and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another state. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
states to establish programs to address
the interstate transport of air pollutants
(e.g., NOX SIP Call,5 CAIR,6 and
5 On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued
a NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia
and 22 states to reduce emissions of NOX in order
to reduce the transport of ozone and ozone
precursors. In compliance with EPA’s NOX SIP Call,
Alabama developed rules governing the control of
NOX emissions from EGUs, major non-EGU
industrial boilers, major cement kilns, and internal
combustion engines. On December 27, 2002, EPA
approved Alabama’s rules as fulfilling Phase I (67
FR 78987).
6 On May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), EPA
promulgated CAIR, which required 28 upwind
States and the District of Columbia to revise their
SIPs to include control measures that would reduce
emissions of SO2 and NOX. Various aspects of CAIR
rule were petitioned in court and on December 23,
2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit remanded CAIR to EPA (see
Alabama v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Circuit,
December 23, 2008)), which left CAIR in place to
‘‘temporarily preserve the environmental values
covered by CAIR’’ until EPA replaces it with a rule
consistent with the Court’s ruling. The Court
directed EPA to remedy various areas of the rule
that were petitioned consistent with its July 11,
2008 (see Alabama v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (DC
Circuit, July 11, 2008)), opinion, but declined to
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
Continued
10NOP1
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70096
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
CSAPR). The section 110(a)(2)(D)
requirements for a state are not linked
with a particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
classifications are the relevant measures
to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of
the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, EPA does not
believe that the CAA’s interstate
transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation. However,
as discussed later in this notice,
addressing pollutant transport from
other states is an important part of an
area’s maintenance demonstration.
In addition, EPA believes other
section 110 elements that are neither
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions nor linked with an area’s
attainment status are applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be
subject to these requirements after the
area is redesignated. The section 110
and part D requirements which are
linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
approach is consistent with EPA’s
existing policy on applicability (i.e., for
redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well
as with section 184 ozone transport
requirements. See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176,
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio,
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December
7, 1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio,
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR
50399, October 19, 2001).
EPA has not yet completed
rulemaking on a submittal from
Alabama dated September 23, 2009,
addressing ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
elements required under CAA section
110(a)(2). However, these are statewide
requirements that are not a consequence
of the nonattainment status of the
Birmingham Area. As stated above, EPA
believes that section 110 elements not
impose a schedule on EPA for completing that
action. Id. Therefore, CAIR is currently in effect in
Alabama.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
linked to an area’s nonattainment status
are not applicable for purposes of
redesignation. Therefore,
notwithstanding the fact that EPA has
not yet completed rulemaking on
Alabama’s submittal for the PM2.5
infrastructure SIP elements of section
110(a)(2), EPA believes it has approved
all SIP elements under section 110 that
must be approved as a prerequisite for
redesignating the Birmingham Area to
attainment.
Title I, Part D requirements. EPA
proposes that if EPA approves
Alabama’s base year emissions
inventory, which is part of the
maintenance plan submittal, the
Alabama SIP will meet applicable SIP
requirements under part D of the CAA.
As discussed in greater detail below,
EPA believes the emissions inventory is
approvable because the 2009 direct
PM2.5, SO2, and NOX emissions for
Alabama were developed consistent
with EPA guidance for emission
inventories and represent a
comprehensive, accurate and current
inventory as required by CAA section
172(c)(3).
Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP
requirements. EPA has determined that
if the approval of the base year
emissions inventory, discussed in
section VIII of this rulemaking, is
finalized, the Alabama SIP will meet the
applicable SIP requirements for the
Birmingham Area for purposes of
redesignation under title I, part D of the
CAA. Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the
basic nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas.
All areas that were designated
nonattainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under
this subpart of the CAA and the
requirements applicable to them are
contained in sections 172 and 176.
For purposes of evaluating this
redesignation request, the applicable
part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for
all nonattainment areas are contained in
sections 172(c)(1)–(9) and in section
176. A thorough discussion of the
requirements contained in section 172
can be found in the General Preamble
for Implementation of title I (57 FR
13498, April 16, 1992).
Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements.
Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for
all nonattainment areas to provide for
the implementation of all Reasonable
Available Control Measures (RACM) as
expeditiously as practicable and to
provide for attainment of the national
primary ambient air quality standards.
EPA interprets this requirement to
impose a duty on all nonattainment
areas to consider all available control
measures and to adopt and implement
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
such measures as are reasonably
available for implementation in each
area as components of the area’s
attainment demonstration. Under
section 172, states with nonattainment
areas must submit plans providing for
timely attainment and meeting a variety
of other requirements. However,
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c), EPA’s
September 20, 2010, determination that
the Birmingham area was attaining the
24-hour PM2.5 standard suspended
Alabama’s obligation to submit most of
the attainment planning requirements
that would otherwise apply.
Specifically, the determination of
attainment suspended Alabama’s
obligation to submit an attainment
demonstration and planning SIPs to
provide for reasonable further progress
(RFP), reasonable available control
measures, and contingency measures
under section 172(c)(9).
The General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992) also discusses the
evaluation of these requirements in the
context of EPA’s consideration of a
redesignation request. The General
Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of
applicable requirements for purposes of
evaluating redesignation requests when
an area is attaining a standard (General
Preamble for Implementation of Title I
(57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)).
Because attainment has been reached
in the Birmingham Area, no additional
measures are needed to provide for
attainment, and section 172(c)(1)
requirements for an attainment
demonstration and RACM are no longer
considered to be applicable for purposes
of redesignation as long as the Area
continues to attain the standard until
redesignation. See also 40 CFR
51.1004(c).
The RFP plan requirement under
section 172(c)(2) is defined as progress
that must be made toward attainment.
This requirement is not relevant for
purposes of redesignation because EPA
has determined that the Birmingham
Area has monitored attainment of the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See
General Preamble, 57 FR 13564. See
also 40 CFR 51.1004(c). In addition,
because the Birmingham Area has
attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
and is no longer subject to a RFP
requirement, the requirement to submit
the section 172(c)(9) contingency
measures is not applicable for purposes
of redesignation. Id.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
and approval of a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual
emissions. As part of Alabama’s
redesignation request for the
Birmingham Area, Alabama submitted a
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
2009 base year emissions inventory. As
discussed below in section VIII, EPA is
proposing to approve the 2009 base year
inventory submitted with the
redesignation request as meeting the
section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory
requirement.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the
identification and quantification of
emissions for major new and modified
stationary sources to be allowed in an
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires
source permits for the construction and
operation of new and modified major
stationary sources anywhere in the
nonattainment area. EPA has
determined that, since PSD
requirements will apply after
redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement
that a NSR program be approved prior
to redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more
detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ Alabama
has demonstrated that the Birmingham
Area will be able to maintain the
NAAQS without part D NSR in effect,
and therefore Alabama need not have
fully approved part D NSR programs
prior to approval of the redesignation
request. Nonetheless, Alabama currently
has a fully-approved part D NSR
program in place. Alabama’s PSD
program will become effective in the
Birmingham Area upon redesignation to
attainment. Section 172(c)(6) requires
the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of
the NAAQS. Because attainment has
been reached, no additional measures
are needed to provide for attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA
believes the Alabama SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)
applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
Section 176 Conformity
Requirements. Section 176(c) of the
CAA requires states to establish criteria
and procedures to ensure that federally
supported or funded projects conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to
transportation plans, programs and
projects that are developed, funded or
7 CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to
submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain
Federal criteria and procedures for determining
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
approved under title 23 of the United
States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal
Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federally
supported or funded projects (general
conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be
consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation,
enforcement and enforceability that EPA
promulgated pursuant to its authority
under the CAA.
EPA interprets the conformity SIP
requirements 7 as not applying for
purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request under section 107(d) because
state conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and Federal
conformity rules apply where state rules
have not been approved. See Wall v.
EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)
(upholding this interpretation); see also
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Tampa, Florida). Thus,
the Birmingham Area has satisfied all
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation under section 110 and
part D of title I of the CAA.
70097
that since the part D subpart 1
requirements did not become due prior
to submission of the redesignation
request, they are also not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375
F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); 68 FR 25424,
25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of
the St. Louis-East St. Louis Area to
attainment of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS). With the approval of the
emissions inventory, EPA will have
approved all part D subpart 1
requirements applicable for purposes of
this redesignation.
b. The Birmingham Area Has a Fully
Approved Applicable SIP Under Section
110(k) of the CAA
If EPA issues a final approval of the
base year emissions inventory, EPA will
have fully approved the applicable
Alabama SIP for the Birmingham 2006
24-hour PM2.5 nonattainment area under
section 110(k) of the CAA for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (see Calcagni
Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir.
1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any
additional measures it may approve in
conjunction with a redesignation action
(see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and
citations therein). Following passage of
the CAA of 1970, Alabama has adopted
and submitted, and EPA has fully
approved at various times, provisions
addressing the various 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS SIP elements applicable
in the Birmingham Area (May 31, 1972,
37 FR 10842; July 13, 2011, 76 FR
41100).
As indicated above, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements that are neither
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions nor linked to an area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. In addition, EPA believes
Criteria (3)—The Air Quality
Improvement in the Birmingham 2006
24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment
Area Is Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
Resulting From Implementation of the
SIP and Applicable Federal Air
Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the air quality
improvement in the area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP and
applicable Federal air pollution control
regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA believes that
Alabama has demonstrated that the
observed air quality improvement in the
Birmingham Area is due to permanent
and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other state
adopted measures.
State, local and Federal measures
enacted in recent years have resulted in
permanent emission reductions. Most of
these emission reductions are
enforceable through regulations. A few
non-regulatory measures also result in
emission reductions.
The state and local measures that
have been implemented to date and
relied upon by Alabama to demonstrate
attainment and/or maintenance include
local NOX controls on cement plants in
the Area due to the 8-hour ozone
contingency plan, Jefferson and Shelby
County burn bans, and voluntary onroad and off-road diesel retrofit projects.
As shown in Table 2, local reasonably
available control technology (RACT) PM
controls installed in the Birmingham
Area have reduced direct PM2.5
emissions by approximately 62 tons per
year (tpy) as of the end of 2009. These
transportation conformity. Transportation
conformity SIPs are different from the MVEBs that
are established in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70098
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
controls are associated with the
Birmingham Annual PM2.5 Attainment
Demonstration SIP, submitted to EPA on
March 13, 2009.
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF RACT CONTROLS IN THE BIRMINGHAM AREA
Facility
Source
W.J. Bullock ..................................
McWane Pipe ................................
Sloss Industries .............................
American Cast Iron Pipe ...............
Crucible furnaces .........................
Charge handling area ..................
Coal piles .....................................
Charge make-up ..........................
Roads & process areas ...............
Cupola melting furnace ................
PM2.5 reduction
(tpy)
RACT controls
Nucor Steel ...................................
Sand & cement silos ....................
Meltshop fugitives ........................
U.S. Pipe .......................................
Cupola charge make-up ..............
Sand & cement silos ....................
Baghouse .....................................
Wet suppression ..........................
Wet suppression ..........................
Wet suppression ..........................
Paving ..........................................
New Cupola/Bag house & spray
suppression.
Baghouse .....................................
Baghouse & physical improvements.
Wet suppression ..........................
Bin vents ......................................
Total .......................................
......................................................
......................................................
In addition, closures of certain
facilities have resulted in continued
reductions of local PM2.5 emissions in
the Birmingham Area. In late 2009, W.J.
Bullock and Sloss Mineral Wool in
Jefferson County announced plans to
cease operations, resulting in additional
PM2.5 emission reductions of 0.13 tpy
and 130 tpy, respectively. In March
2010, U.S. Pipe ceased production,
resulting in an additional emission
reduction of 46 tpy of PM2.5. In total, the
RACT controls and facility closures
amount to reductions of greater than
eight percent of direct PM2.5 point
source emissions in Jefferson County.
Furthermore, control equipment
installed at utilities in the Birmingham
Area have decreased emissions of NOX
and SO2. These reductions, prompted by
the NOX SIP Call and CAIR, are
summarized in Table 3 below. In 2007,
flue gas desulfurization systems were
added to units 8–10 of Alabama Power
Installation date
3.891
0.385
0.398
11.91
3.58
5.84
2009
2008
2008
2008
2007/2008
2007/2008
0.09
28.1
2008
2008
1.818
5.93
2008
2008
61.942
............................
Company’s (APC) Gorgas Plant in
anticipation of CAIR. Selective catalytic
reduction (SCR) systems were installed
on units 3 and 4 at APC Miller Plant in
2003 as a result of the NOX SIP Call,
with a consent decree requiring year
round operation beginning in 2008 in
preparation for CAIR. The year round
SCR operation requirements have been
incorporated into the facilities’ title V
operating permits and are thus
enforceable.
TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS AND CONTROLS AT UTILITIES IN THE BIRMINGHAM AREA 8
Date control installed
Emissions reductions from
2006–2009 (tpy)
Facility
NOX
SO2
NOX
SO2
Miller Unit 3 .........................................................................................................
Miller Unit 4 .........................................................................................................
Gorgas Unit 8 ......................................................................................................
Gorgas Unit 9 ......................................................................................................
Gorgas Unit 10 ....................................................................................................
Gaston Unit 5 * ....................................................................................................
2008
2008
................
................
................
................
................
................
2007
2007
2007
2010
4,680
3,786
................
................
................
................
................
................
10,007
9,975
40,779
43,579
71
70
96
96
97
78
Total Reductions ...................................................................................................
................
................
8,466
104,341
................
APC
APC
APC
APC
APC
APC
Percent
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
* Gaston Unit 5 data reflects reductions from 2006–2010.
The Federal measures that have been
implemented include the following:
Tier 2 vehicle standards. In addition
to requiring NOX controls, the Tier 2
rule reduced the allowable sulfur
content of gasoline to 30 parts per
million (ppm) starting in January of
2006. Most gasoline sold in North
Carolina prior to this had a sulfur
content of approximately 300 ppm.
Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel
highway vehicle standards. The second
8 Data in Tables 3 and 4 reflect reported actual
emissions from the Clean Air Markets Division
Database https://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/
index.cfm?fuseaction=emissions.wizard.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
phase of the standards and testing
procedures, which began in 2007,
reduces particulate matter (PM) and
NOX from heavy-duty highway engines
and also reduces highway diesel fuel
sulfur content to 15 ppm. The total
program is expected to achieve a 90 and
95 percent reduction in PM and NOX
emissions from heavy-duty highway
engines, respectively.
Nonroad spark-ignition engines and
recreational engines standards. Tier 1 of
this standard, implemented in 2004, and
Tier 2, implemented in 2007, have
reduced and will continue to reduce PM
emissions.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Large nonroad diesel engine
standards. Promulgated in 2004, this
rule is being phased in between 2008
and 2014. This rule will reduce sulfur
content in nonroad diesel fuel and,
when fully implemented, will reduce
NOX and direct PM2.5 emissions by over
90 percent from these engines.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), EPA issued a NOX SIP
Call requiring the District of Columbia
and 22 states to reduce emissions of
NOX. Affected states were required to
comply with Phase I of the SIP Call
beginning in 2004, and Phase II
beginning in 2007. Emission reductions
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
resulting from regulations developed in
response to the NOX SIP Call are
permanent and enforceable.
CAIR and CSAPR. As previously
discussed, the remanded CAIR,
originally promulgated to reduce
transported pollution, was left in place
to ‘‘temporarily preserve the
environmental values covered by CAIR’’
until EPA replaced it with a rule
consistent with the Court’s opinion. To
remedy CAIR’s flaws, EPA promulgated
the final CSAPR on August 8, 2011.
CSAPR addresses the interstate
transport requirements of the CAA with
respect to the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5
and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As noted
previously, the requirements of CAIR
address emissions through the 2011
control period and CSAPR requires
similar or greater emission reductions in
the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond.
Because PM2.5 concentrations in the
Birmingham area are impacted by the
transport of sulfates and nitrates, the
area’s air quality is affected by
regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions
from power plants. Table 4, below,
70099
presents statewide EGU emissions data
compiled by EPA’s Clean Air Markets
Division for the years 2002 and 2009.
Emissions for 2009 reflect
implementation of CAIR. Table 4 shows
that Alabama and states impacting the
Birmingham Area for the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, as indicated in CSAPR,
reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from
EGUs by 1,173,566 tpy and 2,425,474
tpy, respectively, between 2002 and
2009.
TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2002 AND 2009 STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES IMPACTING
THE BIRMINGHAM AREA 8
NOX
State
2002
2009
SO2
Net change
2002–2009
2002
2009
Net change
2002–2009
161,559
146,456
281,146
198,599
370,497
200,909
155,996
225,371
49,609
57,566
110,969
78,767
95,785
110,239
27,912
36,120
¥111,950
¥88,890
¥170,177
¥119,832
¥274,712
¥90,670
¥128,084
¥189,251
448,248
512,654
778,868
482,653
1,132,069
889,766
336,995
507,110
277,972
262,258
413,726
252,002
600,687
573,619
108,042
174,583
¥170,276
¥250,396
¥365,142
¥230,651
¥531,382
¥316,147
¥228,953
¥332,527
Total ..............................................................
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Alabama ...............................................................
Georgia ................................................................
Indiana .................................................................
Kentucky ..............................................................
Ohio ......................................................................
Pennsylvania ........................................................
Tennessee ...........................................................
West Virginia ........................................................
1,740,533
566,967
¥1,173,566
5,088,363
2,662,889
¥2,425,474
As was noted earlier, EPA
promulgated CSAPR to address
interstate transport of emissions and
resulting secondary air pollutants and to
replace CAIR. CAIR, among other
things, required emission reductions
that contributed to the air quality
improvement in the Birmingham Area.
CSAPR requires substantial reductions
of SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs
across most of the Eastern United States,
with implementation beginning on
January 1, 2012. CAIR will continue to
be implemented through 2011, and will
be replaced by CSAPR beginning in
2012. CSAPR requires reductions of
NOX and SO2 emissions to levels below
the levels that led to attainment of the
1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard in the
Birmingham Area. Given the remanded
status of CAIR, this air quality
improvement could not be considered
permanent at the time ADEM submitted
its request for redesignation of the
Birmingham Area. However, since that
time CSAPR has been finalized, which
mandates even greater reductions than
have already occurred under CAIR and,
more importantly, more reductions than
are needed to maintain the standard in
the Area. The reductions of EGU
emissions of SO2 and NOX contributed
to the air quality improvement in the
Birmingham Area. Therefore, the final
promulgation of CSAPR in combination
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:19 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
with the other measures cited by
Alabama and described above, ensure
that the emission reductions that led the
Area to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS can be considered permanent
and enforceable for purposes of section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii).
Criteria (4)—The Birmingham Area Has
a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the area has a
fully approved maintenance plan
pursuant to section 175A of the CAA
(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In
conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Birmingham Area to
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, ADEM submitted a SIP
revision to provide for the maintenance
of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for at
least 10 years after the effective date of
redesignation to attainment. EPA
believes this maintenance plan meets
the requirements for approval under
section 175A of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance
plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after the Administrator approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, the State must
submit a revised maintenance plan
which demonstrates that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the 10
years following the initial 10-year
period. To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future 2006 24-hour PM2.5
violations. The Calcagni Memorandum
provides further guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan,
explaining that a maintenance plan
should address five requirements: The
attainment emissions inventory,
maintenance demonstration,
monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan. As
is discussed more fully below, EPA
finds that Alabama’s maintenance plan
includes all the necessary components
and is thus proposing to approve it as
a revision to the Alabama SIP.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
The Birmingham Area attained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on
monitoring data for the 3-year period
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70100
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
from 2007–2009. Alabama selected 2009
as the attainment emissions inventory
year. The attainment inventory
identifies a level of emissions in the
Area that is sufficient to attain the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Alabama began
development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline
emissions inventory for the Birmingham
Area. As noted above, the year 2009 was
chosen as the base year for developing
a comprehensive emissions inventory
for direct PM2.5 and the primary PM2.5
precursors, SO2 and NOX, for which
projected emissions could be developed
for 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021, and 2024.
ADEM used actual point source
emissions data for 2009 for all sources
in Jefferson County and a majority of
sources in Shelby County. The Visibility
Improvement—State and Tribal
Association of the Southeast (VISTAS)
projected 2009 emissions were used
only where actual emissions were
unavailable. The projected inventory
included with the maintenance plan
estimates emissions forward to 2024,
which is beyond the 10-year interval
required in section 175A of the CAA. In
addition to comparing the final year of
the plan, 2024, to the base year, 2009,
Alabama compared interim years to the
baseline to demonstrate that these years
are also expected to show continued
maintenance of the 24-hour PM2.5
standard. On March 7, 2011, at the
request of EPA, ADEM submitted a
letter in support of the June 17, 2010,
redesignation request. The letter
contains revisions to emissions data in
Tables 4.3–1, 4.3–2, and 4.3–3 of the
redesignation request to correct
administrative errors and a clarification
on how the 2009 point source inventory
was developed. A copy of the letter is
included in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking (EPA–R04–OAR–2011–
0043) and can be obtained from the
www.regulations.gov Web site.
The emissions inventory is composed
of four major types of sources: Point,
area, on-road mobile and non-road
mobile. The future year emissions
inventories have been estimated using
projected rates of growth in population,
traffic, economic activity, expected
control programs, and other parameters.
Due to the remand of CAIR, ADEM did
not include any emissions reductions
expected under the rule past 2012. The
promulgation of CSAPR ensured that
reductions expected under CAIR would
remain, thus EPA considers ADEM’s
projections to be conservative estimates.
Non-road mobile emissions estimates
were based on the EPA’s
NONROAD2008a non-road mobile
model, with the exception of the
railroad locomotives, commercial
marine, and aircraft engine. These
emissions are estimated by taking
activity data, such as landings and
takeoffs, and multiplying by an
Economic Growth Analysis System
(EGAS) emission factor. On-road mobile
source emissions were calculated using
EPA’s MOVES2010 mobile emission
factors model. The 2009 SO2, NOX and
PM2.5 emissions for the Birmingham
Area, as well as the emissions for other
years, were developed consistent with
EPA guidance and are summarized in
Tables 5 through 8 of the following
subsection discussing the maintenance
demonstration.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
The June 17, 2010, final submittal
includes a maintenance plan for the
Birmingham nonattainment area. The
maintenance plan:
(i) Shows compliance with and
maintenance of the 24-hour PM2.5
standard by providing information to
support the demonstration that current
and future emissions of SO2, NOX and
PM2.5 remain at or below 2009
emissions levels.
(ii) Uses 2009 as the attainment year
and includes future emissions inventory
projections for 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021,
and 2024.
(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year’’ at least 10
years (and beyond) after the time
necessary for EPA to review and
approve the maintenance plan. Per 40
CFR part 93, NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs
were established for the last year (2024)
of the maintenance plan (see section VI
below).
(iv) Provides actual and projected
emissions inventories, in tons per day
(tpd), for the Birmingham
nonattainment area, as shown in Tables
5 through 8 below.
TABLE 5—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA
Sector
2009
2012
2015
2018
2021
2024
Point .........................................................................................................
Area ..........................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................
Mobile .......................................................................................................
11.22
12.35
1.60
2.36
9.75
12.18
1.49
1.90
10.29
12.37
1.32
1.45
10.88
12.57
1.15
1.30
11.47
12.78
1.05
1.15
12.10
12.98
1.00
0.96
Total ..................................................................................................
27.53
25.32
25.43
25.90
26.45
27.04
TABLE 6—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR NOX EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA
Sector
2009
2012
2015
2018
2021
2024
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Point .........................................................................................................
Area ..........................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................
Mobile .......................................................................................................
96.25
11.24
27.31
72.05
96.41
11.42
24.60
57.74
98.01
11.59
21.74
43.43
99.66
11.77
19.65
37.34
101.65
11.94
19.19
31.25
103.69
12.12
19.42
25.20
Total ..................................................................................................
206.85
190.17
174.77
168.42
164.03
160.43
TABLE 7—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR SO2 EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA
Sector
2009
Point .........................................................................................................
Area ..........................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
2012
2015
2018
2021
2024
493.41
1.06
0.50
203.71
1.09
0.20
204.41
1.11
0.19
205.17
1.14
0.19
205.84
1.16
0.19
206.92
1.19
0.20
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70101
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 7—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR SO2 EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA—Continued
Sector
2009
2012
2015
2018
2021
2024
Mobile .......................................................................................................
0.43
0.37
0.29
0.30
0.32
0.33
Total ..................................................................................................
495.40
205.37
206.00
206.80
207.51
208.64
TABLE 8—EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR BIRMINGHAM AREA
Year
PM2.5 (tpd)
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2009 .....................................................................................................................
2012 .....................................................................................................................
2015 .....................................................................................................................
2018 .....................................................................................................................
2021 .....................................................................................................................
2024 .....................................................................................................................
Difference from 2009 to 2024 ..............................................................................
Tables 5 through 8 summarize the
2009 and future projected emissions of
direct PM2.5 and precursors from the
counties in the Birmingham Area. In
situations where local emissions are the
primary contributor to nonattainment,
the ambient air quality standard should
not be violated in the future as long as
emissions from within the
nonattainment area remain at or below
the baseline with which attainment was
achieved. Alabama has projected
emissions as described previously and
determined that emissions in the
Birmingham Area will remain below
those in the attainment year inventory
for the duration of the maintenance
plan.
As discussed in section VI of this
proposed rulemaking, a safety margin is
the difference between the attainment
level of emissions (from all sources) and
the projected level of emissions (from
all sources) in the maintenance plan.
The attainment level of emissions is the
level of emissions during one of the
years in which the area met the NAAQS.
Alabama selected 2009 as the
attainment emissions inventory year for
the Birmingham Area. Alabama
calculated the safety margins in its
submittal as 46.42 tpd for NOX and 0.49
tpd for PM2.5. The State has decided to
allocate 23.21 tpd of the available NOX
safety margin and 0.245 tpd of the
available PM2.5 safety margin to the
2024 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area.
Therefore, the remaining safety margin
for NOX will be 23.21 tpd and the
remaining safety margin for PM2.5 will
be 0.245 tpd. This allocation and the
resulting available safety margin for the
Birmingham Area are discussed further
in section VI of this proposed
rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
27.53
25.32
25.43
25.90
26.45
27.04
¥0.49
d. Monitoring Network
There are currently ten monitors
measuring PM2.5 in the Birmingham
Area. The State of Alabama, through
ADEM, has committed to continue
operation of the monitors in the
Birmingham Area in compliance with
40 CFR part 58 and have thus addressed
the requirement for monitoring. EPA
approved Alabama’s 2010 monitoring
plan on October 8, 2010.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
The State of Alabama, through ADEM,
has the legal authority to enforce and
implement the requirements of the
Birmingham Area 2006 24-hour PM2.5
maintenance plan. This includes the
authority to adopt, implement and
enforce any subsequent emissions
control contingency measures
determined to be necessary to correct
future PM2.5 attainment problems.
ADEM will track the progress of the
maintenance plan by performing future
reviews of triennial emission
inventories for the Birmingham Area as
required in the Air Emissions Reporting
Rule (AERR) and Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR). For
these periodic inventories, ADEM will
review the assumptions made for the
purpose of the maintenance
demonstration concerning projected
growth of activity levels. If any of these
assumptions appear to have changed
substantially, then ADEM will re-project
emissions for the Birmingham Area.
f. Contingency Measures in the
Maintenance Plan
The contingency measures are
designed to promptly correct a violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA
requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to assure that the
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX (tpd)
206.85
190.17
174.77
168.42
164.03
160.43
¥46.42
SO2 (tpd)
495.40
205.37
206.00
206.80
207.51
208.64
¥286.76
state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for
action by the State. A state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a
requirement that a state will implement
all measures with respect to control of
the pollutant that were contained in the
SIP before redesignation of the area to
attainment in accordance with section
175A(d).
In the June 17, 2010, submittal,
Alabama affirms that all programs
instituted by the State and EPA will
remain enforceable and that sources are
prohibited from reducing emissions
controls following the redesignation of
the Area. The contingency plan
included in the submittal includes a
triggering mechanism to determine
when contingency measures are needed
and a process of developing and
implementing appropriate control
measures. The State of Alabama will use
actual ambient monitoring data as the
triggering event to determine when
contingency measures should be
implemented.
As previously mentioned, on March 7,
2011, at the request of EPA, ADEM
submitted a letter in support of the June
17, 2010, redesignation request. The
letter contains clarifying information
regarding the contingency measures
included in the maintenance plan and
an additional emissions inventory-based
contingency measure trigger. A copy of
the letter is included in the docket for
this proposed rulemaking (EPA–R04–
OAR–2011–0043) and can be obtained
from the www.regulations.gov Web site.
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70102
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Alabama has identified a primary
trigger as occurring when the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, as described in section II
above, are violated. Alabama commits to
adopting, within 18 months of a
certified violation of the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, one or more of the control
measures discussed below.
Additionally, Alabama has identified a
secondary trigger to occur when the
98th percentile 24-hour concentration
for a single year at any monitor in the
nonattainment area records a
concentration of 36 mg/m3 or greater. In
such a case, the state will evaluate
existing controls measures and
determine whether any further emission
reduction measures should be
implemented. ADEM will consider
several factors in its evaluation of the
need for additional controls measures in
the event of a future year violation of
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
Depending on the timing of the future
year violations, additional local and
regional emissions reductions may still
be planned. ADEM will evaluate the air
quality impacts of those regulatory
programs in determining if further
reductions are required to ensure
continued maintenance of the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Birmingham
Maintenance Area.
In addition to the triggers indicated
above, Alabama will monitor regional
emissions through the CERR and AERR
and compare them to the projected
inventories and the attainment year
inventory. If the actual emissions from
these inventories are greater than ten
percent above the projected emissions
presented in the maintenance plan, than
ADEM will evaluate whether additional
planning or control measures are
needed to prevent the Area from
violating the NAAQS or to correct a
potential violation.
In the event that further reductions
are needed to ensure continued
maintenance, the list of ‘‘culpable
sources’’ developed by Alabama in the
State’s 2009 attainment demonstration
for the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS will be
evaluated for additional control of direct
PM2.5 emissions. As additional
information, a copy of section 8.2 of the
Birmingham Annual PM2.5 Attainment
Demonstration SIP, submitted to EPA on
March 13, 2009, was included with the
March 7, 2011, letter to EPA, which is
included in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking (EPA–R04–OAR–2011–
0043). This section contains the detailed
contingency measures for the annual
PM2.5 SIP and was referenced in the
redesignation request and maintenance
plan for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In
addition, ADEM will consider the
possibility of expanding the current
voluntary diesel retrofit program
currently in place in the Birmingham
Area.
Once a primary trigger is initiated,
ADEM will commence analysis,
including review of expected emissions
reductions from local and regional
regulatory programs, air quality
modeling, and emissions inventory
assessment to determine emission
control measures that will be required to
attain or maintain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. All controls that will be
relied upon for contingency purposes
are scheduled to be installed in 2012 or
later and are therefore not already relied
upon in for maintenance. The schedule
for implementation of this plan and
details of steps ADEM will take to bring
the area back into compliance are
outlined in Table 9.
At least one of the following
contingency measures will be adopted
and implemented upon a primary
triggering event:
• Continued implementation of
previously adopted controls which have
not yet been realized but are sufficient
to address the violation, including
future year emission reductions from
Federal measures to address interstate
pollutant transport and from the Georgia
multi-pollutant rule;
• Additional controls of direct PM2.5
emissions from the list of ‘‘culpable
sources’’ developed in the PM2.5 annual
attainment SIP and included in the
March 7, 2011, letter;
• Expansion of the current voluntary
diesel retrofit program in the
Birmingham Area;
• Any additional controls deemed
beneficial to address the violation at the
time of the trigger.
TABLE 9—SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT REVISIONS AND/OR RULE REVISIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING CONTINGENCY MEASURES
Step
Description of action
1 ........................
Identify and quantify the emissions reductions expected to result from current and future state and Federal
regulatory programs.
Use the best available air quality modeling to evaluate the air quality improvement expected from step 1
above.
Draft any needed permit conditions or SIP regulations ....................................................................................
Complete rulemaking or permit revision process and submit to EPA ..............................................................
3 months.
6 months.
Maximum time required for completion
18 months.
2 ........................
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
3 ........................
4 ........................
EPA has concluded that the
maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components of a
maintenance plan: Attainment
inventory, monitoring network,
verification of continued attainment,
and a contingency plan. Therefore, the
maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by the State of Alabama for
the Birmingham Area meets the
requirements of section 175A of the
CAA and is approvable.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
Schedule
VI. What is EPA’s analysis of
Alabama’s proposed NOX and PM2.5
MVEBs for the Birmingham area?
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation plans, programs, and
projects, such as the construction of
new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e.,
be consistent with) the part of the state’s
air quality plan that addresses pollution
from cars and trucks. Conformity to the
SIP means that transportation activities
will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS
or any interim milestones. If a
transportation plan does not conform,
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3 months.
6 months.
most new projects that would expand
the capacity of roadways cannot go
forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93
set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and
assuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a SIP. The
regional emissions analysis is one, but
not the only, requirement for
implementing transportation
conformity. Transportation conformity
is a requirement for nonattainment and
maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
are areas that were previously
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS
but have since been redesignated to
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
attainment with an approved
maintenance plan for that NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans for
nonattainment areas. These control
strategy SIPs (including RFP and
attainment demonstration) and
maintenance plans create MVEBs for
criteria pollutants and/or their
precursors to address pollution from
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a
MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state
may adopt MVEBs for other years as
well. The MVEB is the portion of the
total allowable emissions in the
maintenance demonstration that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101.
The MVEB serves as a ceiling on
emissions from an area’s planned
transportation system. The MVEB
concept is further explained in the
preamble to the November 24, 1993,
Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR
62188). The preamble also describes
how to establish the MVEB in the SIP
and how to revise the MVEB.
After interagency consultation with
the transportation partners for the
Birmingham Area, Alabama has elected
to develop MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5
for the entire nonattainment area
(Jefferson, Shelby, and the
nonattainment portion of Walker
Counties). Alabama is developing these
MVEBs, as required, for the last year of
its maintenance plan, 2024. The MVEBs
reflect the total on-road emissions for
2024, plus an allocation from the
available NOX and PM2.5 safety margin.
Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term ‘‘safety
margin’’ is the difference between the
attainment level (from all sources) and
the projected level of emissions (from
all sources) in the maintenance plan.
The safety margin can be allocated to
the transportation sector; however, the
total emissions must remain below the
attainment level. The NOX and PM2.5
MVEBs and allocation from the safety
margin were developed in consultation
with the transportation partners and
were added to account for uncertainties
in population growth, changes in model
vehicle miles traveled and new
emission factor models. The NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area
are defined in Table 10 below.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
70103
MVEBs for transportation conformity
purposes was initially outlined in EPA’s
May 14, 1999, guidance, ‘‘Conformity
[tpd]
Guidance on Implementation of March
2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.’’
NOX
PM2.5
EPA adopted regulations to codify the
adequacy process in the Transportation
2024 On-road Mobile Emissions
Conformity Rule Amendments for the
(tpd) .....................
0.96
25.20 ‘‘New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Safety Margin AlloAmbient Air Quality Standards and
cated to MVEB ....
0.245
23.21 Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing
2024 Conformity
Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule
MVEB ..................
1.21
48.41
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’
As mentioned above, the Birmingham
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004).
Area has chosen to allocate a portion of
Additional information on the adequacy
the available safety margins to the NOX
process for transportation conformity
and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024. This
purposes is available in the proposed
allocation is 23.21 tpd and 0.245 tpd for
rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation
NOX and PM2.5, respectively. Therefore,
Conformity Rule Amendments:
the remaining safety margins for 2024
Response to Court Decision and
are 23.21 tpd and 0.245 tpd for NOX and Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974,
PM2.5, respectively.
38984 (June 30, 2003).
Through this rulemaking, EPA is
As discussed earlier, Alabama’s
proposing to approve the MVEBs for
maintenance plan submission includes
NOX and PM2.5 for 2024 for the
NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the
Birmingham Area because EPA has
Birmingham Area for 2024, the last year
determined that the Area maintains the
of the maintenance plan. EPA reviewed
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with the
the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs through the
emissions at the levels of the budgets.
adequacy process. The Alabama SIP
Once the MVEBs for the Birmingham
submission, including the Birmingham
Area are approved or found adequate
Area NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs, was open
(whichever is completed first), they
for public comment on EPA’s adequacy
must be used for future conformity
Web site on March 24, 2011, found at:
determinations. After thorough review,
https://www.epa.gov/otaq/state
EPA has determined that the budgets
resources/transconf/currsips.htm. The
meet the adequacy criteria, as outlined
EPA public comment period on
in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), and is proposing adequacy for the MVEBs for 2024 for
to approve the budgets because they are Birmingham Area closed on April 25,
consistent with maintenance of the 2006 2011. EPA did not receive any
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024.
comments on the adequacy of the
MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any
VII. What is the status of EPA’s
requests for the SIP submittal.
adequacy determination for the
EPA intends to make its
proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for
determination on the adequacy of the
2024 for the Birmingham Area?
2024 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
for transportation conformity purposes
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
in the near future by completing the
containing MVEBs, EPA may
adequacy process that was started on
affirmatively find the MVEB contained
March 24, 2011. After EPA finds the
therein adequate for use in determining
2024 MVEBs adequate or approves
transportation conformity. Once EPA
them, the new MVEBs for NOX and
affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB PM2.5 must be used for future
is adequate for transportation
transportation conformity
conformity purposes, that MVEB must
determinations. For required regional
be used by state and Federal agencies in emissions analysis years that involve
determining whether proposed
2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets
transportation projects conform to the
will be the new 2024 MVEBs
SIP as required by section 176(c) of the
established in the maintenance plan, as
CAA.
defined in section VI of this proposed
EPA’s substantive criteria for
rulemaking.
determining adequacy of a MVEB are set
VIII. What is EPA’s analysis of the
out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process
proposed 2009 base year emissions
for determining adequacy consists of
inventory for the Birmingham area?
three basic steps: public notification of
a SIP submission, a public comment
As discussed above, section 172(c)(3)
period, and EPA’s adequacy
of the CAA requires areas to submit a
determination. This process for
base year emissions inventory. As part
determining the adequacy of submitted
of Alabama’s request to redesignate the
TABLE 10—BIRMINGHAM AREA PM2.5
NOX MVEBS
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
70104
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Birmingham Area, the State submitted a
2009 base year emissions inventory to
meet this requirement. Emissions
contained in the submittal cover the
general source categories of point
sources, area sources, on-road mobile
sources, and non-road mobile sources.
All emission summaries were
accompanied by source-specific
descriptions of emission calculation
procedures and sources of input data.
Alabama’s submittal documents 2009
emissions in the Birmingham Area in
units of tpd. Table 11 below provides a
summary of the 2009 emissions of direct
PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 for the
Birmingham Area. In today’s notice,
EPA is proposing to approve this 2009
base year inventory as meeting the
section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory
requirement.
TABLE 11—BIRMINGHAM AREA 2009 EMISSIONS FOR PM2.5, NOX, AND SO2
[tpd (percent total)]
Source
PM2.5
NOX
SO2
Point Source Total .................................................................................................................
Area Source Total ..................................................................................................................
On-Road Mobile Source Total ...............................................................................................
Non-Road Mobile Source Total .............................................................................................
11.22
12.35
2.36
1.60
[40.8]
[44.9]
[8.6]
[5.8]
96.25
11.24
72.05
27.31
[46.5]
[5.4]
[34.8]
[13.2]
493.41
1.06
0.43
0.50
[99.6]
[0.2]
[0.1]
[0.1]
Total for all Sources .......................................................................................................
27.53
..........
206.85
..........
495.40
..........
IX. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed
actions?
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
EPA’s proposed actions establish the
basis upon which EPA may take final
action on the issues being proposed for
approval today. Approval of Alabama’s
redesignation request would change the
legal designation of Jefferson and Shelby
Counties and the designated portion of
Walker County in Alabama for the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR
part 81, from nonattainment to
attainment. Approval of Alabama’s
request would also incorporate a plan
for maintaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in the Birmingham Area
through 2024 into the Alabama SIP.
This maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any
future violations of the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and procedures for
evaluation of potential violations. The
maintenance plan also establishes NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham
Area. The NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for
2024 for the Birmingham Area are 48.41
tpd and 1.21 tpd, respectively. Final
action would also approve the Area’s
emissions inventory under CAA section
172(c)(3). Additionally, EPA is notifying
the public of the status of EPA’s
adequacy determination for the newlyestablished PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for
2024 for the Birmingham Area.
X. Proposed Actions on the
Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan SIP Revisions
Including Approval of the NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the
Birmingham Area
EPA previously determined that the
Birmingham Area was attaining the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on
September 20, 2010, at 75 FR 57186.
EPA is now taking three separate but
related actions regarding the Area’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:25 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
redesignation and maintenance of the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
First, EPA is proposing to determine,
based on complete, quality-assured and
certified monitoring data for the 2007–
2009 monitoring period, and after
review of preliminary data in AQS for
2008–2010, that the Birmingham Area
continues to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to
determine that the Birmingham Area
has met the criteria under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. On this
basis, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s redesignation request for the
Birmingham Area.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s 2009 emissions inventory for
the Birmingham Area (under CAA
section 172(c)(3)). Alabama selected
2009 as the attainment emissions
inventory year for the Birmingham Area.
This attainment inventory identifies a
level of emissions in the Area that is
sufficient to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and also is a current,
comprehensive inventory that meets the
requirements of section 172(c)(3).
Third, EPA is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan for the
Birmingham Area, including the PM2.5
and NOX MVEBs for 2024, into the
Alabama SIP (under CAA section 175A).
The maintenance plan demonstrates
that the Area will continue to maintain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and the
budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria
contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and
(5). Further, as part of today’s action,
EPA is describing the status of its
adequacy determination for the PM2.5
and NOX MVEBs for 2024 in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24
months from the effective date of EPA’s
adequacy determination for the MVEBs
or the effective date for the final rule for
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
this action, whichever is earlier, the
transportation partners will need to
demonstrate conformity to the new NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR
93.104(e).
If finalized, approval of the
redesignation request would change the
official designation of Jefferson and
Shelby Counties in their entireties and
the nonattainment portion of Walker
County in the Birmingham Area for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40
CFR part 81, from nonattainment to
attainment.
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
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
this reason, these proposed actions:
• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory
action[s]’’ subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget under
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are 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.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are 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
• Do 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 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
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Particulate matter.
emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 2, 2011.
Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2011–29183 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Nov 09, 2011
Jkt 226001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9488–6]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance
Pollution Contingency Plan National
Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the
Tar Lake Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 5 is issuing a
Notice of intent of Partial Deletion of the
following two parcels of the Tar Lake
Site Superfund (Site) located in
Mancelona, Michigan from the National
Priorities List (NPL): the non-East
Tailings Area (ETA) part of property PIN
05–11–129–006–00 (41.4 acres); and the
non-ETA part of property PIN 05–11–
129–007–00 (33.63 acres) and requests
public comments on this proposed
action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant
to section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the
State of Michigan, through the Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality,
have determined that all appropriate
response actions at these two parcels
under CERCLA have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
This partial deletion pertains only to
the two property PINs listed above. The
deletion of these two parcels from the
Site affects all surface soils, subsurface
soils, structures and groundwater within
the boundaries of these parcels. In 2005,
the ETA, approximately 45.49 acres, in
the northeastern part of the Site, was
deleted from the NPL when EPA
determined that the ETA was acceptable
for unrestricted use and unlimited
exposure (UU/UE). The two parcels
being proposed for deletion are adjacent
to and south of the ETA. The current
remaining areas of the Site will remain
on the NPL and are not being
considered for deletion as part of this
action.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
December 12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1983–0002, by one of the
following methods:
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70105
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: Karen Cibulskis, Remedial
Project Manager, at
cibulskis.karen@epa.gov or Megan
McSeveney, Community Involvement
Coordinator, at
mcseveney.megan@epa.gov.
• Fax: Gladys Beard, Deletion Process
Manager, at (312) 697–2077.
• Mail: Karen Cibulskis, Remedial
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (SR–6J), 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604,
(312) 886–1843, or Megan McSeveney,
Community Involvement Coordinator,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886–1972 or
(800) 621–8431.
• Hand delivery: Megan McSeveney,
Community Involvement Coordinator,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5 (SI–7J), 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
docket’s normal hours of operations,
and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed
information. The normal business hours
are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–
0002. 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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. 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 email comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
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
E:\FR\FM\10NOP1.SGM
10NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70091-70105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29183]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0043-201110; FRL-9490-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of
the Birmingham 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area
to Attainment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On June 17, 2010, the State of Alabama, through the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), Air Division, submitted
a request for EPA to redesignate the Birmingham fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the
``Birmingham Area'' or ``Area'') to attainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); and to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a
maintenance plan for the Area. The Birmingham 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 nonattainment area is comprised of Jefferson and
Shelby Counties in their entireties and a portion of Walker County. EPA
is proposing to approve the redesignation request for the Birmingham
Area, along with the related SIP revision, including Alabama's 2009
emissions inventory for the Area and Alabama's plan for maintaining
attainment of the PM2.5 standard in the Area. EPA is also
proposing to approve the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5 for the year 2024
for the Birmingham Area. These actions are being proposed pursuant to
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and its implementing regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2011-0043, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0043, 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-
2011-0043. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI
[[Page 70092]]
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through 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. 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
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 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: Joel Huey of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Joel Huey
may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9104, or via electronic mail at
huey.joel@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
VI. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's proposed NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area?
VII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the
Birmingham area?
VIII. What is EPA's analysis of the proposed 2009 base year
emissions inventory for the Birmingham area?
IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval of the 2024
NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area
X. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
EPA is proposing to take the following three separate but related
actions, some of which involve multiple elements: (1) To redesignate
the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, provided EPA approves the emissions inventory submitted with the
maintenance plan; (2) to approve, under CAA section 172(c)(3), the
emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan; and (3) to
approve into the Alabama SIP, under section 175A of the CAA, Alabama's
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, including the
associated MVEBs (EPA is also notifying the public of the status of
EPA's adequacy determination for the Birmingham Area MVEBs for the
PM2.5 NAAQS). These actions are summarized below and
described in greater detail throughout this notice of proposed
rulemaking.
First, EPA proposes to determine that, if EPA finalizes approval of
the 2009 baseline emissions inventory for the Birmingham Area, the Area
has met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)
of the CAA. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve a request to
change the legal designation of Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their
entireties and the designated portion of Walker County in the
Birmingham Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. As discussed below, the emissions inventory is
being proposed for approval today.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's 2009 emissions
inventory for the Birmingham Area (under CAA section 172(c)(3)).
Alabama selected 2009 as the attainment emissions inventory year for
the Birmingham Area. This attainment inventory identifies a level of
emissions in the Area that is sufficient to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and is a current, comprehensive inventory that
meets the requirements of section 172(c)(3).
Third, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area as
meeting the requirements of section 175A (such approval being one of
the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The recently
promulgated Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR),\1\ requires
reductions of NOX and SO2 associated with power
plants to be permanent and enforceable. The maintenance plan is
designed to help keep the Birmingham Area in attainment of the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. Consistent with the CAA, the
maintenance plan that EPA is proposing to approve today also includes
NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the
Birmingham Area. EPA is proposing to approve (into the Alabama SIP) the
2024 MVEBs that are included as part of Alabama's maintenance plan for
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 States;
Correction of SIP Approvals for 22 States'' (76 FR 48208, August 8,
2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a matter related matter to this third action, EPA is also
notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy process for the
newly-established NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024
for the Birmingham Area. ADEM submitted MVEBs for NOX and
PM2.5 in its original June 17, 2010, redesignation request.
On May 2, 2011, ADEM submitted additional revisions to the MVEBs for
the 24-hour redesignation request.\2\ The adequacy comment period for
the new Birmingham Area 2024 MVEBs began on March 24, 2011, with EPA's
posting of the availability of this submittal on EPA's Adequacy Web
site (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm).
The adequacy comment period for these MVEBs closed on April 25, 2011.
No adverse comments were received during the adequacy public comment
period. Please see section VII of this proposed rulemaking for further
explanation of
[[Page 70093]]
this process and for more details on the MVEBs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On March 2, 2011, ADEM submitted a proposed revision to the
24-hour NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs originally
submitted on June 17, 2010. The final MVEBs were submitted on May 2,
2011, with ADEM's 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS redesignation
submittal. A copy of the submittal is included in the docket for
this proposed rulemaking (EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0043) and can be obtained
from the www.regulations.gov Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to Alabama's
June 17, 2010, SIP submittal and subsequent supplement of May 2, 2011.
Those documents addresses the specific issues summarized above and the
necessary elements described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for
redesignation of the Birmingham Area to attainment of the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS.
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
Fine particle pollution can be emitted directly or formed
secondarily in the atmosphere. The main precursors of PM2.5
are sulfur dioxide (SO2), NOX, ammonia and
volatile organic compounds (VOC). Unless otherwise noted by the State
or EPA, ammonia and VOCs are presumed to be insignificant contributors
to PM2.5 formation, whereas SO2 and
NOX are presumed to be significant contributors to
PM2.5 formation. Sulfates are a type of secondary particle
formed from SO2 emissions of power plants and industrial
facilities. Nitrates, another common type of secondary particle, are
formed from NOX emissions of power plants, automobiles, and
other combustion sources.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated the first air quality standards
for PM2.5. EPA promulgated an annual standard at a level of
15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year average
of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same rulemaking,
EPA promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a 3-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October
17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the annual average NAAQS at 15
[mu]g/m\3\ but revised the 24-hour NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based again
on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.\3\ Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the primary
and secondary 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the
annual arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in accordance with
40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than or equal to 35 [micro]g/m\3\
at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In response to legal challenges of the annual standard
promulgated in 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit) remanded this NAAQS to EPA
for further consideration. See American Farm Bureau Federation and
National Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (DC
Circuit 2009). However, given that the 1997 and 2006 annual NAAQS
are essentially identical, attainment of the 1997 Annual NAAQS would
also indicate attainment of the remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and supplemented on April 14,
2005, at 70 FR 19844, EPA designated the Birmingham Area as
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air
quality data for calendar years 2001-2003. In that action, EPA defined
the 1997 PM2.5 Birmingham nonattainment area to include
Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their entireties and a portion Walker
County. On November 13, 2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated
designations for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, designating the
Birmingham Area (with the same boundaries as for the 1997
PM2.5 nonattainment area) as nonattainment for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air quality data for calendar
years 2006-2008. That action also clarified that the Birmingham Area
was classified unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA did not promulgate designations for the
annual average NAAQS promulgated in 2006 since that NAAQS was
essentially identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
Therefore, the Birmingham Area is designated nonattainment for the
annual NAAQS promulgated in 1997 and for the 24-hour NAAQS promulgated
in 2006. Today's action only addresses the designation for the 24-hour
NAAQS promulgated in 2006.
All 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were designated under subpart
1 of title I, part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains the general
requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant governed by a
NAAQS and is less prescriptive than the other subparts of title I, part
D. On April 25, 2007 (72 FR 20664), EPA promulgated its
PM2.5 implementation rule, codified at 40 CFR part 51,
subpart Z, in which the Agency provided guidance for state and Tribal
plans to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS. This rule, at 40 CFR
51.1004(c), specifies some of the regulatory impacts of attaining the
NAAQS, as discussed below.
On May 12, 2005, EPA published the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), which addressed the interstate transport requirements of the
CAA and required states to significantly reduce SO2 and
NOX emissions from power plants (70 FR 25162). The
associated Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) were published on April
28, 2006 (71 FR 25328). However, on July 11, 2008, the DC Circuit Court
issued its decision to vacate and remand both CAIR and the associated
CAIR FIPs in their entirety (North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (DC
Cir., 2008)). EPA petitioned for rehearing, and 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., 2008)). The Court
left CAIR in place 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. As a result of
these court rulings, the power plant emission reductions that resulted
solely from the development, promulgation, and implementation of CAIR,
and the associated contribution to air quality improvement that
occurred solely as a result of CAIR in the Birmingham Area could not be
considered to be permanent.
On August 8, 2011, EPA published CSAPR in the Federal Register
under the title, ``Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 States; Correction
of SIP Approvals for 22 States'' (76 FR 48208, August 8, 2011) to
address interstate transport of emissions and resulting secondary air
pollutants and to replace CAIR. The CAIR emission reduction
requirements limit emissions in Alabama and states upwind of Alabama
through 2011, and CSAPR requires similar or greater reductions in the
relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. The emission reductions that CSAPR
mandates may be considered to be permanent and enforceable. In turn,
the air quality improvement in the Birmingham Area that has resulted
from electric generating units (EGUs) emission reductions associated
with CAIR (as well as the additional air quality improvement that would
be expected to result from full implementation of CSAPR) may also be
considered to be permanent and enforceable. EPA proposes that the
requirement in section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met because the
emission reduction requirements of CAIR address emissions through 2011
and EPA has now promulgated CSAPR which requires similar or greater
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. Because the
emission reduction requirements of CAIR are enforceable through the
2011 control period, and because CSAPR has now been promulgated to
address the requirements previously addressed by CAIR and gets similar
or greater reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond, EPA is
proposing to determine that the pollutant transport
[[Page 70094]]
part of the reductions that led to attainment in the Birmingham Area
can now be considered permanent and enforceable. Therefore, EPA
proposes to find that the transport requirement of CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has been met for the Birmingham Area.
The 3-year ambient air quality data for 2007-2009 indicated no
violations of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for the Birmingham Area.
As a result, on June 17, 2010, Alabama requested redesignation of the
Birmingham Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. The redesignation request included three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air quality data for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007-2009, indicating that the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS had been achieved for the Birmingham Area. Under
the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment if
sufficient, complete, quality-assured data is available for the
Administrator to determine that the area has attained the standard and
the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section
107(d)(3)(E). From 2007 through the present, the 24-hour
PM2.5 design values for the Birmingham Area have declined.
While 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations are dependent on a
variety of conditions, the overall downtrend in PM2.5
concentrations in the Birmingham Area can be attributed to the
reduction of emissions, as will be discussed in more detail in section
V of this proposed rulemaking.
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation providing the following criteria are met: (1)
The Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable
implementation plan for the area under section 110(k); (3) the
Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan
for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A; and (5) the
state containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the
area under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA.
EPA has provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (April
16, 1992, 57 FR 13498, and supplemented on April 28, 1992, 57 FR 18070)
and has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests
in the following documents:
1. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
2. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; and
3. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994.
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
On June 17, 2010, the State of Alabama, through ADEM, requested the
redesignation of the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA's evaluation indicates that the Birmingham
Area has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and meets the
requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E),
including the maintenance plan requirements under section 175A of the
CAA. As a result, EPA is proposing to take the three related actions
summarized in section I of this notice.
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
As stated above, in accordance with the CAA, EPA proposes in
today's action to: (1) Redesignate the Birmingham Area to attainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) approve the Birmingham
Area emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan; and (3)
approve into the Alabama SIP Birmingham's 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS maintenance plan, including the associated MVEBs. These actions
are based upon EPA's determination that the Birmingham Area continues
to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met for the Birmingham Area, provided
EPA approves the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance
plan. The five redesignation criteria provided under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are discussed in greater detail for the Area in the
following paragraphs of this section.
Criteria (1)--The Birmingham Area has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). EPA is proposing to determine that
the Birmingham Area continues to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. For PM2.5, an area may be considered
to be attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as determined in accordance with
40 CFR 50.13 and Appendix N of part 50, based on three complete,
consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring
data. To attain these NAAQS, the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration,
as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less
than or equal to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ at all relevant monitoring sites in the
subject area over a 3-year period. The relevant data must be collected
and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in
the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). The monitors generally should have
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
On September 20, 2010, at 75 FR 57186, EPA determined that the
Birmingham Area was attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
For that action EPA reviewed PM2.5 monitoring data from
monitoring stations in the Birmingham Area for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007-2009. These data have been quality-
assured and are recorded in AQS. EPA has reviewed more recent data
which indicates that the Birmingham Area continues to attain the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the submitted 3-year attainment
period of 2007-2009. The 98th percentiles of the PM2.5
concentrations for 2007-2010 and the 3-year average of these values
(i.e., design values) are summarized in Table 1. Data available to date
in AQS for 2011, which have not yet been certified, indicate the
Birmingham Area continues to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS.
[[Page 70095]]
Table 1--Design Value Concentrations for the Birmingham 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Area ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
98th Percentile 24-hour concentrations 3-Year design
-------------------------------------------- values
Location County Monitor ID ---------------------
2007 2008 2009 2010 2007-2009 2008-2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Birmingham........................ Jefferson.................. 01-073-0023 42.8 33.5 24.4 28.7 34 29
McAdory................................. Jefferson.................. 01-073-1005 30.9 25.8 21.3 22.7 26 23
Bruce Shaw Rd. (Providence)............. Jefferson.................. 01-073-1009 31.4 27.3 22.1 18.4 27 23
Asheville Road (Leeds).................. Jefferson.................. 01-073-1010 33.0 24.6 19.1 22.3 26 22
Wylam................................... Jefferson.................. 01-073-2003 37.7 33.5 25.2 25.4 32 28
Hoover.................................. Jefferson.................. 01-073-2006 29.8 25.9 20.4 21.6 25 23
Pinson High School...................... Jefferson.................. 01-073-5002 34.2 26.4 21.3 20.0 27 23
Corner School Road...................... Jefferson.................. 01-073-5003 32.5 30.0 21.3 18.3 28 23
Pelham High School...................... Shelby..................... 01-117-0006 30.9 24.8 21.2 \4\ 20.0 26 \4\ 22
Highland Avenue (Walker Co.)............ Walker..................... 01-127-0002 30.9 24.3 22.1 18.8 26 22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Pelham High School site did not meet completeness criteria for the third quarter of 2010. However, the maximum third quarter value from 2008-
2010 was 33.6 [mu]g/m\3\ (which occurred in 2008). If this value were used as the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration for 2010, the 24-hour design
value for the 2008-2010 period would be 27 [mu]g/m\3\ and the 2010 design value for the Birmingham Area (from the North Birmingham site) would be
unchanged at 29 [micro]g/m\3\.
The 3-year design value for 2007-2009 submitted by Alabama for
redesignation of the Birmingham Area is 34 [mu]g/m\3\, which meets the
NAAQS as described above. Air quality data for 2010 show that the Area
continues to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS, with a 3-year design
value of 29 [micro]g/m\3\, and that ambient 24-hour concentrations of
PM2.5 continue to decline. As mentioned above, on September
20, 2010 (75 FR 57186) EPA published a clean data determination for the
Birmingham Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In today's
action, EPA is proposing to determine that the Area is continuing to
attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA will not go forward with
the redesignation if the Area does not continue to attain until the
time that EPA finalizes the redesignation. As discussed in more detail
below, the State of Alabama has committed to continue monitoring in
this Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
Criteria (5)--Alabama Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section
110 and Part D of Title I of the CAA; and Criteria (2)--Alabama Has a
Fully Approved SIP Under Aection 110(k) for the Birmingham Area
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the state has met all applicable
requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA
proposes to find that Alabama has met all applicable SIP requirements
for the Birmingham Area under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP
requirements) for purposes of redesignation. Additionally, EPA proposes
to find that the Alabama SIP satisfies the criterion that it meet
applicable SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation under part D
of title I of the CAA (requirements specific to 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 nonattainment areas) in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA proposes to determine that the SIP is
fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making
these determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable
to the Area and, if applicable, that they are fully approved under
section 110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
requirements that were applicable prior to submittal of the complete
redesignation request.
a. The Birmingham Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
General SIP requirements. Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include
enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or
techniques; provisions for the establishment and operation of
appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality;
and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and
requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of
the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the
following: submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after
reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air
quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D
requirements (New Source Review (NSR) permit programs); provisions for
air pollution modeling; and provisions for public and local agency
participation in planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate
transport of air pollutants (e.g., NOX SIP Call,\5\ CAIR,\6\
and
[[Page 70096]]
CSAPR). The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not
linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and
classification in that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked
with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classifications
are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one
particular area in the state. Thus, EPA does not believe that the CAA's
interstate transport requirements should be construed to be applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation. However, as discussed later
in this notice, addressing pollutant transport from other states is an
important part of an area's maintenance demonstration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX in order to reduce the
transport of ozone and ozone precursors. In compliance with EPA's
NOX SIP Call, Alabama developed rules governing the
control of NOX emissions from EGUs, major non-EGU
industrial boilers, major cement kilns, and internal combustion
engines. On December 27, 2002, EPA approved Alabama's rules as
fulfilling Phase I (67 FR 78987).
\6\ On May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), EPA promulgated CAIR, which
required 28 upwind States and the District of Columbia to revise
their SIPs to include control measures that would reduce emissions
of SO2 and NOX. Various aspects of CAIR rule
were petitioned in court and on December 23, 2008, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit remanded CAIR to EPA
(see Alabama v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Circuit, December 23, 2008)),
which left CAIR in place to ``temporarily preserve the environmental
values covered by CAIR'' until EPA replaces it with a rule
consistent with the Court's ruling. The Court directed EPA to remedy
various areas of the rule that were petitioned consistent with its
July 11, 2008 (see Alabama v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (DC Circuit, July
11, 2008)), opinion, but declined to impose a schedule on EPA for
completing that action. Id. Therefore, CAIR is currently in effect
in Alabama.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, EPA believes other section 110 elements that are
neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked with
an area's attainment status are applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements
which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone
transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458,
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748,
December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati, Ohio, redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in
the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
EPA has not yet completed rulemaking on a submittal from Alabama
dated September 23, 2009, addressing ``infrastructure SIP'' elements
required under CAA section 110(a)(2). However, these are statewide
requirements that are not a consequence of the nonattainment status of
the Birmingham Area. As stated above, EPA believes that section 110
elements not linked to an area's nonattainment status are not
applicable for purposes of redesignation. Therefore, notwithstanding
the fact that EPA has not yet completed rulemaking on Alabama's
submittal for the PM2.5 infrastructure SIP elements of
section 110(a)(2), EPA believes it has approved all SIP elements under
section 110 that must be approved as a prerequisite for redesignating
the Birmingham Area to attainment.
Title I, Part D requirements. EPA proposes that if EPA approves
Alabama's base year emissions inventory, which is part of the
maintenance plan submittal, the Alabama SIP will meet applicable SIP
requirements under part D of the CAA. As discussed in greater detail
below, EPA believes the emissions inventory is approvable because the
2009 direct PM2.5, SO2, and NOX
emissions for Alabama were developed consistent with EPA guidance for
emission inventories and represent a comprehensive, accurate and
current inventory as required by CAA section 172(c)(3).
Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements. EPA has determined
that if the approval of the base year emissions inventory, discussed in
section VIII of this rulemaking, is finalized, the Alabama SIP will
meet the applicable SIP requirements for the Birmingham Area for
purposes of redesignation under title I, part D of the CAA. Subpart 1
of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to
all nonattainment areas. All areas that were designated nonattainment
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under this
subpart of the CAA and the requirements applicable to them are
contained in sections 172 and 176.
For purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, the
applicable part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for all nonattainment
areas are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-(9) and in section 176. A
thorough discussion of the requirements contained in section 172 can be
found in the General Preamble for Implementation of title I (57 FR
13498, April 16, 1992).
Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements. Section 172(c)(1) requires the
plans for all nonattainment areas to provide for the implementation of
all Reasonable Available Control Measures (RACM) as expeditiously as
practicable and to provide for attainment of the national primary
ambient air quality standards. EPA interprets this requirement to
impose a duty on all nonattainment areas to consider all available
control measures and to adopt and implement such measures as are
reasonably available for implementation in each area as components of
the area's attainment demonstration. Under section 172, states with
nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely attainment
and meeting a variety of other requirements. However, pursuant to 40
CFR 51.1004(c), EPA's September 20, 2010, determination that the
Birmingham area was attaining the 24-hour PM2.5 standard
suspended Alabama's obligation to submit most of the attainment
planning requirements that would otherwise apply. Specifically, the
determination of attainment suspended Alabama's obligation to submit an
attainment demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for reasonable
further progress (RFP), reasonable available control measures, and
contingency measures under section 172(c)(9).
The General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992) also discusses the evaluation of these requirements in
the context of EPA's consideration of a redesignation request. The
General Preamble sets forth EPA's view of applicable requirements for
purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an area is attaining
a standard (General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR
13498, April 16, 1992)).
Because attainment has been reached in the Birmingham Area, no
additional measures are needed to provide for attainment, and section
172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment demonstration and RACM are no
longer considered to be applicable for purposes of redesignation as
long as the Area continues to attain the standard until redesignation.
See also 40 CFR 51.1004(c).
The RFP plan requirement under section 172(c)(2) is defined as
progress that must be made toward attainment. This requirement is not
relevant for purposes of redesignation because EPA has determined that
the Birmingham Area has monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. See General Preamble, 57 FR 13564. See also 40
CFR 51.1004(c). In addition, because the Birmingham Area has attained
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer subject to a
RFP requirement, the requirement to submit the section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Id.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. As
part of Alabama's redesignation request for the Birmingham Area,
Alabama submitted a
[[Page 70097]]
2009 base year emissions inventory. As discussed below in section VIII,
EPA is proposing to approve the 2009 base year inventory submitted with
the redesignation request as meeting the section 172(c)(3) emissions
inventory requirement.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
emissions for major new and modified stationary sources to be allowed
in an area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that, since PSD
requirements will apply after redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved
prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance
of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this
view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled,
``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Alabama has demonstrated that the
Birmingham Area will be able to maintain the NAAQS without part D NSR
in effect, and therefore Alabama need not have fully approved part D
NSR programs prior to approval of the redesignation request.
Nonetheless, Alabama currently has a fully-approved part D NSR program
in place. Alabama's PSD program will become effective in the Birmingham
Area upon redesignation to attainment. Section 172(c)(6) requires the
SIP to contain control measures necessary to provide for attainment of
the NAAQS. Because attainment has been reached, no additional measures
are needed to provide for attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA believes the
Alabama SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for
purposes of redesignation.
Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA
requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that
federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects that
are developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the United States
Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federally supported or funded projects (general
conformity). State transportation conformity SIP revisions must be
consistent with Federal conformity regulations relating to
consultation, enforcement and enforceability that EPA promulgated
pursuant to its authority under the CAA.
EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements \7\ as not applying
for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d)
because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation
and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this
interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (redesignation
of Tampa, Florida). Thus, the Birmingham Area has satisfied all
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation under section 110
and part D of title I of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions
to their SIPs to reflect certain Federal criteria and procedures for
determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity
SIPs are different from the MVEBs that are established in control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. The Birmingham Area Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under
Section 110(k) of the CAA
If EPA issues a final approval of the base year emissions
inventory, EPA will have fully approved the applicable Alabama SIP for
the Birmingham 2006 24-hour PM2.5 nonattainment area under
section 110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (see Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir.
1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any additional measures it may approve
in conjunction with a redesignation action (see 68 FR 25426 (May 12,
2003) and citations therein). Following passage of the CAA of 1970,
Alabama has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved at
various times, provisions addressing the various 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS SIP elements applicable in the Birmingham Area
(May 31, 1972, 37 FR 10842; July 13, 2011, 76 FR 41100).
As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements that
are neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked to
an area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. In addition, EPA believes that since the
part D subpart 1 requirements did not become due prior to submission of
the redesignation request, they are also not applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th
Cir. 2004); 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of the St.
Louis-East St. Louis Area to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS).
With the approval of the emissions inventory, EPA will have approved
all part D subpart 1 requirements applicable for purposes of this
redesignation.
Criteria (3)--The Air Quality Improvement in the Birmingham 2006 24-
Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment Area Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the air quality improvement in the area
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting
from implementation of the SIP and applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA believes that Alabama has demonstrated
that the observed air quality improvement in the Birmingham Area is due
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other state adopted
measures.
State, local and Federal measures enacted in recent years have
resulted in permanent emission reductions. Most of these emission
reductions are enforceable through regulations. A few non-regulatory
measures also result in emission reductions.
The state and local measures that have been implemented to date and
relied upon by Alabama to demonstrate attainment and/or maintenance
include local NOX controls on cement plants in the Area due
to the 8-hour ozone contingency plan, Jefferson and Shelby County burn
bans, and voluntary on-road and off-road diesel retrofit projects.
As shown in Table 2, local reasonably available control technology
(RACT) PM controls installed in the Birmingham Area have reduced direct
PM2.5 emissions by approximately 62 tons per year (tpy) as
of the end of 2009. These
[[Page 70098]]
controls are associated with the Birmingham Annual PM2.5
Attainment Demonstration SIP, submitted to EPA on March 13, 2009.
Table 2--Summary of RACT Controls in the Birmingham Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5
Facility Source RACT controls reduction Installation
(tpy) date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.J. Bullock...................... Crucible furnaces... Baghouse............ 3.891 2009
McWane Pipe....................... Charge handling area Wet suppression..... 0.385 2008
Sloss Industries.................. Coal piles.......... Wet suppression..... 0.398 2008
American Cast Iron Pipe........... Charge make-up...... Wet suppression..... 11.91 2008
Roads & process Paving.............. 3.58 2007/2008
areas.
Cupola melting New Cupola/Bag house 5.84 2007/2008
furnace. & spray suppression.
Sand & cement silos. Baghouse............ 0.09 2008
Nucor Steel....................... Meltshop fugitives.. Baghouse & physical 28.1 2008
improvements.
U.S. Pipe......................... Cupola charge make- Wet suppression..... 1.818 2008
up.
Sand & cement silos. Bin vents........... 5.93 2008
---------------------------------
Total......................... .................... .................... 61.942 ................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, closures of certain facilities have resulted in
continued reductions of local PM2.5 emissions in the
Birmingham Area. In late 2009, W.J. Bullock and Sloss Mineral Wool in
Jefferson County announced plans to cease operations, resulting in
additional PM2.5 emission reductions of 0.13 tpy and 130
tpy, respectively. In March 2010, U.S. Pipe ceased production,
resulting in an additional emission reduction of 46 tpy of
PM2.5. In total, the RACT controls and facility closures
amount to reductions of greater than eight percent of direct
PM2.5 point source emissions in Jefferson County.
Furthermore, control equipment installed at utilities in the
Birmingham Area have decreased emissions of NOX and
SO2. These reductions, prompted by the NOX SIP
Call and CAIR, are summarized in Table 3 below. In 2007, flue gas
desulfurization systems were added to units 8-10 of Alabama Power
Company's (APC) Gorgas Plant in anticipation of CAIR. Selective
catalytic reduction (SCR) systems were installed on units 3 and 4 at
APC Miller Plant in 2003 as a result of the NOX SIP Call,
with a consent decree requiring year round operation beginning in 2008
in preparation for CAIR. The year round SCR operation requirements have
been incorporated into the facilities' title V operating permits and
are thus enforceable.
Table 3--Summary of Emissions and Controls at Utilities in the Birmingham Area \8\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date control Emissions reductions from 2006-
installed 2009 (tpy)
Facility ------------------------------------------------------
NOX SO2 NOX SO2 Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APC Miller Unit 3........................................ 2008 ......... 4,680 ......... 71
APC Miller Unit 4........................................ 2008 ......... 3,786 ......... 70
APC Gorgas Unit 8........................................ ......... 2007 ......... 10,007 96
APC Gorgas Unit 9........................................ ......... 2007 ......... 9,975 96
APC Gorgas Unit 10....................................... ......... 2007 ......... 40,779 97
APC Gaston Unit 5 *...................................... ......... 2010 ......... 43,579 78
--------------------------------
Total Reductions..................................... ......... ......... 8,466 104,341 .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Gaston Unit 5 data reflects reductions from 2006-2010.
The Federal measures that have been implemented include the
following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Data in Tables 3 and 4 reflect reported actual emissions
from the Clean Air Markets Division Database https://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/index.cfm?fuseaction=emissions.wizard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 2 vehicle standards. In addition to requiring NOX
controls, the Tier 2 rule reduced the allowable sulfur content of
gasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm) starting in January of 2006.
Most gasoline sold in North Carolina prior to this had a sulfur content
of approximately 300 ppm.
Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle standards. The
second phase of the standards and testing procedures, which began in
2007, reduces particulate matter (PM) and NOX from heavy-
duty highway engines and also reduces highway diesel fuel sulfur
content to 15 ppm. The total program is expected to achieve a 90 and 95
percent reduction in PM and NOX emissions from heavy-duty
highway engines, respectively.
Nonroad spark-ignition engines and recreational engines standards.
Tier 1 of this standard, implemented in 2004, and Tier 2, implemented
in 2007, have reduced and will continue to reduce PM emissions.
Large nonroad diesel engine standards. Promulgated in 2004, this
rule is being phased in between 2008 and 2014. This rule will reduce
sulfur content in nonroad diesel fuel and, when fully implemented, will
reduce NOX and direct PM2.5 emissions by over 90
percent from these engines.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX. Affected states were
required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004, and
Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission reductions
[[Page 70099]]
resulting from regulations developed in response to the NOX
SIP Call are permanent and enforceable.
CAIR and CSAPR. As previously discussed, the remanded CAIR,
originally promulgated to reduce transported pollution, was left in
place to ``temporarily preserve the environmental values covered by
CAIR'' until EPA replaced it with a rule consistent with the Court's
opinion. To remedy CAIR's flaws, EPA promulgated the final CSAPR on
August 8, 2011. CSAPR addresses the interstate transport requirements
of the CAA with respect to the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As noted previously, the requirements of
CAIR address emissions through the 2011 control period and CSAPR
requires similar or greater emission reductions in the relevant areas
in 2012 and beyond.
Because PM2.5 concentrations in the Birmingham area are
impacted by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, the area's air
quality is affected by regulation of SO2 and NOX
emissions from power plants. Table 4, below, presents statewide EGU
emissions data compiled by EPA's Clean Air Markets Division for the
years 2002 and 2009. Emissions for 2009 reflect implementation of CAIR.
Table 4 shows that Alabama and states impacting the Birmingham Area for
the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as indicated in CSAPR, reduced
NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by 1,173,566 tpy
and 2,425,474 tpy, respectively, between 2002 and 2009.
Table 4--Comparison of 2002 and 2009 Statewide EGU NOX and SO2 Emissions (tpy) for States Impacting the
Birmingham Area \8\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX SO2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Net change Net change
2002 2009 2002-2009 2002 2009 2002-2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama..................... 161,559 49,609 -111,950 448,248 277,972 -170,276
Georgia..................... 146,456 57,566 -88,890 512,654 262,258 -250,396
Indiana..................... 281,146 110,969 -170,177 778,868 413,726 -365,142
Kentucky.................... 198,599 78,767 -119,832 482,653 252,002 -230,651
Ohio........................ 370,497 95,785 -274,712 1,132,069 600,687 -531,382
Pennsylvania................ 200,909 110,239 -90,670 889,766 573,619 -316,147
Tennessee................... 155,996 27,912 -128,084 336,995 108,042 -228,953
West Virginia............... 225,371 36,120 -189,251 507,110 174,583 -332,527
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................... 1,740,533 566,967 -1,173,566 5,088,363 2,662,889 -2,425,474
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As was noted earlier, EPA promulgated CSAPR to address interstate
transport of emissions and resulting secondary air pollutants and to
replace CAIR. CAIR, among other things, required emission reductions
that contributed to the air quality improvement in the Birmingham Area.
CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and
NOX emissions from EGUs across most of the Eastern United
States, with implementation beginning on January 1, 2012. CAIR will
continue to be implemented through 2011, and will be replaced by CSAPR
beginning in 2012. CSAPR requires reductions of NOX and
SO2 emissions to levels below the levels that led to
attainment of the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard in the
Birmingham Area. Given the remanded status of CAIR, this air quality
improvement could not be considered permanent at the time ADEM
submitted its request for redesignation of the Birmingham Area.
However, since that time CSAPR has been finalized, which mandates even
greater reductions than have already occurred under CAIR and, more
importantly, more reductions than are needed to maintain the standard
in the Area. The reductions of EGU emissions of SO2 and
NOX contributed to the air quality improvement in the
Birmingham Area. Therefore, the final promulgation of CSAPR in
combination with the other measures cited by Alabama and described
above, ensure that the emission reductions that led the Area to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS can be considered permanent and
enforceable for purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii).
Criteria (4)--The Birmingham Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the
Birmingham Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, ADEM submitted a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for at least 10 years after the
effective date of redesignation to attainment. EPA believes this
maintenance plan meets the requirements for approval under section 175A
of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan
