Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama: Removal of State Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Birmingham Area, 13055-13061 [2012-5266]
Download as PDF
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
beneficial ownership information in
mitigating money laundering/terrorist
financing risk; or (iii) an inability to
obtain the required information due to
other legal requirements?
FinCEN is seeking comment to
determine if there are certain types of,
or thresholds for, products, services, or
customers, with respect to which a
financial institution should not be
required to obtain beneficial ownership
information, due to substantially
reduced risk. For example, should
customers that are exempt from the CIP
Rules, also be exempt from beneficial
ownership identification? Additionally,
FinCEN is seeking comment as to
whether there are certain products or
services offered by financial institutions
that, due to ancillary statutory or
regulatory obligations, would prohibit
compliance with a CDD requirement to
obtain beneficial ownership information
as outlined in this ANPRM. FinCEN is
also seeking comment on whether there
are significant differences in risks or
perceived ability to obtain beneficial
ownership information with respect to
foreign versus domestic customers and/
or beneficial owners.
9. What financial institutions should
not be covered by a CDD rule based on
products and services offered?
FinCEN is considering whether a CDD
program rule as described in this
ANPRM should be more widely
applicable to financial institutions not
currently subject to a CIP Rule, and is
seeking comments from industry and
interested parties to determine if there
are types of financial institutions
currently covered under FinCEN’s
regulations and subject to SAR and
AML Program rules, that should not be
covered by a CDD obligation, either
because the products and services
offered are not consistent with the
information sought in a CDD obligation
or for any other reason.
10. What would be the impact on
consumers or other customers of a CDD
program including the elements
identified above?
FinCEN is seeking comment regarding
the potential impact on consumers or
customers of financial institutions.
What are the benefits and challenges of
the above suggested CDD requirements
that may exist between financial
institutions and customers taking into
account the objective of increasing the
inclusion in the financial system of
traditionally underserved individuals?
Will a CDD program affect the
willingness or ability of consumers or
others to use or access certain financial
institutions or services?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
VI. Conclusion
13055
Comments must be received on
or before April 4, 2012.
With this ANPRM, FinCEN is seeking
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
input on the questions set forth above.
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
FinCEN also is soliciting comments on
OAR–2012–0118, by one of the
the impact to law enforcement or
following methods:
authorities, regulatory agencies, and
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
consumers, and welcomes comments on
on-line instructions for submitting
all aspects of the ANPRM, and all
comments.
interested parties are encouraged to
2. Email: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
provide their views.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
Dated: February 28, 2012.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0118,
James H. Freis, Jr.,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Network.
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
[FR Doc. 2012–5187 Filed 3–2–12; 8:45 am]
Environmental Protection Agency,
BILLING CODE 4810–02–P
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae
Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Development Section, Air Planning
AGENCY
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
40 CFR Part 52
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0118; FRL–9642–9]
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
Approval and Promulgation of
deliveries are only accepted during the
Implementation Plans; Alabama:
Regional Office’s normal hours of
Removal of State Low-Reid Vapor
operation. The Regional Office’s official
Pressure Requirement for the
hours of business are Monday through
Birmingham Area
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Agency (EPA).
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012–
ACTION: Proposed rule.
0118. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve,
docket without change and may be
through parallel processing, a draft
made available online at
revision to the Alabama State
www.regulations.gov, including any
Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted
personal information provided, unless
by the Alabama Department of
the comment includes information
Environmental Management (ADEM),
claimed to be Confidential Business
on January 10, 2012. The proposed
Information (CBI) or other information
revision modifies Alabama’s SIP to
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
move Chapter 335–3–20 ‘‘Control of
Do not submit through
Fuels,’’ which includes the regulation
www.regulations.gov or email,
that governs the State’s 7.0 pounds per
information that you consider to be CBI
square inch (psi) requirement for the
or otherwise protected. The
low-Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) fuel
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
program in Jefferson and Shelby
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
Counties (hereafter referred to as the
means EPA will not know your identity
‘‘Birmingham Area’’) from the active
or contact information unless you
measures portion of the Alabama SIP to
provide it in the body of your comment.
the contingency measures portions of
If you send an email comment directly
the maintenance plans for the
Birmingham Area for the ozone national to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
address will be automatically captured
or standards), and of the proposed
and included as part of the comment
maintenance plans for the 1997 annual
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standards, that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards,
submit an electronic comment, EPA
if finalized. If this change to the SIP is
recommends that you include your
finalized, the federal RVP requirement
of 7.8 psi will apply for the Birmingham name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
Area. EPA is proposing to approve this
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
SIP revision because the State has
cannot read your comment due to
demonstrated that it is consistent with
technical difficulties and cannot contact
section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA
you for clarification, EPA may not be
or Act).
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
DATES:
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
13056
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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:
Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9043.
Mr. Lakeman can also be reached via
electronic mail at
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
I. What is parallel processing?
II. What is the background of the RVP
requirement?
III. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s
submittal?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is parallel processing?
Consistent with EPA regulations
found at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V,
section 2.3.1, for purposes of expediting
review of a SIP submittal, parallel
processing allows a state to submit a
plan to EPA prior to actual adoption by
the state. Generally, the state submits a
copy of the proposed regulation or other
revisions to EPA before conducting its
public hearing. EPA reviews this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
proposed state action, and prepares a
notice of proposed rulemaking. EPA’s
notice of proposed rulemaking is
published in the Federal Register
during the same time frame that the
state is holding its public process. The
state and EPA then provide for
concurrent public comment periods on
both the state action and federal action.
If the revision that is finally adopted
and submitted by the State is changed
in aspects other than those identified in
the proposed rulemaking on the parallel
process submission, EPA will evaluate
those changes and if necessary and
appropriate, issue another notice of
proposed rulemaking. The final
rulemaking action by EPA will occur
only after the SIP revision has been
adopted by the state and submitted
formally to EPA for incorporation into
the SIP.
On January 10, 2012, the State of
Alabama, through ADEM, submitted a
request for parallel processing of a draft
SIP revision that the State had already
taken through public comment. ADEM
requested parallel processing so that
EPA could begin to take action on its
draft SIP revision in advance of the
State’s submission of the final SIP
revision. As stated above, the final
rulemaking action by EPA will occur
only after the SIP revision has been: (1)
Adopted by Alabama, (2) submitted
formally to EPA for incorporation into
the SIP; and (3) evaluated by EPA,
including any changes made by the
State after the January 10, 2012, draft
was submitted to EPA.
CFR 80.27. The CAA provides for more
stringent requirements to be established
for ozone nonattainment areas.
Specifically, CAA section 211(h) states:
Not later than 6 months after November 15,
1990, the Administrator shall promulgate
regulations making it unlawful for any
person during the high ozone season (as
defined by the Administrator) to sell, offer for
sale, dispense, supply, offer for supply,
transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with a Reid Vapor Pressure in excess
of 9.0 pounds per square inch (psi). Such
regulations shall also establish more stringent
Reid Vapor Pressure standards in a
nonattainment area as the Administrator
finds necessary to generally achieve
comparable evaporative emissions (on a pervehicle basis) in nonattainment areas, taking
into consideration the enforceability of such
standards, the need of an area for emission
control and economic factors.
In accordance with CAA section 211(h),
EPA established a two-phase reduction
in high ozone season commercial
gasoline volatility. These rules focus on
reducing gasoline emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC). VOC and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) are precursors for
ground-level ozone. Phase I was
applicable to calendar years 1989
through 1991. Depending on the state
and month, gasoline RVP was not to
exceed 10.5 psi, 9.5 psi, or 9.0 psi. See
54 FR 11868 (March 22, 1989). Phase II
was applicable to calendar years 1992
and later. Depending on the state and
month, gasoline RVP may not exceed
9.0 psi or 7.8 psi. See 55 FR 23658 (June
11, 1990). A current listing of the RVP
requirements for states can be found on
EPA’s Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/
II. What is the background of the RVP
otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/
requirement?
standards.htm.
The Birmingham Area was originally
The following subsections of this
classified as a 1-hour ozone
proposed rulemaking summarize both
nonattainment area by EPA on March 3,
the federal and state RVP requirements
1978 (43 FR 8962). The Birmingham
in the Birmingham Area. Volatility is
the property of a liquid fuel that defines nonattainment Area at that time was
geographically defined as Jefferson
its evaporation characteristics. RVP is
County, Alabama. On November 6,
an abbreviation for ‘‘Reid vapor
1991, by operation of law under section
pressure,’’ a common measure of and
181(a) of the CAA, EPA classified the
generic term for gasoline volatility.
Birmingham nonattainment area as a
Pursuant to the CAA, EPA regulates the
marginal nonattainment area for the 1vapor pressure of gasoline sold at retail
hour ozone and added Shelby County to
stations during the high ozone season
the nonattainment area (56 FR 56693).
(June 1 to September 15) to reduce
The nonattainment classification for the
evaporative emissions from gasoline
Birmingham marginal ozone area was
that contribute to ground-level ozone
based on ambient air sampling
and diminish the effects of ozonemeasurements for ozone made during
related health problems.
1987–1989. As an ozone nonattainment
A. Background for the Federal
area, the Birmingham Area was subject
Requirement for RVP for the
to the federal RVP requirements of 7.8
Birmingham Area
psi for both Jefferson and Shelby
Section 211(h) of the CAA requires
Counties. Subsequently, in 2001, EPA
EPA to set a maximum RVP standard of
approved a state fuel program that
9.0 psi during the high ozone season,
imposed a 7.0 psi requirement for this
which is defined as June 1st through
area, under section 211(c)(4)(C) of the
September 15th of each year. See also 40 CAA. The action being proposed today
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
would move the 7.0 psi requirement
from the active portion of the Alabama
SIP to the contingency measures portion
of the maintenance plans for the ozone,
1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Throughout this proposed rulemaking,
EPA’s reference to the maintenance
plans for the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS is in reference to the proposed
maintenance plans as these plans have
been proposed for approval by EPA but
have not yet been finalized.
B. Background for the State
Requirement for RVP in the Birmingham
Area
Section 211(c)(4)(C) of the CAA
allows states to seek a waiver from EPA
to adopt into the federally-approved
SIP, a state fuel program that is more
stringent than federal requirements.
Specifically, CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(i)
states:
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
A State may prescribe and enforce, for
purposes of motor vehicle emission control,
a control or prohibition respecting the use of
a fuel or fuel additive in a motor vehicle or
motor vehicle engine if an applicable
implementation plan for such State under
section 7410 of this title so provides The
Administrator may approve such provision
in an implementation plan, or promulgate an
implementation containing such a provision,
only if he finds that the State control or
prohibition is necessary to achieve the
national primary or secondary ambient air
quality standard which the plan implements.
The Administrator may find that a State
control or prohibition is necessary to achieve
that standard if no other measure that would
bring about timely attainment exist, or if
other measures exist and are technically
possible to implement, but are unreasonable
or impracticable. The Administrator may
make a finding of necessity under this
subparagraph even if the plan for the area
does not contain an approved demonstration
of timely attainment.
As mentioned above, the Birmingham
Area was designated as a marginal 1hour ozone nonattainment area on
November 6, 1991. See 56 FR 56693.
Marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment
areas such as the Birmingham Area were
required to attain the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS no later than November 15,
1993. However, the Birmingham Area
did not attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
by the required deadline and thus, EPA
issued a SIP Call for Alabama to develop
and submit a plan on how the Area
would comply with the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable.
This plan, also known as an attainment
demonstration, contained the control
strategies and underlying regulations
that Alabama would use to come into
compliance with the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. On November 1, 2000, ADEM
submitted the 1-hour ozone attainment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
demonstration for the Birmingham Area
as a revision to the Alabama SIP. Among
other control strategies and regulations,
this attainment demonstration included
a request for EPA to approve Alabama’s
regulation to establish requirements for
low sulfur and low-RVP requirements
for the Birmingham Area pursuant to
211(c)(4)(C)(i).
In a final rulemaking on November 7,
2001 (66 FR 56218), EPA determined
that Alabama’s November 1, 2000, SIP
revision contained the necessary data
and analyses to support a finding under
section 211(c)(4)(C)(i) that the State’s
low sulfur and low-RVP requirements
were necessary for the Birmingham Area
to achieve the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In
summary, Alabama’s low sulfur/lowRVP fuel program required that all
gasoline sold during the control period
(June 1st through September 15th) in the
Birmingham Area contain a maximum
RVP of 7.0 psi and maximum sulfur
levels of 150 parts per million volumeweighted average. Alabama’s control on
sulfur applied only through the summer
of 2003. After that time, federal controls
on sulfur in gasoline went into effect.
There was no termination date for the
low-RVP portion of Alabama’s fuel
regulation.
The Birmingham Area subsequently
attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and
was redesignated for that NAAQS on
March 12, 2004. See 69 FR 11798. At
that time, ADEM included the 7.0 psi
RVP requirement in its maintenance
plan. Thereafter, the Birmingham Area
was designated as a nonattainment for
the more stringent 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, effective June 15, 2004 (69 FR
23858). On May 12, 2006 (71 FR 27631),
the Birmingham Area was redesignated
to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.1 As part of the requirement to
be redesignated to attainment, ADEM
developed a maintenance plan pursuant
to CAA section 175A(a) that
demonstrated the Area would maintain
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at
least 10 years after redesignation. In that
maintenance demonstration, ADEM, in
its emissions projections, adopted a
conservative approach to the fuel
requirement in the Area by assuming a
high ozone season RVP requirement of
1 On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised
8-hour ozone NAAQS—also known as the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS. Currently, the Agency is
reviewing individual area’s compliance with the
revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS and anticipates
completing a designation process in the Spring of
2012. Today’s rulemaking is not related to the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS, however, EPA notes that
2008–2010 and preliminary 2009–2011 monitoring
data suggests that the Birmingham Area is attaining
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13057
9.0 psi as opposed to 7.0 psi.2 The State
demonstrated that the Area could
continue to maintain the ozone NAAQS
with the 9.0 psi requirement.
Nonetheless, the State’s RVP
requirement of 7.0 psi remains in the
active portion of the SIP, and the federal
RVP requirement of 7.8 psi also remains
applicable through 40 CFR 80.27.
On January 10, 2012, ADEM
submitted a draft revision to Alabama’s
SIP to move Chapter 335–3–20 ‘‘Control
of Fuels’’ from the active measures
portion of the Alabama SIP to the
contingency measures portions of the
maintenance plans for the applicable
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. ADEM
explained that the 7.0 psi requirement
would be moved to the maintenance
plans as a contingency measure for the
ozone NAAQS, the annual 1997 PM2.5
standard and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards; however, it would be
removed from the SIP as an active
requirement. The applicable RVP would
then be the federal standard of 7.8 psi.
Because the state RVP requirement of
7.0 psi is a part of the federallyapproved SIP for Alabama, the State
must meet the requirements of CAA
section 110(l) to move this state-level
RVP requirement from the active
measures portions of the SIP to the
contingency measures portions of the
affected maintenance plans. More
details on CAA section 110(l)
requirements are provided below.
III. What are the Section 110(l)
requirements?
EPA’s primary consideration for
determining the approvability of
Alabama’s January 10, 2012, draft SIP
revision is whether this requested action
complies with section 110(l) of the
CAA. Section 110(l) of the CAA states:
Plan Revision—Each revision to an
implementation plan submitted by a State
under this chapter shall be adapted by such
State after reasonable notice and public
hearing. The Administrator shall not approve
a revision of a plan if the revision would
interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 7501 of this
title), or any other applicable requirement of
this chapter. 42 U.S.C. 7410(l).
Because the RVP requirements
currently are a part of the SIP, the
revision must meet the requirements of
CAA section 110(l). Alabama’s January
10, 2012, draft SIP revision is requesting
2 The Birmingham Area was also designated
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 and the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. In association with these
redesignation request, EPA proposed to approve
maintenance plans which assume a high ozone
season RVP requirement of 7.8 psi as opposed to
the State requirement of 7.0 psi.
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
13058
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
only that the state-level requirement of
7.0 psi be moved from the active
measures portions of the Alabama SIP to
the contingency measures portions of
the maintenance plans for the ozone
NAAQS, the annual 1997 PM2.5
standards and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. Therefore, as part of
Alabama’s SIP revision request to
change its RVP requirement, Alabama
must demonstrate that the revision will
not interfere with the attainment or
maintenance of any of the NAAQS or
any other applicable requirement of the
CAA.
Developing what is necessary for a
SIP revision to comply with section
110(l) is a case-by-case determination
based upon the circumstances of each
revision. EPA interprets 110(l) as
applying to all NAAQS that are in effect,
including those that have been
promulgated but for which the EPA has
not yet made designations. The specific
elements of the SIP revision depend on
the circumstances and emissions
analyses. The State’s request does not
involve a modification of the 7.8 psi
federal RVP requirement, which is
separately applicable by federal
regulation (40 CFR 80.27) to both
Jefferson and Shelby Counties. Thus,
EPA’s proposed approval action
considers the potential impacts with
regard to a difference in RVP
requirements for the Birmingham Area
between the state-level requirement of
7.0 psi and the federal-level requirement
of 7.8 psi. EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s
January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision is
provided below.
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of
Alabama’s submittal?
ADEM submitted a draft revision to
the Alabama SIP on January 10, 2012,
for parallel processing. The purpose of
Alabama’s January 10, 2012, draft SIP
revision is to move the state-level RVP
requirement of 7.0 psi from the active
measures portions of the SIP to the
contingency measures portions of the
SIP. The applicable RVP requirement
would then be the federal 7.8 psi
requirement and the 7.0 psi state-level
requirement would be a part of the
maintenance plans as contingency
measures for the NAAQS discussed
above. The State is not seeking a change
to the federal RVP requirements of 7.8
psi that are applicable to the
Birmingham Area.
Alabama’s January 10, 2012, draft SIP
revision includes an evaluation of the
impact that the removal of the 7.0 psi
state-level RVP requirement would have
on the applicable NAAQS. For the
purposes of this change, EPA is making
the preliminary determination that the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
applicable NAAQS3 of interest for the
noninterference demonstration required
by section 110(l) of the CAA are the
ozone, particulate matter and nitrogen
oxides (NO2) standards because the RVP
requirements results primarily in
emissions benefits for VOCs and NOX.
VOCs and NOX emissions are precursors
for ozone and particulate matter, and
NO2 is a component of NOX. There are
no emissions reductions attributable to
the emissions of carbon monoxide (CO),
lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from RVP
requirements. As a result, there is no
information indicating the proposed
revision would have any impact on
those NAAQS. Additionally, the
Birmingham Area is currently
designated attainment for the CO, lead
and SO2 NAAQS, and is continuing to
attain these standards. Therefore, the
analysis below focuses on the impact of
Alabama’s changes to the RVP
requirements on the ozone, particulate
matter and NO2 NAAQS.
a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions for
Non-Interference Analyses for
Alabama’s RVP Change
In Alabama’s January 10, 2012, draft
SIP revision, the State provided a
technical demonstration to support the
request to move Alabama’s 7.0 psi RVP
requirement from the active measures
portions of the Alabama SIP to the
contingency measures portions of the
affected maintenance plans. In that
technical demonstration, Alabama
provided information regarding the
emissions trends from the maintenance
plans for the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.
To determine these emissions, Alabama
took a conservative approach and
assumed a high ozone season RVP
requirement for the Birmingham Area of
9.0 psi in the ozone maintenance plan
and 7.8 psi in the maintenance plans for
the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. All of these maintenance
plans, which included modeling,
indicated future emissions projections
under the baseline ‘‘attainment’’ level
emissions without the emissions
reductions associated with the statelevel 7.0 psi RVP requirements.
In Alabama’s January 10, 2012, draft
SIP revision, ADEM also provided an
updated analysis utilizing the Motor
Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES)
modeling to evaluate the potential
impacts for the ozone NAAQS that
might result exclusively from changing
the high ozone season RVP
requirements from the state-level
requirement of 7.0 psi to the federal
3 The six NAAQS that EPA establishes health and
welfare based standards are CO, lead, NO2, ozone,
particulate matter, and SO2.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirement of 7.8 psi. Specifically,
ADEM compared what the projected
emissions in the year 2012 (the year the
program is requested to be rescinded),
would be, assuming a RVP level of 7.0
psi and 7.8 psi. The comparison
revealed a slight increase in emissions
of 25 tons for NOX and 60 tons for VOC
(cumulative over the entire season)
would result from the change to the
federal requirement from June 1st
through September 15th. While the
modeling showed a slight increase in
NOX and VOC emissions resulting from
the use of 7.8 psi RVP as opposed to 7.0
psi, the most appropriate analysis for
purposes of evaluating non-interference
is whether total area emissions in the
future years would remain at or below
the level determined to be consistent
with maintenance of the NAAQS. To
provide this full evaluation, the State
compared emissions generated for the
year 2011, using a RVP of 7.0 psi to
emissions generated for the years 2012
and 2015, using a RVP of 7.8 psi. Table
1 below provides the results of this
analysis.
TABLE 1—COMPARATIVE EMISSIONS
FOR CHANGE TO RVP
2011 7.0
psi RVP
(tons)
2012 7.8
psi RVP
(tons)
2015 7.8
psi RVP
(tons)
* 6511
* 2764
* 5819
* 2593
* 4429
* 2081
NOX ......
VOC ......
* Emissions are total from June 1 through
September 15.
As Table 1 clearly indicates, NOX and
VOC emissions in the Birmingham Area
will continue to decrease, even with the
increase in high ozone season fuel RVP
to 7.8 psi. The slight increase in
emissions is being mitigated area-wide
by a steady decrease in tailpipe
emissions, which is the result of cleaner
new vehicle fleet replacing the older
fleet. As discussed below, based on this
data, together with air quality data, and
maintenance demonstrations and
attainment designations for the NAAQS,
EPA is making the preliminary
determination that the slight increase in
NOX and VOC emissions resulting from
this change will not interfere with the
Area’s ability to attain and maintain the
NAAQS, or any other applicable
requirement. More details on the
individual non-interference analyses for
the ozone, PM2.5 and NO2 NAAQS are
provided below.
b. Non-Interference Analysis for the
Ozone NAAQS
Effective June 15, 2004, the
Birmingham Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
ozone NAAQS. The primary precursors
for ozone are VOCs and NOX emissions.
As a previous 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area, the Birmingham
Area was already subject to the federal
RVP requirements for high ozone season
gasoline, and as mentioned above, the
State opted to implement a state-level
RVP requirement for high ozone season
gasoline to aid the Area with
compliance with the ozone NAAQS.
Although originally implemented for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, these federal
and state RVP requirements continued
to apply to the Birmingham Area for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and are still
applicable for the Birmingham Area.
On January 27, 2006, ADEM
submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. As part of the State’s
ozone maintenance plan, Alabama took
a conservative approach to projecting its
emissions inventories for the future
projection years of 2009, 2015 and 2017
by assuming a level of 9.0 psi for RVP
for high ozone season gasoline in the
Birmingham Area. The intent of this
conservative approach to developing the
future projection year emissions was to
demonstrate that the Birmingham Area
could maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard without relying on the 7.0 psi
state-level requirement for RVP in high
ozone season gasoline. ADEM used the
MOBILE6.2 mobile source emissions
model to estimate the emissions. In the
years 2015 and 2017, ADEM projected a
reduction from the 2002 base year
inventory of approximately 45 percent
in NOX emissions (in tons per summer
day). The projected reduction of VOC
emissions (in tons per summer day) for
the years 2015 and 2017 is
approximately a 20 percent from the
2002 base year emissions inventory.
There is an overall downward trend
in ozone concentration in the
Birmingham Area that can be attributed
to regional and local programs/controls
enacted in the Birmingham Area that
have led to significant emissions
reductions. On May 12, 2006 (71 FR
27631), EPA approved Alabama’s 1997
8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the
Birmingham Area and redesignated the
Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The Birmingham Area is
continuing to meet the 1-hour and 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS,4 and is meeting
the new 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
4 The air quality design value for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS is the 3-year average of the annual
4th highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone
concentration. The level of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS is 0.08 parts per million (ppm). The 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS is not met when the design
value is greater than 0.08 ppm (0.085 ppm rounds
up).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
based on the 2008–2010 design value of
75 parts per billion (ppb). The 2008
ozone NAAQS is met when the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average concentration, averaged over 3
years is 75 ppb or less. Based on
preliminary monitoring data from 2009–
2011, the Birmingham Area is
continuing to meet the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. More detail on the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS is provided
below.
EPA established a more stringent 8hour ozone NAAQS of 75 ppb on March
12, 2008. The Agency is currently in the
process of determining areas’
compliance with the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, and has not yet completed the
formal designation process. However,
on December 9, 2011, EPA announced
its preliminary intention regarding
designations for nonattainment areas for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA did
not indicate the Birmingham Area as a
potential nonattainment area for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As stated
above, although the Agency has not yet
completed the designation process, EPA
must still consider compliance with
section 110(l) of the CAA. EPA,
therefore, evaluated whether or not
Alabama’s requested change to its RVP
requirements would interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. In doing so, EPA
reviewed current monitoring data,
which suggest that the Birmingham
Area appears to be attaining the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS. The current design
value for ozone for the Birmingham
Area is 2008–2010 is 75ppb, while the
preliminary 2009–2011 design value is
75 ppb for this Area. EPA also evaluated
the potential increase in the VOC and
NOX precursor emissions, and whether
it is reasonable to conclude that the
requested change to Alabama’s high
ozone season RVP requirement (which
would have the effect in the Area of
reverting to the federal RVP requirement
for high ozone season fuel) would cause
the Area to be out of compliance with
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
In light of the current designations,
monitoring data and the submitted
modeling, including the fact that the
VOC and NOX emissions inventories are
projected to continue to significantly
decrease,5 EPA has preliminarily
determined that Alabama’s change to its
RVP requirements for the Birmingham
Area will not interfere with attainment
or maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
5 Indeed, the future decreases in the inventory are
an order of magnitude greater than the increases
associated with the change in RVP.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13059
c. Non-Interference Analysis for the
Particulate Matter NAAQS
Effective April 5, 2005, the
Birmingham Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
Annual NAAQS. The primary
precursors for PM2.5 are NOX and sulfur
oxides. VOC and ammonia can be
determined to be precursors to PM2.5
formation on a case-by-case basis. For
the Birmingham Area, neither the State
of Alabama or EPA have made a
determination that VOC and ammonia
are significant precursors to the
formation of PM2.5 in the Birmingham
Area thus NOX and sulfur oxides are the
precursors of interests in addition to
direct PM2.5 emissions. In 2005 ADEM
and Jefferson County Department of
Health contracted with Envair to study
the nature and potential causes of PM2.5
concentrations in the Birmingham Area.
The study investigated the sources of
particulate matter pollution in and
around the North Birmingham and
Wylam monitors. The study gave insight
into the sources of particulate matter
pollution in and around the North
Birmingham and Wylam monitors.
According to the findings of the study,
sulfate and primary organic matter are
the most important contributors to PM2.5
in the Birmingham Area. The results of
the study indicate that the most
effective control strategies to reduce
PM2.5 concentrations in the Birmingham
area include the reduction of regional
and urban/local emissions of SO2. As
mentioned earlier in this rulemaking,
the RVP requirements result in
emissions benefits for VOC and NOX so
EPA focused on these precursors for the
analysis of the potential impact of
Alabama’s SIP change.
On May 13, 2009, ADEM submitted a
redesignation request and maintenance
plan for the 1997 PM2.5 Annual
standards. As part of the State’s 1997
Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan,
Alabama took a conservative approach
for developing its emissions inventory
for the future projection years of 2009,
2015 and 2017 by assuming a level of
7.8 psi for RVP for high ozone season
gasoline in the Birmingham Area. The
intent of this conservative approach to
developing the future projection year
emissions was to demonstrate that the
Birmingham Area could maintain the
1997 Annual PM2.5 standard without
relying on the 7.0 psi state-level
requirement for RVP in high ozone
season gasoline. ADEM originally used
the MOBILE6.2 mobile source emissions
model to estimate the emissions but
later updated these emissions with the
MOVES mobile source emissions model.
As discussed earlier the most effective
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
13060
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
way to reduce PM2.5 concentrations in
the Birmingham area is to control SO2
emissions. The projected reduction of
SO2 emissions (in tons per day) for the
years 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021 and 2024
is approximately 58 percent from the
2009 base year emissions inventory. As
Table 2 indicates the PM2.5 annual
design value has been decreasing. The
overall downward trend in PM2.5
concentration in the Birmingham area
can be attributed to regional and local
programs/controls enacted in the
Birmingham area that have led to
significant emission reductions.
TABLE 2—PM2.5 ANNUAL DESIGN VALUES
Year
2005–2007
2006–2008
2007–2009
2008–2010
Design Value * .................................................................................
18.7
17.3
15.1
13.7
* The air quality design value for the PM2.5 1997 annual standard is 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).
On June 29, 2011 (76 FR 38023), EPA
made a determination that the
Birmingham PM2.5 nonattainment area
has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard and on November 10, 2011 (76
FR 70078), EPA proposed to approve
Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Birmingham
Area and redesignate the Area to
attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. EPA did not receive any
comments on the proposed rulemaking
to redesignate this Area to attainment
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standards.
could maintain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards without relying on the 7.0 psi
state-level requirement for RVP in high
ozone season gasoline. ADEM used the
MOVES mobile source emissions model
to estimate the emissions. As Table 3
indicates the PM2.5 24-hour design value
has been decreasing. The overall
downward trend in PM2.5 concentration
in the Birmingham Area can be
attributed to regional and local
programs/controls enacted in the
Birmingham Area that have led to
significant emission reductions.
On June 17, 2010, ADEM submitted a
redesignation request and maintenance
plan for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. As part of the State’s 2006
24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plan,
Alabama took a conservative approach
for developing its emissions inventory
for the future projection years of 2012,
2015, 2018, 2021 and 2024 by assuming
a level of 7.8 psi for RVP for high ozone
season gasoline in the Birmingham
Area. The intent of this conservative
approach to developing the future
projection year emissions was to
demonstrate that the Birmingham Area
TABLE 3—PM2.5 24-HOUR DESIGN VALUES
2005–2007
2006–2008
2007–2009
2008–2010
Design Value ...................................................................................
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Year
44
39
34
29
On September 20, 2010 (75 FR 57186),
EPA made a determination that the
Birmingham PM2.5 nonattainment area
has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standard and on November 10, 2011 (76
FR 70091), EPA proposed to approve
Alabama’s 2006 24-hour PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Birmingham
Area and redesignate the Area to
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. EPA did not receive any
comments on the proposed rulemaking
to redesignate this Area to attainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
In light of the proposed designation,
monitoring data and the submitted
modeling, including the fact that the
VOC and NOX emissions inventories are
projected to continue to significantly
decrease, EPA has preliminarily
determined that Alabama’s change to its
RVP requirements for the Birmingham
Area will not interfere with attainment
or maintenance of the 1997 PM2.5
annual or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards.
d. Non-Interference Analysis for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS
On January 20, 2012, EPA finalized
designations for 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
Alabama was designated unclassifiable/
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
attainment, including the Birmingham
Area, for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Also,
EPA evaluated the potential increase in
the NOX emissions (approximately a
quarter of a ton per day between June
1st and September 15th) and whether it
is reasonable to believe that Alabama’s
change for its high ozone season RVP
requirement (which has the effect of
reverting the Area to the federal RVP
requirement for high ozone season fuel)
would cause the Area to be out of
compliance with the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
The slight increase in NOX emissions is
being mitigated by a steady decrease in
tailpipe emissions, which is the result of
cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing the
older fleet. In light of the current
designation, monitoring data and the
submitted modeling, including the fact
that NOX emissions inventories are
projected to continue to significantly
decrease, EPA has preliminarily
determined that Alabama’s change to its
RVP requirements for the Birmingham
Area will not interfere with the
continued decline in NOX emissions,
nor with attainment or maintenance of
the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
V. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s January 10, 2012, SIP
revision regarding the State’s regulation
at Chapter 335–3–20 ‘‘Control of Fuels’’
which identifies Alabama’s 7.0 psi
requirement for the low-RVP fuel
program in the Birmingham Area (i.e.,
Jefferson and Shelby Counties).
Specifically, Alabama’s January 10,
2012, proposed SIP revision moves the
State’s 7.0 psi requirement for low-RVP
fuel program in the Birmingham Area
from the active measures portion to the
contingency measures portions of the
maintenance plans for ozone standards,
the annual 1997 PM2.5 standard and the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard. This
action, if finalized, would result in
applicability of the federal RVP
requirement of 7.8 psi for the
Birmingham Area.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this 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 in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements and Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Mar 02, 2012
Jkt 226001
Dated: February 24, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012–5266 Filed 3–2–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[EPA–HQ–TRI–2011–0174; FRL–9642–2]
Electronic Reporting of Toxics Release
Inventory Data
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Facilities that currently report
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data to
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) use either paper reporting
forms or the online reporting software
application known as the Toxics Release
Inventory-Made Easy Web or simply
TRI-MEweb. Effective January 1, 2013,
EPA proposes to require facilities to
report non-confidential TRI data to EPA
using electronic software provided by
the Agency. The only exception to this
electronic reporting requirement would
be for the few facilities that submit trade
secret TRI information (including
sanitized and unsanitized information),
who would continue to submit their
trade secret reporting forms and
substantiation forms in hard copy. As of
Reporting Year (RY) 2010,
approximately 95 percent of TRI
reporting facilities were using TRIMEweb, making it possible for the
Agency to process and expedite the
release of TRI data to the public.
Under this rulemaking, EPA would
also require facilities to submit
electronically (i.e., not on paper forms
or CD–ROMs) any revisions or
withdrawals of previously submitted
TRI data. For trade secret submissions,
EPA would still accept revisions or
withdrawals of previously submitted
trade secret information on paper forms.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 4, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
TRI–2011–0174, by one of the following
methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: oei.docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: 202–566–9744.
• Mail: OEI Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13061
• Hand Delivery: EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–TRI–2011–
0174. 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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. 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 docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
for which disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other materials, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the OEI Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. This Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center
Public Reading Room is open from
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13055-13061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5266]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0118; FRL-9642-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama:
Removal of State Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Birmingham
Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, through parallel processing, a
draft revision to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP),
submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM),
on January 10, 2012. The proposed revision modifies Alabama's SIP to
move Chapter 335-3-20 ``Control of Fuels,'' which includes the
regulation that governs the State's 7.0 pounds per square inch (psi)
requirement for the low-Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) fuel program in
Jefferson and Shelby Counties (hereafter referred to as the
``Birmingham Area'') from the active measures portion of the Alabama
SIP to the contingency measures portions of the maintenance plans for
the Birmingham Area for the ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or standards), and of the proposed maintenance plans
for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
standards, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards, if
finalized. If this change to the SIP is finalized, the federal RVP
requirement of 7.8 psi will apply for the Birmingham Area. EPA is
proposing to approve this SIP revision because the State has
demonstrated that it is consistent with section 110 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 4, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0118, by one of the following methods:
1. 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-2012-0118, 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: 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-
2012-0118. 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 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
[[Page 13056]]
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: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can also be reached via electronic mail at
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is parallel processing?
II. What is the background of the RVP requirement?
III. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's submittal?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is parallel processing?
Consistent with EPA regulations found at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix
V, section 2.3.1, for purposes of expediting review of a SIP submittal,
parallel processing allows a state to submit a plan to EPA prior to
actual adoption by the state. Generally, the state submits a copy of
the proposed regulation or other revisions to EPA before conducting its
public hearing. EPA reviews this proposed state action, and prepares a
notice of proposed rulemaking. EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking is
published in the Federal Register during the same time frame that the
state is holding its public process. The state and EPA then provide for
concurrent public comment periods on both the state action and federal
action.
If the revision that is finally adopted and submitted by the State
is changed in aspects other than those identified in the proposed
rulemaking on the parallel process submission, EPA will evaluate those
changes and if necessary and appropriate, issue another notice of
proposed rulemaking. The final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only
after the SIP revision has been adopted by the state and submitted
formally to EPA for incorporation into the SIP.
On January 10, 2012, the State of Alabama, through ADEM, submitted
a request for parallel processing of a draft SIP revision that the
State had already taken through public comment. ADEM requested parallel
processing so that EPA could begin to take action on its draft SIP
revision in advance of the State's submission of the final SIP
revision. As stated above, the final rulemaking action by EPA will
occur only after the SIP revision has been: (1) Adopted by Alabama, (2)
submitted formally to EPA for incorporation into the SIP; and (3)
evaluated by EPA, including any changes made by the State after the
January 10, 2012, draft was submitted to EPA.
II. What is the background of the RVP requirement?
The following subsections of this proposed rulemaking summarize
both the federal and state RVP requirements in the Birmingham Area.
Volatility is the property of a liquid fuel that defines its
evaporation characteristics. RVP is an abbreviation for ``Reid vapor
pressure,'' a common measure of and generic term for gasoline
volatility. Pursuant to the CAA, EPA regulates the vapor pressure of
gasoline sold at retail stations during the high ozone season (June 1
to September 15) to reduce evaporative emissions from gasoline that
contribute to ground-level ozone and diminish the effects of ozone-
related health problems.
A. Background for the Federal Requirement for RVP for the Birmingham
Area
Section 211(h) of the CAA requires EPA to set a maximum RVP
standard of 9.0 psi during the high ozone season, which is defined as
June 1st through September 15th of each year. See also 40 CFR 80.27.
The CAA provides for more stringent requirements to be established for
ozone nonattainment areas. Specifically, CAA section 211(h) states:
Not later than 6 months after November 15, 1990, the
Administrator shall promulgate regulations making it unlawful for
any person during the high ozone season (as defined by the
Administrator) to sell, offer for sale, dispense, supply, offer for
supply, transport, or introduce into commerce gasoline with a Reid
Vapor Pressure in excess of 9.0 pounds per square inch (psi). Such
regulations shall also establish more stringent Reid Vapor Pressure
standards in a nonattainment area as the Administrator finds
necessary to generally achieve comparable evaporative emissions (on
a per-vehicle basis) in nonattainment areas, taking into
consideration the enforceability of such standards, the need of an
area for emission control and economic factors.
In accordance with CAA section 211(h), EPA established a two-phase
reduction in high ozone season commercial gasoline volatility. These
rules focus on reducing gasoline emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOC). VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOX) are
precursors for ground-level ozone. Phase I was applicable to calendar
years 1989 through 1991. Depending on the state and month, gasoline RVP
was not to exceed 10.5 psi, 9.5 psi, or 9.0 psi. See 54 FR 11868 (March
22, 1989). Phase II was applicable to calendar years 1992 and later.
Depending on the state and month, gasoline RVP may not exceed 9.0 psi
or 7.8 psi. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). A current listing of the
RVP requirements for states can be found on EPA's Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.
The Birmingham Area was originally classified as a 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area by EPA on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962). The Birmingham
nonattainment Area at that time was geographically defined as Jefferson
County, Alabama. On November 6, 1991, by operation of law under section
181(a) of the CAA, EPA classified the Birmingham nonattainment area as
a marginal nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone and added Shelby
County to the nonattainment area (56 FR 56693). The nonattainment
classification for the Birmingham marginal ozone area was based on
ambient air sampling measurements for ozone made during 1987-1989. As
an ozone nonattainment area, the Birmingham Area was subject to the
federal RVP requirements of 7.8 psi for both Jefferson and Shelby
Counties. Subsequently, in 2001, EPA approved a state fuel program that
imposed a 7.0 psi requirement for this area, under section 211(c)(4)(C)
of the CAA. The action being proposed today
[[Page 13057]]
would move the 7.0 psi requirement from the active portion of the
Alabama SIP to the contingency measures portion of the maintenance
plans for the ozone, 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS. Throughout this proposed rulemaking, EPA's reference to the
maintenance plans for the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS is in reference to the proposed maintenance
plans as these plans have been proposed for approval by EPA but have
not yet been finalized.
B. Background for the State Requirement for RVP in the Birmingham Area
Section 211(c)(4)(C) of the CAA allows states to seek a waiver from
EPA to adopt into the federally-approved SIP, a state fuel program that
is more stringent than federal requirements. Specifically, CAA section
211(c)(4)(C)(i) states:
A State may prescribe and enforce, for purposes of motor vehicle
emission control, a control or prohibition respecting the use of a
fuel or fuel additive in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine if
an applicable implementation plan for such State under section 7410
of this title so provides The Administrator may approve such
provision in an implementation plan, or promulgate an implementation
containing such a provision, only if he finds that the State control
or prohibition is necessary to achieve the national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard which the plan implements.
The Administrator may find that a State control or prohibition is
necessary to achieve that standard if no other measure that would
bring about timely attainment exist, or if other measures exist and
are technically possible to implement, but are unreasonable or
impracticable. The Administrator may make a finding of necessity
under this subparagraph even if the plan for the area does not
contain an approved demonstration of timely attainment.
As mentioned above, the Birmingham Area was designated as a
marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment area on November 6, 1991. See 56 FR
56693. Marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas such as the Birmingham
Area were required to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS no later than
November 15, 1993. However, the Birmingham Area did not attain the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS by the required deadline and thus, EPA issued a SIP
Call for Alabama to develop and submit a plan on how the Area would
comply with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable.
This plan, also known as an attainment demonstration, contained the
control strategies and underlying regulations that Alabama would use to
come into compliance with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On November 1, 2000,
ADEM submitted the 1-hour ozone attainment demonstration for the
Birmingham Area as a revision to the Alabama SIP. Among other control
strategies and regulations, this attainment demonstration included a
request for EPA to approve Alabama's regulation to establish
requirements for low sulfur and low-RVP requirements for the Birmingham
Area pursuant to 211(c)(4)(C)(i).
In a final rulemaking on November 7, 2001 (66 FR 56218), EPA
determined that Alabama's November 1, 2000, SIP revision contained the
necessary data and analyses to support a finding under section
211(c)(4)(C)(i) that the State's low sulfur and low-RVP requirements
were necessary for the Birmingham Area to achieve the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. In summary, Alabama's low sulfur/low-RVP fuel program required
that all gasoline sold during the control period (June 1st through
September 15th) in the Birmingham Area contain a maximum RVP of 7.0 psi
and maximum sulfur levels of 150 parts per million volume-weighted
average. Alabama's control on sulfur applied only through the summer of
2003. After that time, federal controls on sulfur in gasoline went into
effect. There was no termination date for the low-RVP portion of
Alabama's fuel regulation.
The Birmingham Area subsequently attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
and was redesignated for that NAAQS on March 12, 2004. See 69 FR 11798.
At that time, ADEM included the 7.0 psi RVP requirement in its
maintenance plan. Thereafter, the Birmingham Area was designated as a
nonattainment for the more stringent 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, effective
June 15, 2004 (69 FR 23858). On May 12, 2006 (71 FR 27631), the
Birmingham Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.\1\ As part of the requirement to be redesignated to
attainment, ADEM developed a maintenance plan pursuant to CAA section
175A(a) that demonstrated the Area would maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. In that maintenance
demonstration, ADEM, in its emissions projections, adopted a
conservative approach to the fuel requirement in the Area by assuming a
high ozone season RVP requirement of 9.0 psi as opposed to 7.0 psi.\2\
The State demonstrated that the Area could continue to maintain the
ozone NAAQS with the 9.0 psi requirement. Nonetheless, the State's RVP
requirement of 7.0 psi remains in the active portion of the SIP, and
the federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi also remains applicable through
40 CFR 80.27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone
NAAQS--also known as the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Currently, the
Agency is reviewing individual area's compliance with the revised 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and anticipates completing a designation process in
the Spring of 2012. Today's rulemaking is not related to the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, however, EPA notes that 2008-2010 and preliminary
2009-2011 monitoring data suggests that the Birmingham Area is
attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
\2\ The Birmingham Area was also designated nonattainment for
the 1997 PM2.5 and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. In
association with these redesignation request, EPA proposed to
approve maintenance plans which assume a high ozone season RVP
requirement of 7.8 psi as opposed to the State requirement of 7.0
psi.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 10, 2012, ADEM submitted a draft revision to Alabama's
SIP to move Chapter 335-3-20 ``Control of Fuels'' from the active
measures portion of the Alabama SIP to the contingency measures
portions of the maintenance plans for the applicable ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS. ADEM explained that the 7.0 psi requirement
would be moved to the maintenance plans as a contingency measure for
the ozone NAAQS, the annual 1997 PM2.5 standard and the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 standards; however, it would be removed from
the SIP as an active requirement. The applicable RVP would then be the
federal standard of 7.8 psi. Because the state RVP requirement of 7.0
psi is a part of the federally-approved SIP for Alabama, the State must
meet the requirements of CAA section 110(l) to move this state-level
RVP requirement from the active measures portions of the SIP to the
contingency measures portions of the affected maintenance plans. More
details on CAA section 110(l) requirements are provided below.
III. What are the Section 110(l) requirements?
EPA's primary consideration for determining the approvability of
Alabama's January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision is whether this
requested action complies with section 110(l) of the CAA. Section
110(l) of the CAA states:
Plan Revision--Each revision to an implementation plan submitted
by a State under this chapter shall be adapted by such State after
reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not
approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in section 7501 of this title), or any
other applicable requirement of this chapter. 42 U.S.C. 7410(l).
Because the RVP requirements currently are a part of the SIP, the
revision must meet the requirements of CAA section 110(l). Alabama's
January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision is requesting
[[Page 13058]]
only that the state-level requirement of 7.0 psi be moved from the
active measures portions of the Alabama SIP to the contingency measures
portions of the maintenance plans for the ozone NAAQS, the annual 1997
PM2.5 standards and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. Therefore, as part of Alabama's SIP revision request to
change its RVP requirement, Alabama must demonstrate that the revision
will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of any of the
NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
Developing what is necessary for a SIP revision to comply with
section 110(l) is a case-by-case determination based upon the
circumstances of each revision. EPA interprets 110(l) as applying to
all NAAQS that are in effect, including those that have been
promulgated but for which the EPA has not yet made designations. The
specific elements of the SIP revision depend on the circumstances and
emissions analyses. The State's request does not involve a modification
of the 7.8 psi federal RVP requirement, which is separately applicable
by federal regulation (40 CFR 80.27) to both Jefferson and Shelby
Counties. Thus, EPA's proposed approval action considers the potential
impacts with regard to a difference in RVP requirements for the
Birmingham Area between the state-level requirement of 7.0 psi and the
federal-level requirement of 7.8 psi. EPA's analysis of Alabama's
January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision is provided below.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's submittal?
ADEM submitted a draft revision to the Alabama SIP on January 10,
2012, for parallel processing. The purpose of Alabama's January 10,
2012, draft SIP revision is to move the state-level RVP requirement of
7.0 psi from the active measures portions of the SIP to the contingency
measures portions of the SIP. The applicable RVP requirement would then
be the federal 7.8 psi requirement and the 7.0 psi state-level
requirement would be a part of the maintenance plans as contingency
measures for the NAAQS discussed above. The State is not seeking a
change to the federal RVP requirements of 7.8 psi that are applicable
to the Birmingham Area.
Alabama's January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision includes an
evaluation of the impact that the removal of the 7.0 psi state-level
RVP requirement would have on the applicable NAAQS. For the purposes of
this change, EPA is making the preliminary determination that the
applicable NAAQS\3\ of interest for the noninterference demonstration
required by section 110(l) of the CAA are the ozone, particulate matter
and nitrogen oxides (NO2) standards because the RVP
requirements results primarily in emissions benefits for VOCs and
NOX. VOCs and NOX emissions are precursors for
ozone and particulate matter, and NO2 is a component of
NOX. There are no emissions reductions attributable to the
emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), lead and sulfur dioxide
(SO2) from RVP requirements. As a result, there is no
information indicating the proposed revision would have any impact on
those NAAQS. Additionally, the Birmingham Area is currently designated
attainment for the CO, lead and SO2 NAAQS, and is continuing
to attain these standards. Therefore, the analysis below focuses on the
impact of Alabama's changes to the RVP requirements on the ozone,
particulate matter and NO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The six NAAQS that EPA establishes health and welfare based
standards are CO, lead, NO2, ozone, particulate matter,
and SO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions for Non-Interference Analyses for
Alabama's RVP Change
In Alabama's January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision, the State
provided a technical demonstration to support the request to move
Alabama's 7.0 psi RVP requirement from the active measures portions of
the Alabama SIP to the contingency measures portions of the affected
maintenance plans. In that technical demonstration, Alabama provided
information regarding the emissions trends from the maintenance plans
for the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. To determine these emissions,
Alabama took a conservative approach and assumed a high ozone season
RVP requirement for the Birmingham Area of 9.0 psi in the ozone
maintenance plan and 7.8 psi in the maintenance plans for the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards. All of these
maintenance plans, which included modeling, indicated future emissions
projections under the baseline ``attainment'' level emissions without
the emissions reductions associated with the state-level 7.0 psi RVP
requirements.
In Alabama's January 10, 2012, draft SIP revision, ADEM also
provided an updated analysis utilizing the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Simulator (MOVES) modeling to evaluate the potential impacts for the
ozone NAAQS that might result exclusively from changing the high ozone
season RVP requirements from the state-level requirement of 7.0 psi to
the federal requirement of 7.8 psi. Specifically, ADEM compared what
the projected emissions in the year 2012 (the year the program is
requested to be rescinded), would be, assuming a RVP level of 7.0 psi
and 7.8 psi. The comparison revealed a slight increase in emissions of
25 tons for NOX and 60 tons for VOC (cumulative over the
entire season) would result from the change to the federal requirement
from June 1st through September 15th. While the modeling showed a
slight increase in NOX and VOC emissions resulting from the
use of 7.8 psi RVP as opposed to 7.0 psi, the most appropriate analysis
for purposes of evaluating non-interference is whether total area
emissions in the future years would remain at or below the level
determined to be consistent with maintenance of the NAAQS. To provide
this full evaluation, the State compared emissions generated for the
year 2011, using a RVP of 7.0 psi to emissions generated for the years
2012 and 2015, using a RVP of 7.8 psi. Table 1 below provides the
results of this analysis.
Table 1--Comparative Emissions for Change to RVP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 7.0 2012 7.8 2015 7.8
psi RVP psi RVP psi RVP
(tons) (tons) (tons)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.................................... * 6511 * 5819 * 4429
VOC.................................... * 2764 * 2593 * 2081
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions are total from June 1 through September 15.
As Table 1 clearly indicates, NOX and VOC emissions in
the Birmingham Area will continue to decrease, even with the increase
in high ozone season fuel RVP to 7.8 psi. The slight increase in
emissions is being mitigated area-wide by a steady decrease in tailpipe
emissions, which is the result of cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing
the older fleet. As discussed below, based on this data, together with
air quality data, and maintenance demonstrations and attainment
designations for the NAAQS, EPA is making the preliminary determination
that the slight increase in NOX and VOC emissions resulting
from this change will not interfere with the Area's ability to attain
and maintain the NAAQS, or any other applicable requirement. More
details on the individual non-interference analyses for the ozone,
PM2.5 and NO2 NAAQS are provided below.
b. Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS
Effective June 15, 2004, the Birmingham Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
[[Page 13059]]
ozone NAAQS. The primary precursors for ozone are VOCs and
NOX emissions. As a previous 1-hour ozone nonattainment
area, the Birmingham Area was already subject to the federal RVP
requirements for high ozone season gasoline, and as mentioned above,
the State opted to implement a state-level RVP requirement for high
ozone season gasoline to aid the Area with compliance with the ozone
NAAQS. Although originally implemented for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS,
these federal and state RVP requirements continued to apply to the
Birmingham Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and are still
applicable for the Birmingham Area.
On January 27, 2006, ADEM submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As part of the
State's ozone maintenance plan, Alabama took a conservative approach to
projecting its emissions inventories for the future projection years of
2009, 2015 and 2017 by assuming a level of 9.0 psi for RVP for high
ozone season gasoline in the Birmingham Area. The intent of this
conservative approach to developing the future projection year
emissions was to demonstrate that the Birmingham Area could maintain
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard without relying on the 7.0 psi state-
level requirement for RVP in high ozone season gasoline. ADEM used the
MOBILE6.2 mobile source emissions model to estimate the emissions. In
the years 2015 and 2017, ADEM projected a reduction from the 2002 base
year inventory of approximately 45 percent in NOX emissions
(in tons per summer day). The projected reduction of VOC emissions (in
tons per summer day) for the years 2015 and 2017 is approximately a 20
percent from the 2002 base year emissions inventory.
There is an overall downward trend in ozone concentration in the
Birmingham Area that can be attributed to regional and local programs/
controls enacted in the Birmingham Area that have led to significant
emissions reductions. On May 12, 2006 (71 FR 27631), EPA approved
Alabama's 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area
and redesignated the Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The Birmingham Area is continuing to meet the 1-hour and 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS,\4\ and is meeting the new 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
based on the 2008-2010 design value of 75 parts per billion (ppb). The
2008 ozone NAAQS is met when the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average concentration, averaged over 3 years is 75 ppb or less.
Based on preliminary monitoring data from 2009-2011, the Birmingham
Area is continuing to meet the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. More detail on
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The air quality design value for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
the 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration. The level of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
0.08 parts per million (ppm). The 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is not met
when the design value is greater than 0.08 ppm (0.085 ppm rounds
up).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA established a more stringent 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 75 ppb on
March 12, 2008. The Agency is currently in the process of determining
areas' compliance with the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and has not yet
completed the formal designation process. However, on December 9, 2011,
EPA announced its preliminary intention regarding designations for
nonattainment areas for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA did not
indicate the Birmingham Area as a potential nonattainment area for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As stated above, although the Agency has not
yet completed the designation process, EPA must still consider
compliance with section 110(l) of the CAA. EPA, therefore, evaluated
whether or not Alabama's requested change to its RVP requirements would
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. In doing so, EPA reviewed current monitoring data, which suggest
that the Birmingham Area appears to be attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The current design value for ozone for the Birmingham Area is
2008-2010 is 75ppb, while the preliminary 2009-2011 design value is 75
ppb for this Area. EPA also evaluated the potential increase in the VOC
and NOX precursor emissions, and whether it is reasonable to
conclude that the requested change to Alabama's high ozone season RVP
requirement (which would have the effect in the Area of reverting to
the federal RVP requirement for high ozone season fuel) would cause the
Area to be out of compliance with the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
In light of the current designations, monitoring data and the
submitted modeling, including the fact that the VOC and NOX
emissions inventories are projected to continue to significantly
decrease,\5\ EPA has preliminarily determined that Alabama's change to
its RVP requirements for the Birmingham Area will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Indeed, the future decreases in the inventory are an order
of magnitude greater than the increases associated with the change
in RVP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Non-Interference Analysis for the Particulate Matter NAAQS
Effective April 5, 2005, the Birmingham Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 Annual NAAQS. The primary
precursors for PM2.5 are NOX and sulfur oxides.
VOC and ammonia can be determined to be precursors to PM2.5
formation on a case-by-case basis. For the Birmingham Area, neither the
State of Alabama or EPA have made a determination that VOC and ammonia
are significant precursors to the formation of PM2.5 in the
Birmingham Area thus NOX and sulfur oxides are the
precursors of interests in addition to direct PM2.5
emissions. In 2005 ADEM and Jefferson County Department of Health
contracted with Envair to study the nature and potential causes of
PM2.5 concentrations in the Birmingham Area. The study
investigated the sources of particulate matter pollution in and around
the North Birmingham and Wylam monitors. The study gave insight into
the sources of particulate matter pollution in and around the North
Birmingham and Wylam monitors. According to the findings of the study,
sulfate and primary organic matter are the most important contributors
to PM2.5 in the Birmingham Area. The results of the study
indicate that the most effective control strategies to reduce
PM2.5 concentrations in the Birmingham area include the
reduction of regional and urban/local emissions of SO2. As
mentioned earlier in this rulemaking, the RVP requirements result in
emissions benefits for VOC and NOX so EPA focused on these
precursors for the analysis of the potential impact of Alabama's SIP
change.
On May 13, 2009, ADEM submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan for the 1997 PM2.5 Annual standards. As
part of the State's 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan,
Alabama took a conservative approach for developing its emissions
inventory for the future projection years of 2009, 2015 and 2017 by
assuming a level of 7.8 psi for RVP for high ozone season gasoline in
the Birmingham Area. The intent of this conservative approach to
developing the future projection year emissions was to demonstrate that
the Birmingham Area could maintain the 1997 Annual PM2.5
standard without relying on the 7.0 psi state-level requirement for RVP
in high ozone season gasoline. ADEM originally used the MOBILE6.2
mobile source emissions model to estimate the emissions but later
updated these emissions with the MOVES mobile source emissions model.
As discussed earlier the most effective
[[Page 13060]]
way to reduce PM2.5 concentrations in the Birmingham area is
to control SO2 emissions. The projected reduction of
SO2 emissions (in tons per day) for the years 2012, 2015,
2018, 2021 and 2024 is approximately 58 percent from the 2009 base year
emissions inventory. As Table 2 indicates the PM2.5 annual
design value has been decreasing. The overall downward trend in
PM2.5 concentration in the Birmingham area can be attributed
to regional and local programs/controls enacted in the Birmingham area
that have led to significant emission reductions.
Table 2--PM2.5 Annual Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2005-2007 2006-2008 2007-2009 2008-2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design Value *...................... 18.7 17.3 15.1 13.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The air quality design value for the PM2.5 1997 annual standard is 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\).
On June 29, 2011 (76 FR 38023), EPA made a determination that the
Birmingham PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard and on November 10, 2011 (76 FR
70078), EPA proposed to approve Alabama's 1997 Annual PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area and redesignate the Area to
attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA did not
receive any comments on the proposed rulemaking to redesignate this
Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standards.
On June 17, 2010, ADEM submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards. As
part of the State's 2006 24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plan,
Alabama took a conservative approach for developing its emissions
inventory for the future projection years of 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021 and
2024 by assuming a level of 7.8 psi for RVP for high ozone season
gasoline in the Birmingham Area. The intent of this conservative
approach to developing the future projection year emissions was to
demonstrate that the Birmingham Area could maintain the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standards without relying on the 7.0 psi state-level
requirement for RVP in high ozone season gasoline. ADEM used the MOVES
mobile source emissions model to estimate the emissions. As Table 3
indicates the PM2.5 24-hour design value has been
decreasing. The overall downward trend in PM2.5
concentration in the Birmingham Area can be attributed to regional and
local programs/controls enacted in the Birmingham Area that have led to
significant emission reductions.
Table 3--PM2.5 24-Hour Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2005-2007 2006-2008 2007-2009 2008-2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design Value........................ 44 39 34 29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 20, 2010 (75 FR 57186), EPA made a determination that the
Birmingham PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 standard and on November 10, 2011 (76 FR
70091), EPA proposed to approve Alabama's 2006 24-hour PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area and redesignate the Area to
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards. EPA did not
receive any comments on the proposed rulemaking to redesignate this
Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
In light of the proposed designation, monitoring data and the
submitted modeling, including the fact that the VOC and NOX
emissions inventories are projected to continue to significantly
decrease, EPA has preliminarily determined that Alabama's change to its
RVP requirements for the Birmingham Area will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the 1997 PM2.5 annual or the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards.
d. Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
On January 20, 2012, EPA finalized designations for 2010
NO2 NAAQS. Alabama was designated unclassifiable/attainment,
including the Birmingham Area, for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Also,
EPA evaluated the potential increase in the NOX emissions
(approximately a quarter of a ton per day between June 1st and
September 15th) and whether it is reasonable to believe that Alabama's
change for its high ozone season RVP requirement (which has the effect
of reverting the Area to the federal RVP requirement for high ozone
season fuel) would cause the Area to be out of compliance with the 2010
NO2 NAAQS. The slight increase in NOX emissions
is being mitigated by a steady decrease in tailpipe emissions, which is
the result of cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing the older fleet. In
light of the current designation, monitoring data and the submitted
modeling, including the fact that NOX emissions inventories
are projected to continue to significantly decrease, EPA has
preliminarily determined that Alabama's change to its RVP requirements
for the Birmingham Area will not interfere with the continued decline
in NOX emissions, nor with attainment or maintenance of the
2010 NO2 NAAQS.
V. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's January 10, 2012, SIP
revision regarding the State's regulation at Chapter 335-3-20 ``Control
of Fuels'' which identifies Alabama's 7.0 psi requirement for the low-
RVP fuel program in the Birmingham Area (i.e., Jefferson and Shelby
Counties). Specifically, Alabama's January 10, 2012, proposed SIP
revision moves the State's 7.0 psi requirement for low-RVP fuel program
in the Birmingham Area from the active measures portion to the
contingency measures portions of the maintenance plans for ozone
standards, the annual 1997 PM2.5 standard and the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 standard. This action, if finalized, would result
in applicability of the federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi for the
Birmingham Area.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
[[Page 13061]]
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this 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 in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 24, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-5266 Filed 3-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P