Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of the Birmingham 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 4341-4346 [2013-00954]

Download as PDF 4341 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS Subpart GG—New Mexico 2. Section 52.1620(c) is amended by revising the entries for Parts 74 and 79 under the first table titled ‘‘New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20— ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air Quality’’. The revisions read as follows: § 52.1620 * Identification of plan. * * (c) * * * * * EPA APPROVED NEW MEXICO REGULATIONS State citation State approval/ effective date Title/subject EPA approval date Comments New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20—Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air Quality * * * Part 74 .................................... Permits—Prevention of Significant Deterioration. * 6/3/2011 * 1/22/2013 [Insert FR page number where document begins]. * * * * Part 79 .................................... Permits—Nonattainment Areas. * 6/3/2011 * 1/22/2013 [Insert FR page number where document begins]. * * * * * * * * * * * * * DATES: * Effective on January 14, 2013. [FR Doc. 2013–00729 Filed 1–18–13; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BILLING CODE P Laurel Dygowski, Air Program, Mailcode 8P–AR, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–6144, dygowski.laurel@epa.gov. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0114; FRL–9771–9] Approval, Disapproval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of Utah; Regional Haze Rule Requirements for Mandatory Class I Areas Under 40 CFR 51.309; Correction Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule; correction. AGENCY: The EPA is supplementing the preamble to the final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on December 14, 2012. This final rule partially approved and partially disapproved a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Utah on May 26, 2011 that addresses regional haze. The final rule preamble inadvertently did not include language pertaining to judicial review, and this document adds that language. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:36 Jan 18, 2013 Jkt 229001 In Federal Register document 2012–29406 published in the Federal Register on December 14, 2012 (77 FR 74355), the following corrections are made: 1. On page 74372, in the first column, in section V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews, paragraph L. is added to read as follows: ‘‘L. Judicial Review— Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 25, 2013. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)’’ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 * Revisions to 20.2.74.303(A) NMAC submitted 5/23/ 2011, effective 6/3/2011, are NOT part of SIP. 20.2.74.303 NMAC submitted 12/1/2010, effective 1/1/ 2011, remains SIP approved (6/20/2011, 76 FR 43149). Dated: December 20, 2012. James B. Martin, Regional Administrator, Region 8. [FR Doc. 2013–01081 Filed 1–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0316; FRL–9771–1] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of the Birmingham 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area to Attainment Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: EPA is taking final action to approve a request submitted on May 2, 2011, from the State of Alabama, through the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), Air Division, to redesignate the Birmingham fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Birmingham Area’’ or SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM 22JAR1 4342 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations ‘‘Area’’) to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The Birmingham 1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment area is comprised of Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their entireties and a portion of Walker County. EPA’s approval of the redesignation request is based on the determination that the State of Alabama has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment set forth in the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), including the determination that the Birmingham Area has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, EPA is approving a revision to the Alabama state implementation plan (SIP) to include the 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area that contains the new 2024 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5. This action also approves the 2009 emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan. DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective on February 21, 2013. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 2011–0316. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information 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 through 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Huey, 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. Joel Huey may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 9104 or via electronic mail at huey.joel@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. What is the background for the actions? II. What are the actions EPA is taking? III. Why is EPA taking these actions? IV. What are the effects of these actions? V. Final Action VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background for the actions? As stated in our proposed approval notice published on November 10, 2011 (76 FR 70078), this redesignation action addresses the Birmingham Area’s status solely with respect to the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, for which designations were finalized on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944) and April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844). On May 2, 2011, the State of Alabama, through ADEM, submitted a request to redesignate the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and for EPA approval of the Alabama SIP revisions containing a maintenance plan for the Area. In the November 10, 2011, notice, EPA proposed to take the following three separate but related actions, some of which involve multiple elements: (1) To redesignate the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, provided EPA approves the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan; (2) to approve into the Alabama SIP, under section 175A of the CAA, Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, including the associated MVEBs; and (3) to approve, under CAA section 172(c)(3), the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan. No comments were received on the proposed action. EPA is now taking final action on the three actions identified above. Additional background for today’s action, and other details regarding the proposed redesignation, is set forth in EPA’s November 10, 2011, proposal and is summarized below. The following information also: (1) Affirms that the most recent available ambient monitoring data continue to support this redesignation action, (2) summarizes the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area, and (3) provides additional information on events that have occurred since the November 10, 2011, proposal. With regard to the data, EPA has reviewed the most recent ambient monitoring data, which indicate that the Birmingham Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the 3-year attainment period of 2008– 2010, which was provided with Alabama’s May 2, 2011, submittal and request for redesignation. As stated in EPA’s November 10, 2011, proposal notice, the 3-year design value of 13.7 mg/m3 for 2008–2010 meets the NAAQS of 15.0 mg/m3. Quality assured and certified data now in EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) for 2011 provide a 3-year design value of 12.9 mg/m3 for 2009– 2011. Furthermore, preliminary monitoring data for 2012 indicate that the Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2012 preliminary data are available in AQS although are not yet quality assured and certified. The MVEBs, specified in tons per year (tpy), included in the maintenance plan are as shown in Table 1 below. In the November 10, 2011, proposed action, EPA noted that the period for public comment on the adequacy of these MVEBs (as contained in Alabama’s submittal) began on March 24, 2011, and closed on April 25, 2011. No comments were received during the public comment period. Through this final action, EPA is finding the 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs adequate for transportation conformity purposes and finalizing the approval of the budgets. TABLE 1—BIRMINGHAM AREA PM2.5 NOX MVEBS [tpy] tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PM2.5 2024 On-road Mobile Emissions ............................................................................................................................. Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ......................................................................................................................... 2024 Conformity MVEBs ......................................................................................................................................... In the November 10, 2011, proposed redesignation of the Birmingham Area, VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:36 Jan 18, 2013 Jkt 229001 EPA proposed to determine that the emission reduction requirements that PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 335.70 106.37 442.07 NOX 8,738.39 7,243.11 15,981.50 contributed to attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard in the E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM 22JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with nonattainment area could be considered permanent and enforceable. See 76 FR at 70092, 70097–70099. At the time of proposal, EPA noted that the requirements of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR),1 which had been in place since 2005, were to be replaced, starting in 2012, by the requirements in the then recently promulgated Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). CSAPR included regulatory changes to sunset (i.e., discontinue) the CAIR requirements for control periods in 2012 and beyond. See 76 FR at 48322. Although Alabama’s redesignation request and maintenance plan included reductions associated with CAIR, EPA proposed to approve the request based in part on the fact that CSAPR achieved similar or greater reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. See 76 FR at 70092, 70097– 70099. Because CSAPR requirements were expected to replace the CAIR requirements starting in 2012, EPA considered the impact of CSAPR related reductions on the Birmingham Area. On this basis, EPA proposed to determine that, pursuant to CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii), the pollutant transport part of the reductions that led to attainment in the Birmingham Area could be considered permanent and enforceable. See 76 FR at 70079, 70084– 70086. On December 30, 2011, shortly after EPA’s proposed approval of the Birmingham redesignation, the D.C. Circuit issued an order addressing the status of CSAPR and CAIR in response to motions filed by numerous parties seeking a stay of CSAPR pending judicial review. In that order, the court stayed CSAPR pending resolution of the petitions for review of that rule in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (No. 11–1302 and consolidated cases), also referred to as EME Homer City. The court also indicated that EPA was expected to continue to administer CAIR in the interim until judicial review of CSAPR was completed. Subsequently, on August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in EME Homer City to vacate and remand CSAPR and to keep CAIR in place. Specifically, the court ordered EPA to 1 On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which requires significant reductions in emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOX from electric generating units to limit the interstate transport of these pollutants and the ozone and fine particulate matter they form in the atmosphere. See 70 FR 25162. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:36 Jan 18, 2013 Jkt 229001 continue administering CAIR pending the promulgation of a valid replacement. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit has not yet issued the final mandate in EME Homer City as EPA (as well as several intervenors) petitioned for rehearing en banc, asking the full court to review the decision. While rehearing proceedings are pending, EPA intends to act in accordance with the panel opinion in the EME Homer City opinion. Subsequent to the EME Homer City opinion, EPA published several proposals to redesignate both particulate matter and ozone nonattainment areas to attainment. These proposals explained the legal status of CAIR and CSAPR, and provided a basis on which EPA would consider emissions reductions associated with CAIR to be permanent and enforceable for redesignation purposes, pursuant to CAA section 107(d)(3)(D)(iii). In those actions, EPA explained that in light of the August 21, 2012, order by the D.C. Circuit, CAIR remains in place and enforceable until substituted by a ‘‘valid’’ replacement rule. See, e.g., 77 FR 69409 (November 19, 2012); 77 FR 68087 (November 15, 2012). Alabama’s May 2, 2011, SIP submittal supporting its redesignation request includes CAIR as a control measure, which became state-effective on April 3, 2007, and was approved by EPA on October 1, 2007, for the purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. See 72 FR 55659. Due to the legal status of CSAPR at the time that EPA proposed approval of Alabama’s May 2, 2011, redesignation submittal, EPA was able to rely on CSAPR related reductions. EPA also recognized that the monitoring data used to demonstrate the Birmingham Area’s attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS included reductions associated with CAIR. Due to the uncertainty regarding the legal status of CAIR when Alabama provided its submittal on May 2, 2011, the State’s analysis assumed that no additional reductions in SO2 or NOX emissions from utilities would occur above and beyond those achieved through 2012 as a result of CAIR. To the extent that the Alabama submittal relies on CAIR reductions that occurred through 2012, the recent directive from the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City ensures that the reductions associated with CAIR will be permanent and enforceable for the necessary time period for purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). EPA has been ordered by the court to develop a new rule, and the opinion makes clear that after promulgating that new rule EPA must provide states an PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 4343 opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to implement that rule. CAIR thus cannot be replaced until EPA has promulgated a final rule through a notice-andcomment rulemaking process; states have had an opportunity to draft and submit SIPs; EPA has reviewed the SIPs to determine if they can be approved; and EPA has taken action on the SIPs, including promulgating a Federal Implementation Plan, if appropriate. The court’s clear instruction to EPA is that it must continue to administer CAIR until a ‘‘valid replacement’’ exists, and thus CAIR reductions may be relied upon until the necessary actions are taken by EPA and states to administer CAIR’s replacement. Furthermore, the court’s instruction provides an additional backstop; by definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and meets the court’s direction would require upwind states to have SIPs that eliminate significant contributions to downwind nonattainment and prevent interference with maintenance in downwind areas. Further, in deciding to vacate CSAPR and to require EPA to continue administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the consequences of vacating CAIR ‘‘might be more severe now in light of the reliance interests accumulated over the intervening four years.’’ EME Homer City, 696 F.3d at 38. The accumulated reliance interests include the interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely on reductions associated with CAIR, which brought certain nonattainment areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions, states would be forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on top of those achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type of irrational result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to continue administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable for purposes such as redesignation. Following promulgation of the replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as appropriate to identify whether there are any issues that need to be addressed. In light of these unique circumstances and for the reasons explained above, EPA is approving the redesignation request and the related SIP revision for Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their entireties and a portion of Walker County in Alabama, including Alabama’s plan for maintaining attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Birmingham Area. EPA E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM 22JAR1 4344 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations continues to implement CAIR in accordance with current direction from the court, and thus CAIR is in place and enforceable, and will remain so, until substituted by a valid replacement rule. Alabama’s SIP revision lists CAIR as a control measure, which became stateeffective on April 3, 2007, and was approved by EPA on October 1, 2007, for the purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. The monitoring data used to demonstrate the Area’s attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment deadline was impacted by CAIR. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with II. What are the actions EPA is taking? In today’s rulemaking, EPA is approving: (1) A change to the legal designation of the Birmingham Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) under CAA section 175A, Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, including the associated MVEBs; and (3) under CAA section 172(c)(3), the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan for the Area. The maintenance plan is designed to demonstrate that the Birmingham Area will continue to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. EPA’s approval of the redesignation request is based on EPA’s determination that the Birmingham Area meets the criteria for redesignation set forth in CAA, sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A, including EPA’s determination that the Birmingham Area has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s analyses of Alabama’s redesignation request, emissions inventory, and maintenance plan are described in detail in the November 10, 2011, proposed rule (76 FR 70078). Consistent with the CAA, the maintenance plan that EPA is approving also includes 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area. In this action, EPA is approving these NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area for the purposes of transportation conformity. For required regional emissions analysis years that involve 2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets will be the new 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs. III. Why is EPA taking these actions? EPA has determined that the Birmingham Area has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and has also determined that all other criteria for the redesignation of the Birmingham Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS have been met. See CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). One of those requirements is that the VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:36 Jan 18, 2013 Jkt 229001 Birmingham Area has an approved plan demonstrating maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also taking final action to approve the maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area as meeting the requirements of sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. In addition, EPA is approving the new NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area as contained in Alabama’s maintenance plan because these MVEBs are consistent with maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard in the Birmingham Area. Finally, EPA is approving the emissions inventory as meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. The detailed rationale for EPA’s determinations and actions are set forth in the proposed rulemaking and in other discussion in this final rulemaking. IV. What are the effects of these actions? Approval of the redesignation request changes the legal designation of the Birmingham Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is modifying the regulatory table in 40 CFR 81.301 to reflect a designation of attainment for these full and partial counties. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Alabama SIP, Alabama’s plan for maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Birmingham Area through 2024. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy possible future violations of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and establishes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area. Additionally, this action approves the emissions inventory for the Birmingham Area pursuant to section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. V. Final Action EPA is taking final action to approve three separate but related actions, some of which involve multiple elements: (1) The redesignation of the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) under CAA section 175A, Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, including the associated MVEBs; and (3) under CAA section 172(c)(3), the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan for the Area. The 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area includes the new 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs of 15,981.50 tpy and 442.07 tpy, respectively. Within 24 months from the effective date of EPA’s adequacy determination, the transportation partners will need to demonstrate PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 conformity to the new NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e).2 VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in the application of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For these reasons, these actions: • Are 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); • Do not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • Are certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • Do not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Are not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Are not significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National 2 The adequacy finding becomes effective upon the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii). E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM 22JAR1 4345 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and, • Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this final 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. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 25, 2013. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2). List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Particulate matter. 40 CFR Part 81 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks. Dated: January 9, 2013. Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, Regional Administrator, Region 4. 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows: PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart B—Alabama 2. Section 52.50(e) is amended by adding a new entry for ‘‘1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the Birmingham Alabama Area’’ at the end of the table to read as follows: ■ § 52.50 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * EPA-APPROVED ALABAMA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date/effective date EPA approval date * * 1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the Birmingham Area. * * Birmingham PM2.5 Nonattainment Area. 5/2/11 * * 1/22/13 [Insert citation of publication]. PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 2. In § 81.301, the table entitled ‘‘Alabama—PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ is amended under ‘‘Birmingham, AL’’ by revising the entry for ‘‘Jefferson County, ■ Explanation * Shelby County, Walker County (part)’’ to read as follows: § 81.301 * * Alabama. * * * ALABAMA—PM2.5 (ANNUAL NAAQS) Designation a Designated area Date 1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with Birmingham, AL: Jefferson County ............................. Shelby County ................................. Walker County (part) The area described by U.S. Census 2000 block group identifiers 01–127– 0214–5, 01–127–0215–4, and 01–127–0216–2. * * Type This action is effective 1/22/13 .............................................. This action is effective 1/22/13 .............................................. This action is effective 1/22/13 .............................................. * * Attainment. Attainment. Attainment. * * a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:36 Jan 18, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM 22JAR1 * 4346 * * Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations * * * [FR Doc. 2013–00954 Filed 1–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 679 [Docket No. 111207737–2141–2] RIN 0648–XC452 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by Catcher/Processors Using Trawl Gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. AGENCY: NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Pacific cod by catcher/ processors (C/Ps) using trawl gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the A season allowance of the 2013 Pacific cod total allowable catch apportioned to C/Ps using trawl gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA. DATES: Effective 1200 hours, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), January 20, 2013, through 1200 hours, A.l.t., September 1, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Obren Davis, 907–586–7228. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive economic zone tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:36 Jan 18, 2013 Jkt 229001 according to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Regulations governing fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. Regulations governing sideboard protections for GOA groundfish fisheries appear at subpart B of 50 CFR part 680. The A season allowance of the 2013 Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) apportioned to C/Ps using trawl gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA is 188 metric tons (mt), as established by the final 2012 and 2013 harvest specifications for groundfish of the GOA (77 FR 15194, March 14, 2012) and inseason adjustment to the final 2013 harvest specifications for Pacific cod (78 FR 267, January 3, 2013). In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) has determined that the A season allowance of the 2013 Pacific cod TAC apportioned to C/Ps using trawl gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA will soon be reached. Therefore, the Regional Administrator is establishing a directed fishing allowance of 0 mt, and is setting aside the remaining 188 mt as bycatch to support other anticipated groundfish fisheries. In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional Administrator finds that this directed fishing allowance has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Pacific cod by C/Ps using trawl gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA. After the effective date of this closure the PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 maximum retainable amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time during a trip. Classification This action responds to the best available information recently obtained from the fishery. The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), finds good cause to waive the requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This requirement is impracticable and contrary to the public interest as it would prevent NMFS from responding to the most recent fisheries data in a timely fashion and would delay the directed fishing closure of Pacific cod for C/Ps using trawl gear in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a notice providing time for public comment because the most recent, relevant data only became available as of January 15, 2013. The AA also finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based upon the reasons provided above for waiver of prior notice and opportunity for public comment. This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Dated: January 16, 2013. Kara Meckley, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2013–01165 Filed 1–16–13; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P E:\FR\FM\22JAR1.SGM 22JAR1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4341-4346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00954]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0316; FRL-9771-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of
the Birmingham 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area
to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve a request submitted on
May 2, 2011, from the State of Alabama, through the Alabama Department
of Environmental Management (ADEM), Air Division, to redesignate the
Birmingham fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment
area (hereafter referred to as the ``Birmingham Area'' or

[[Page 4342]]

``Area'') to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The Birmingham 1997 Annual
PM2.5 nonattainment area is comprised of Jefferson and
Shelby Counties in their entireties and a portion of Walker County.
EPA's approval of the redesignation request is based on the
determination that the State of Alabama has met the criteria for
redesignation to attainment set forth in the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act), including the determination that the Birmingham Area has attained
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, EPA is approving
a revision to the Alabama state implementation plan (SIP) to include
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Birmingham
Area that contains the new 2024 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs)
for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5. This action
also approves the 2009 emissions inventory submitted with the
maintenance plan.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective on February 21,
2013.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0316. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information 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 through 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Huey, 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. Joel Huey may be reached by
phone at (404) 562-9104 or via electronic mail at huey.joel@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What is the background for the actions?
II. What are the actions EPA is taking?
III. Why is EPA taking these actions?
IV. What are the effects of these actions?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for the actions?

As stated in our proposed approval notice published on November 10,
2011 (76 FR 70078), this redesignation action addresses the Birmingham
Area's status solely with respect to the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS, for which designations were finalized on January 5, 2005 (70 FR
944) and April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844). On May 2, 2011, the State of
Alabama, through ADEM, submitted a request to redesignate the
Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS and for EPA approval of the Alabama SIP revisions containing a
maintenance plan for the Area. In the November 10, 2011, notice, EPA
proposed to take the following three separate but related actions, some
of which involve multiple elements: (1) To redesignate the Birmingham
Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, provided
EPA approves the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance
plan; (2) to approve into the Alabama SIP, under section 175A of the
CAA, Alabama's 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan,
including the associated MVEBs; and (3) to approve, under CAA section
172(c)(3), the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan.
No comments were received on the proposed action. EPA is now taking
final action on the three actions identified above. Additional
background for today's action, and other details regarding the proposed
redesignation, is set forth in EPA's November 10, 2011, proposal and is
summarized below. The following information also: (1) Affirms that the
most recent available ambient monitoring data continue to support this
redesignation action, (2) summarizes the NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area, and
(3) provides additional information on events that have occurred since
the November 10, 2011, proposal.
With regard to the data, EPA has reviewed the most recent ambient
monitoring data, which indicate that the Birmingham Area continues to
attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the 3-year
attainment period of 2008-2010, which was provided with Alabama's May
2, 2011, submittal and request for redesignation. As stated in EPA's
November 10, 2011, proposal notice, the 3-year design value of 13.7
[mu]g/m\3\ for 2008-2010 meets the NAAQS of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. Quality
assured and certified data now in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) for
2011 provide a 3-year design value of 12.9 [mu]g/m\3\ for 2009-2011.
Furthermore, preliminary monitoring data for 2012 indicate that the
Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
The 2012 preliminary data are available in AQS although are not yet
quality assured and certified.
The MVEBs, specified in tons per year (tpy), included in the
maintenance plan are as shown in Table 1 below. In the November 10,
2011, proposed action, EPA noted that the period for public comment on
the adequacy of these MVEBs (as contained in Alabama's submittal) began
on March 24, 2011, and closed on April 25, 2011. No comments were
received during the public comment period. Through this final action,
EPA is finding the 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs
adequate for transportation conformity purposes and finalizing the
approval of the budgets.

Table 1--Birmingham Area PM2.5 NOX MVEBs
[tpy]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2024 On-road Mobile Emissions........... 335.70 8,738.39
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs........ 106.37 7,243.11
2024 Conformity MVEBs................... 442.07 15,981.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the November 10, 2011, proposed redesignation of the Birmingham
Area, EPA proposed to determine that the emission reduction
requirements that contributed to attainment of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 standard in the

[[Page 4343]]

nonattainment area could be considered permanent and enforceable. See
76 FR at 70092, 70097-70099. At the time of proposal, EPA noted that
the requirements of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR),\1\ which had
been in place since 2005, were to be replaced, starting in 2012, by the
requirements in the then recently promulgated Cross-State Air Pollution
Rule (CSAPR), 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). CSAPR included regulatory
changes to sunset (i.e., discontinue) the CAIR requirements for control
periods in 2012 and beyond. See 76 FR at 48322. Although Alabama's
redesignation request and maintenance plan included reductions
associated with CAIR, EPA proposed to approve the request based in part
on the fact that CSAPR achieved similar or greater reductions in the
relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. See 76 FR at 70092, 70097-70099.
Because CSAPR requirements were expected to replace the CAIR
requirements starting in 2012, EPA considered the impact of CSAPR
related reductions on the Birmingham Area. On this basis, EPA proposed
to determine that, pursuant to CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii), the
pollutant transport part of the reductions that led to attainment in
the Birmingham Area could be considered permanent and enforceable. See
76 FR at 70079, 70084-70086.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which requires
significant reductions in emissions of sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and NOX from electric generating units
to limit the interstate transport of these pollutants and the ozone
and fine particulate matter they form in the atmosphere. See 70 FR
25162. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v.
EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule
to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits
provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C.
Cir. 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On December 30, 2011, shortly after EPA's proposed approval of the
Birmingham redesignation, the D.C. Circuit issued an order addressing
the status of CSAPR and CAIR in response to motions filed by numerous
parties seeking a stay of CSAPR pending judicial review. In that order,
the court stayed CSAPR pending resolution of the petitions for review
of that rule in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (No. 11-1302 and
consolidated cases), also referred to as EME Homer City. The court also
indicated that EPA was expected to continue to administer CAIR in the
interim until judicial review of CSAPR was completed. Subsequently, on
August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in EME Homer City
to vacate and remand CSAPR and to keep CAIR in place. Specifically, the
court ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR pending the
promulgation of a valid replacement. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v.
EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit has not yet
issued the final mandate in EME Homer City as EPA (as well as several
intervenors) petitioned for rehearing en banc, asking the full court to
review the decision. While rehearing proceedings are pending, EPA
intends to act in accordance with the panel opinion in the EME Homer
City opinion.
Subsequent to the EME Homer City opinion, EPA published several
proposals to redesignate both particulate matter and ozone
nonattainment areas to attainment. These proposals explained the legal
status of CAIR and CSAPR, and provided a basis on which EPA would
consider emissions reductions associated with CAIR to be permanent and
enforceable for redesignation purposes, pursuant to CAA section
107(d)(3)(D)(iii). In those actions, EPA explained that in light of the
August 21, 2012, order by the D.C. Circuit, CAIR remains in place and
enforceable until substituted by a ``valid'' replacement rule. See,
e.g., 77 FR 69409 (November 19, 2012); 77 FR 68087 (November 15, 2012).
Alabama's May 2, 2011, SIP submittal supporting its redesignation
request includes CAIR as a control measure, which became state-
effective on April 3, 2007, and was approved by EPA on October 1, 2007,
for the purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX
emissions. See 72 FR 55659. Due to the legal status of CSAPR at the
time that EPA proposed approval of Alabama's May 2, 2011, redesignation
submittal, EPA was able to rely on CSAPR related reductions. EPA also
recognized that the monitoring data used to demonstrate the Birmingham
Area's attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS included
reductions associated with CAIR. Due to the uncertainty regarding the
legal status of CAIR when Alabama provided its submittal on May 2,
2011, the State's analysis assumed that no additional reductions in
SO2 or NOX emissions from utilities would occur
above and beyond those achieved through 2012 as a result of CAIR. To
the extent that the Alabama submittal relies on CAIR reductions that
occurred through 2012, the recent directive from the D.C. Circuit in
EME Homer City ensures that the reductions associated with CAIR will be
permanent and enforceable for the necessary time period for purposes of
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). EPA has been ordered by the court to
develop a new rule, and the opinion makes clear that after promulgating
that new rule EPA must provide states an opportunity to draft and
submit SIPs to implement that rule. CAIR thus cannot be replaced until
EPA has promulgated a final rule through a notice-and-comment
rulemaking process; states have had an opportunity to draft and submit
SIPs; EPA has reviewed the SIPs to determine if they can be approved;
and EPA has taken action on the SIPs, including promulgating a Federal
Implementation Plan, if appropriate. The court's clear instruction to
EPA is that it must continue to administer CAIR until a ``valid
replacement'' exists, and thus CAIR reductions may be relied upon until
the necessary actions are taken by EPA and states to administer CAIR's
replacement. Furthermore, the court's instruction provides an
additional backstop; by definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and
meets the court's direction would require upwind states to have SIPs
that eliminate significant contributions to downwind nonattainment and
prevent interference with maintenance in downwind areas.
Further, in deciding to vacate CSAPR and to require EPA to continue
administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the consequences
of vacating CAIR ``might be more severe now in light of the reliance
interests accumulated over the intervening four years.'' EME Homer
City, 696 F.3d at 38. The accumulated reliance interests include the
interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely on
reductions associated with CAIR, which brought certain nonattainment
areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from
relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions,
states would be forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on
top of those achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type
of irrational result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to
continue administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable
for purposes such as redesignation. Following promulgation of the
replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as appropriate to identify
whether there are any issues that need to be addressed.
In light of these unique circumstances and for the reasons
explained above, EPA is approving the redesignation request and the
related SIP revision for Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their
entireties and a portion of Walker County in Alabama, including
Alabama's plan for maintaining attainment of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Birmingham Area. EPA

[[Page 4344]]

continues to implement CAIR in accordance with current direction from
the court, and thus CAIR is in place and enforceable, and will remain
so, until substituted by a valid replacement rule. Alabama's SIP
revision lists CAIR as a control measure, which became state-effective
on April 3, 2007, and was approved by EPA on October 1, 2007, for the
purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. The
monitoring data used to demonstrate the Area's attainment of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment deadline was
impacted by CAIR.

II. What are the actions EPA is taking?

In today's rulemaking, EPA is approving: (1) A change to the legal
designation of the Birmingham Area from nonattainment to attainment for
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) under CAA section 175A,
Alabama's 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan,
including the associated MVEBs; and (3) under CAA section 172(c)(3),
the emissions inventory submitted with the maintenance plan for the
Area. The maintenance plan is designed to demonstrate that the
Birmingham Area will continue to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. EPA's approval of the
redesignation request is based on EPA's determination that the
Birmingham Area meets the criteria for redesignation set forth in CAA,
sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A, including EPA's determination that the
Birmingham Area has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA's analyses of Alabama's redesignation request, emissions inventory,
and maintenance plan are described in detail in the November 10, 2011,
proposed rule (76 FR 70078).
Consistent with the CAA, the maintenance plan that EPA is approving
also includes 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the
Birmingham Area. In this action, EPA is approving these NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area for the purposes of
transportation conformity. For required regional emissions analysis
years that involve 2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets will be the
new 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs.

III. Why is EPA taking these actions?

EPA has determined that the Birmingham Area has attained the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and has also determined that all other
criteria for the redesignation of the Birmingham Area from
nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
have been met. See CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). One of those requirements
is that the Birmingham Area has an approved plan demonstrating
maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also
taking final action to approve the maintenance plan for the Birmingham
Area as meeting the requirements of sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA. In addition, EPA is approving the new NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area as
contained in Alabama's maintenance plan because these MVEBs are
consistent with maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
standard in the Birmingham Area. Finally, EPA is approving the
emissions inventory as meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of
the CAA. The detailed rationale for EPA's determinations and actions
are set forth in the proposed rulemaking and in other discussion in
this final rulemaking.

IV. What are the effects of these actions?

Approval of the redesignation request changes the legal designation
of the Birmingham Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is modifying the regulatory table in
40 CFR 81.301 to reflect a designation of attainment for these full and
partial counties. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Alabama
SIP, Alabama's plan for maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS in the Birmingham Area through 2024. The maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to remedy possible future violations of
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and establishes NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area.
Additionally, this action approves the emissions inventory for the
Birmingham Area pursuant to section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.

V. Final Action

EPA is taking final action to approve three separate but related
actions, some of which involve multiple elements: (1) The redesignation
of the Birmingham Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) under CAA section 175A, Alabama's 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, including the
associated MVEBs; and (3) under CAA section 172(c)(3), the emissions
inventory submitted with the maintenance plan for the Area. The 1997
Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Birmingham Area
includes the new 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs of
15,981.50 tpy and 442.07 tpy, respectively. Within 24 months from the
effective date of EPA's adequacy determination, the transportation
partners will need to demonstrate conformity to the new NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ The adequacy finding becomes effective upon the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal Register. 40 CFR
93.118(f)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does
not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in
the application of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that
have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For these reasons, these actions:
Are 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);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not significant regulatory action subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National

[[Page 4345]]

Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with
the CAA; and,
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this final 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.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 25, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Particulate matter.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks.

Dated: January 9, 2013.
Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart B--Alabama

0
2. Section 52.50(e) is amended by adding a new entry for ``1997 Annual
PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the Birmingham Alabama Area'' at
the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec. 52.50 Identification of plan.

* * * * *
(e) * * *

EPA-Approved Alabama Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable State submittal
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or date/effective EPA approval date Explanation
provision nonattainment area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Birmingham PM2.5 5/2/11 1/22/13 [Insert ...................
Plan for the Birmingham Area. Nonattainment Area. citation of
publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. In Sec. 81.301, the table entitled ``Alabama--PM2.5
(Annual NAAQS)'' is amended under ``Birmingham, AL'' by revising the
entry for ``Jefferson County, Shelby County, Walker County (part)'' to
read as follows:

Sec. 81.301 Alabama.

* * * * *

Alabama--PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\
Designated area ---------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Birmingham, AL:
Jefferson County............ This action is Attainment.
effective 1/22/13.
Shelby County............... This action is Attainment.
effective 1/22/13.
Walker County (part) The This action is Attainment.
area described by U.S. effective 1/22/13.
Census 2000 block group
identifiers 01-127-0214-5,
01-127-0215-4, and 01-127-
0216-2.

* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as
otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.

[[Page 4346]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-00954 Filed 1-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.