Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 14611 

its Transportation Conformity SIP, 

Regional Haze Implementation Plan, 

Early Action Compacts, and the 8-hour 

Ozone Attainment Demonstration for 

York County, South Carolina portion of 

the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill NC–SC 

nonattainment area. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that South 

Carolina’s SIP and practices adequately 

demonstrate consultation with affected 

local entities related to the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS when necessary. 

IV. Proposed Action 

As described above, DHEC has 

addressed the elements of the CAA 

110(a)(1) and (2) SIP requirements 

pursuant to EPA’s October 2, 2007, 

guidance to ensure that the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS are implemented, 

enforced, and maintained in South 

Carolina. EPA is proposing to approve 

South Carolina’s infrastructure 

submission for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS because this submission is 

consistent with section 110 of the CAA. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: March 7, 2011. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6270 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0720–201039 FRL– 

9282–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Alabama; 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP), 

submitted by the State of Alabama, 

through the Alabama Department of 

Environmental Management (ADEM) as 

demonstrating that the State meets the 

requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 

(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that 

each state adopt and submit a SIP for 

the implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by the EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. Alabama certified 

that the Alabama SIP contains 

provisions that ensure the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS is implemented, 

enforced, and maintained in Alabama 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘infrastructure 

submission’’). Alabama’s infrastructure 

submission, provided to EPA on 

December 10, 2007, addressed all the 

required infrastructure elements for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 18, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2010–0720, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9140. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0720,’’ 

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, 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–2010– 

0720. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

14612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 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: 

Nacosta C. Ward, 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) 562–9140. 

Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic 

mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What elements are required under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of how Alabama 

addressed the elements of Sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) ‘‘infrastructure’’ 

provisions? 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a 

new NAAQS for ozone based on 8-hour 

average concentrations. The 8-hour 

averaging period replaced the previous 

1-hour averaging period, and the level of 

the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 

parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm 

(See 62 FR 38856). By statute, SIPs 

meeting the requirements of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) are to be submitted by 

states within three years after 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

require states to address basic SIP 

requirements, including emissions 

inventories, monitoring, and modeling 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. States were required to 

submit such SIPs for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS to EPA no later than June 

2000. However, intervening litigation 

over the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

created uncertainty about how to 

proceed and many states did not 

provide the required ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP 

submission for this newly promulgated 

NAAQS. 

On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice 

submitted a notice of intent to sue 

related to EPA’s failure to issue findings 

of failure to submit related to the 

‘‘infrastructure’’ requirements for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA 

entered into a consent decree with 

Earthjustice which required EPA, among 

other things, to complete a Federal 

Register notice announcing EPA’s 

determinations pursuant to section 

110(k)(1)(B) as to whether each state had 

made complete submissions to meet the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by 

December 15, 2007. Subsequently, EPA 

received an extension of the date to 

complete this Federal Register notice 

until March 17, 2008, based upon 

agreement to make the findings with 

respect to submissions made by January 

7, 2008. In accordance with the consent 

decree, EPA made completeness 

findings for each state based upon what 

the Agency received from each state as 

of January 7, 2008. 

On March 27, 2008, EPA published a 

final rulemaking entitled, 

‘‘Completeness Findings for Section 

110(a) State Implementation Plans; 8- 

Hour Ozone NAAQS,’’ making a finding 

that each state had submitted or failed 

to submit a complete SIP that provided 

the basic program elements of section 

110(a)(2) necessary to implement the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (See 73 FR 

16205). For those states that did receive 

findings, the findings of failure to 

submit for all or a portion of a state’s 

implementation plan established a 24- 

month deadline for EPA to promulgate 

a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to 

address the outstanding SIP elements 

unless, prior to that time, the affected 

states submitted, and EPA approved, the 

required SIPs. 

The findings that all or portions of a 

state’s submission are complete 

established a 12-month deadline for 

EPA to take action upon the complete 

SIP elements in accordance with section 

110(k). Alabama’s infrastructure 

submission was received by EPA on 

December 10, 2007, and was determined 

to be complete on March 27, 2008. 

Alabama was among other states that 

did not receive findings of failure to 

submit because it had provided a 

complete submission to EPA to address 

the infrastructure elements for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS by March 1, 2008. 

Today’s action is proposing to approve 

Alabama’s infrastructure submission for 

which EPA made the completeness 

determination on March 27, 2008. This 

action is not approving any specific 

rule, but rather proposing that 

Alabama’s already approved SIP meets 

certain CAA requirements. 

II. What elements are required under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit SIPs to provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of a new or revised 

NAAQS within three years following 

the promulgation of such NAAQS, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the 

obligation upon states to make a SIP 

submission to EPA for a new or revised 

NAAQS, but the contents of that 

submission may vary depending upon 

the facts and circumstances. In 

particular, the data and analytical tools 

available at the time the state develops 

and submits the SIP for a new or revised 

NAAQS affects the content of the 

submission. The contents of such SIP 

submissions may also vary depending 

upon what provisions the state’s 

existing SIP already contains. In the 

case of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

states typically have met the basic 

program elements required in section 

110(a)(2) through earlier SIP 

submissions in connection with 

previous ozone NAAQS. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 14613 

1Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are 

not governed by the three year submission deadline 

of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating 

necessary local nonattainment area controls are not 

due within three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the 

nonattainment area plan requirements are due 

pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) 

Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the 

extent that subsection refers to a permit program as 

required in part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) 

submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which 

pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements 

of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today’s proposed 

rulemaking does not address infrastructure 

elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) but does 

provide detail on how Alabama’s SIP addresses 

110(a)(2)(C). 

2This rulemaking only addresses requirements 

for this element as they relate to attainment areas. 

3Today’s proposed rule does not address element 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) (Interstate Transport) for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. Interstate transport 

requirements were formerly addressed by Alabama 

consistent with the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(CAIR). On December 23, 2008, CAIR was remanded 

by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, without 

vacatur, back to EPA. See North Carolina v. EPA, 

531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008). Prior to this remand, 

EPA took final action to approve Alabama’s SIP 

revision, which was submitted to comply with 

CAIR. See 72 FR 55659 (October 1, 2007). In so 

doing, Alabama’s CAIR SIP revision addressed the 

interstate transport provisions in Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

In response to the remand of CAIR, EPA has since 

proposed a new rule to address the interstate 

transport of NOx and SOx in the eastern United 

States. See 75 FR 45210 (Aug. 2, 2010) (‘‘the 

Transport Rule’’). However, because this rule has 

yet to be finalized, EPA’s action on element 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) will be addressed in a separate 

action. 

4This requirement was inadvertently omitted 

from EPA’s October 2, 2007, memorandum entitled 

‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Section 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and 

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards,’’ but 

as mentioned above is not relevant to today’s 

proposed rulemaking. 

More specifically, section 110(a)(1) 

provides the procedural and timing 

requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) 

lists specific elements that states must 

meet for ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP 

requirements related to a newly 

established or revised NAAQS. As 

mentioned above, these requirements 

include SIP infrastructure elements 

such as modeling, monitoring, and 

emissions inventories that are designed 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. The requirements that are 

the subject of this proposed rulemaking 

are listed below 1 and in EPA’s October 

2, 2007, memorandum entitled 

‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required 

Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 

1997 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards.’’ 

• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and 

other control measures. 

• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system. 

• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for 

enforcement of control measures.2

• 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport.3

• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources. 

• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source 

monitoring system. 

• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency power. 

• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions. 

• 110(a)(2)(I): Areas designated 

nonattainment and meet the applicable 

requirements of part D.4

• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with 

government officials; public 

notification; and PSD and visibility 

protection. 

• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/ 

data. 

• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees. 

• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/ 

participation by affected local entities. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of how 

Alabama addressed the elements of 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘infrastructure’’ provisions? 

Alabama’s infrastructure submission 

addresses the provisions of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) as described below. 

1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and 

other control measures: Alabama’s 

infrastructure submission provides an 

overview of the provisions of the 

Alabama Air Regulations relevant to air 

quality control regulations. The 

regulations described below have been 

federally approved in the Alabama SIP 

and include enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures. 

Regulation 335–3–1-.03—Ambient Air 

Quality Standards, generally authorizes 

the ADEM to adopt rules for the control 

of air pollution in order to comply with 

NAAQS, including those necessary to 

obtain EPA approval under section 110 

of the CAA. This regulation along with 

Regulation 335–1–.06—Compliance 

Schedule, set the schedule for 

compliance to be consistent with the 

requirements of the CAA. Regulation 

335–1–.05—Sampling and Testing 

Methods, details the authority and 

means with which ADEM can require 

testing and emissions verification. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that the provisions contained in these 

chapters and Alabama’s practices are 

adequate to protect the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in the State. 

In this action, EPA is not proposing to 

approve or disapprove any existing state 

provisions with regard to excess 

emissions during startup, shutdown, or 

malfunction (SSM) of operations at a 

facility. EPA believes that a number of 

states have SSM provisions which are 

contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 

guidance, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: 

Policy Regarding Excess Emissions 

During Malfunctions, Startup, and 

Shutdown’’ (September 20, 1999), and 

the Agency plans to address such state 

regulations in the future. In the 

meantime, EPA encourages any state 

having deficient SSM provisions to take 

steps to correct it as soon as possible. 

Additionally, in this action, EPA is 

not proposing to approve or disapprove 

any existing state rules with regard to 

director’s discretion or variance 

provisions. EPA believes that a number 

of states have such provisions which are 

contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 

guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 

1987)), and the Agency plans to take 

action in the future to address such state 

regulations. In the meantime, EPA 

encourages any state having a director’s 

discretion or variance provision which 

is contrary to the CAA and EPA 

guidance to take steps to correct the 

deficiency as soon as possible. 

2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system: Alabama’s 

infrastructure submission provides 

information in Regulation 335–1–.04— 

Monitoring, Records, and Reporting, 

with regard to the requirement of 

sources to submit emissions monitoring 

reports as prescribed by the Director. 

These entities collect air monitoring 

data, quality assure the results, and 

report the data. Regulation 335–1–.05— 

Sampling and Testing Methods, details 

the authority and means with which 

ADEM can require testing and emissions 

verification. Alabama regulation 335–3– 

14–.04—Air Permits Authorizing 

Construction in Clean Air: Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Permitting 

(PSD), describes the State’s use of 

ambient air quality monitoring data for 

purposes of permitting new facilities 

and assessing major modifications to 

existing facilities. Annually, EPA 

approves the ambient air monitoring 

network plan for the state agencies. On 

July 1, 2010, Alabama submitted their 

plan to EPA. On October 8, 2010, EPA 

approved Alabama’s monitoring 

network plan. Alabama’s approved 

monitoring network plan can be 

accessed at http://www.regulations.gov 

using Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2010–0720. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Alabama’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for the ambient air quality 

monitoring and data systems related to 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

3. 110(a)(2)(C) Program for 

enforcement of control measures 

including review of proposed new 

sources: Regulation 335–3–14–.04—Air 

Permits Authorizing Construction in 

Clean Air Areas: Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Permitting 

(PSD),—of Alabama’s SIP describes the 

permit requirements for new major 

sources or major modifications of 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

14614 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

existing sources in areas classified as 

attainment or unclassifiable under 

section 107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the 

CAA. This ensures that areas that are in 

attainment of the NAAQS at the time of 

designations prevent any significant 

deterioration in air quality. Regulation 

335–3–14–.05—Air Permits Authorizing 

Construction in or Near Nonattainment 

Areas, sets the permitting requirements 

for areas in or around non-attainment 

areas, including any ozone nonattainment area. Additionally, Alabama 

submitted a SIP revision on June 21, 

2006, which addresses the Ozone 

Implementation New Source Review 

(NSR) Update requirements to include 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) as an ozone 

precursor for permitting purposes for 

PSD and nonattainment NSR. 

Specifically, the Ozone Implementation 

NSR Update requirements included 

changes to major source thresholds for 

sources in certain classes of 

nonattainment areas, changes to offset 

ratios for marginal, moderate, serious, 

severe, and extreme ozone 

nonattainment areas, provisions 

addressing offset requirements for 

facilities that shut down or curtail 

operation, and a requirement stating 

that NOX emissions are ozone 

precursors. EPA took final action to 

approve these revisions to the Alabama 

SIP on May 1, 2008 (73 FR 23957), and 

finalized a correcting amendment on 

June 13, 2008 (73 FR 33696). 

EPA published a final action revising 

Alabama’s greenhouse gas (GHG) 

regulations on December 29, 2010 (75 

FR 81863). The revisions establish 

appropriate emission thresholds for 

determining which new stationary 

sources and modification projects 

become subject to Alabama’s PSD 

permitting requirements for their GHG 

emissions. This rulemaking approves 

changes to ADEM’s Rule 335–3–14– 

.04—Air Permits Authorizing 

Construction in Clean Air Areas: 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Permitting (PSD), which addresses the 

thresholds for GHG permitting 

applicability in Alabama. EPA has made 

the preliminary determination that 

Alabama’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for program enforcement of 

control measures including review of 

proposed new sources related to the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

In this action, EPA is proposing to 

approve Alabama’s infrastructure SIP 

for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS with 

respect to the general requirement in 

section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a 

program in the SIP that regulates the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source as necessary to assure 

that the NAAQS are achieved. EPA is 

not proposing to approve or disapprove 

the state’s existing minor NSR program 

itself to the extent that it is inconsistent 

with EPA’s regulations governing this 

program. EPA believes that a number of 

states may have minor NSR provisions 

that are contrary to the existing EPA 

regulations for this program. EPA 

intends to work with states to reconcile 

state minor NSR programs with EPA’s 

regulatory provisions for the program. 

The statutory requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable 

flexibility in designing minor NSR 

programs, and EPA believes it may be 

time to revisit the regulatory 

requirements for this program to give 

the states an appropriate level of 

flexibility to design a program that 

meets their particular air quality 

concerns, while assuring reasonable 

consistency across the country in 

protecting the NAAQS with respect to 

new and modified minor sources. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Alabama’s SIP and 

practices are adequate for program 

enforcement of control measures 

including review of proposed new 

sources related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

4. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate and 

International transport provisions: In 

Chapter 335–3–14.04—Air Permits 

Authorizing Construction in Clean Air 

Areas: Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Permitting (PSD), ADEM 

outlines how it will notify neighboring 

states of potential impacts from new or 

modified sources. Alabama does not 

have any pending obligation under 

section 115 and 126. Additionally, 

Alabama has federally approved 

regulations in its SIP that satisfy the 

requirements for the NOx SIP Call. See 

67 FR 76316 (December 12, 2002). EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that Alabama’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for insuring compliance with 

the applicable requirements relating to 

interstate and international pollution 

abatement for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

5. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate resources: 

ADEM is responsible for adopting air 

quality rules, revising SIPs, developing 

and tracking the budget, establishing the 

title V fees, and other planning needs. 

ADEM also coordinates agreements with 

local air pollution control programs. 

Additionally, SIP submittals contain 

this information in the submittal cover 

letter. On May 6, 2010, EPA submitted 

a letter to Alabama outlining 105 grant 

commitments and current status of these 

commitments for fiscal year 2009. The 

letter EPA submitted to Alabama can be 

accessed at http://www.regulations.gov 

using Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2010–0720. Annually, states update 

these grant commitments based on 

current SIP requirements, air quality 

planning, and applicable requirements 

related NAAQS. There were no 

outstanding issues, therefore the 

Alabama’s grants were finalized and 

closed out. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that Alabama 

has adequate resources for 

implementation of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

6. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary source 

monitoring system: The Alabama 

infrastructure submission describes how 

the major source and minor source 

emission inventory programs collect 

emission data throughout the State and 

ensure the quality of data. This is 

outlined in Chapter 335–3–1—General 

Provisions of the approved Alabama 

SIP. Specifically, 335–3–1–.04— 

Monitoring, Records, and Reporting, 

335–3–1–.07—Maintenance and 

Malfunctioning of Equipment; 

Reporting, and 335–3–1-.15—Emissions 

Inventory Reporting Requirements, all 

address portions of this requirement. 

Additionally, the National Emissions 

Inventory (NEI) is EPA’s central 

repository for air emissions data. EPA 

published the Air Emissions Reporting 

Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, 

which modified the requirements for 

collecting and reporting air emissions 

data (73 FR 76539). The AERR 

shortened the time states had to report 

emissions data from 17 to 12 months, 

giving states one calendar year to submit 

emissions data. All states are required to 

submit a comprehensive emissions 

inventory every three years and report 

emissions for certain larger sources 

annually through EPA’s online 

Emissions Inventory System (EIS). 

States report emissions data for the 

seven criteria pollutants and the 

precursors that form them—nitrogen 

oxides, sulfur dioxide, ammonia, lead, 

carbon monoxide, particulate matter, 

and volatile organic compounds. Many 

states also voluntarily report emissions 

of hazardous air pollutants. Alabama 

made its latest update to the NEI 

February 17, 2011. EPA compiles the 

emissions data, supplementing it where 

necessary, and releases it to the general 

public through the Web site http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ 

eiinformation.html. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Alabama’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for the stationary source 

monitoring systems related to the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

7. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency power: The 

Alabama SIP provides provisions in 

Chapter 335–3–2—Air Pollution 

Emergency for the identification of air 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 14615 

pollution emergency episodes. Episode 

criteria and emissions reduction plans 

are also covered in this chapter. These 

criteria have previously been approved 

by EPA. EPA believes these criteria are 

adequate to address ozone emergency 

episodes for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Alabama’s SIP and 

practices are adequate for emergency 

powers related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

8. 110(a)(2)(H) Future SIP revisions: 

ADEM is responsible for adopting air 

quality rules and revising SIPs as 

needed to attain or maintain the 

NAAQS. This authority is provided by 

335–3–1–.03—Ambient Air Quality 

Standards, giving Alabama the ability 

and authority to respond to calls for SIP 

revisions, and the State has provided a 

number of SIP revisions over the years 

for implementation of the NAAQS. 

Specific to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, Alabama has provided the 

following submissions: 

• January 27, 2005, SIP Revision (EPA 

approval, see 71 FR 27631, January 25, 

2006)—Redesignation request and 175A 

maintenance plan for the Birmingham, 

AL 8-hour Ozone Area 

• June 21, 2006, SIP Revision (EPA 

approval, see 73 FR 23957, May 1, 2008; 

EPA correcting amendment 73 FR 

33696, June 13, 2008) Clean Air 

Interstate Rule/New Source Review 

(NOX as a precursor to ozone) 

• February 6, 2008, SIP Revision 

(EPA approval, see 74 FR 37945, July 

30, 2009) Birmingham 8-hour Ozone 

Contingency Measures 

In the Birmingham, Alabama 

maintenance plans, the State commits to 

provide additional SIP revisions for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS pursuant to 

section 175A(b), and also commits to 

provide additional SIP revisions to 

implement contingency measures 

should one of the areas that was 

redesignated to attainment violate the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Alabama’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate a commitment 

to provide future SIP revisions related to 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when 

necessary. 

9. 110(a)(2)(J) (121 consultation) 

Consultation with government officials: 

Alabama’s Air Regulation 335–3–1– 

.03—Ambient Air Quality Standards, 

describes how the State consults with 

air pollution control agencies in other 

states whose jurisdictions might be 

affected by SIP development activities. 

Additionally, ADEM has submitted for 

federal approval a regional haze plan 

which outlines consultation practices 

with Federal Land Managers. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Alabama’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate consultation 

with government officials related to the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when 

necessary. 

10. 110(a)(2)(J) (127 public 

notification) Public notification: The 

State’s emergency episode provisions, 

discussed above, provide for 

notification to the public when air 

pollution episodes occur. Furthermore, 

Alabama maintains a public Web site on 

which daily air quality index forecasts 

are posted for the Birmingham, 

Huntsville, Mobile, and Columbus 

areas. This Web site can be accessed at: 

http://adem.alabama.gov/programs/air/ 

airquality.cnt. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Alabama’s SIP and practices adequately 

demonstrate the State’s ability to 

provide public notification related to 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS when 

necessary. 

11. 110(a)(2)(J) (PSD) PSD and 

visibility protection: Alabama 

demonstrates its authority to regulate 

new and modified sources of ozone 

precursors, volatile organic compound 

and nitrogen oxides (VOCs and NOX), to 

assist in the protection of air quality in 

Alabama’s Air Regulations Chapter 335– 

3–14–.04—Air Permits Authorizing 

Construction in Clean Air Areas: 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Permitting (PSD). Alabama submitted a 

SIP revision on March 7, 2007, which 

addresses the Ozone Implementation 

NSR Update requirements to include 

NOX as an ozone precursor for 

permitting purposes. Specifically, the 

Ozone Implementation NSR Update 

requirements included changes to major 

source thresholds for sources in certain 

classes of nonattainment areas, changes 

to offset ratios for marginal, moderate, 

serious, severe, and extreme ozone 

nonattainment areas, provisions 

addressing offset requirements for 

facilities that shut down or curtail 

operation, and a requirement stating 

that NOX emissions are ozone 

precursors. EPA took final action to 

approve these changes to the Alabama 

SIP on May 1, 2008 (73 FR 23957), and 

published a correcting amendment on 

June 13, 2008 (73 FR 33696). 

With regard to the applicable 

requirements for visibility protection, 

EPA recognizes that states are subject to 

visibility and regional haze program 

requirements under Part C of the Act 

(which includes sections 169A and 

169B). In the event of the establishment 

of a new NAAQS, however, the 

visibility and regional haze program 

requirements under part C do not 

change. Thus, EPA finds that there is no 

new visibility obligation ‘‘triggered’’ 

under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new 

NAAQS becomes effective. This would 

be the case even in the event a 

secondary PM2.5 NAAQS for visibility is 

established, because this NAAQS would 

not affect visibility requirements under 

part C. Alabama has submitted SIP 

revisions for approval to satisfy the 

requirements of the CAA section 169A, 

and the regional haze and best available 

retrofit technology rules contained in 40 

CFR 51.308. These revisions are 

currently under review and will be 

acted on in a separate action. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Alabama’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate the State’s 

ability to implement PSD programs and 

to provide for visibility protection 

related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS when necessary. 

12. 110(a)(2)(K) Air quality and 

modeling/data: Alabama has the 

authority to conduct air quality 

modeling and report the results of such 

modeling to EPA, as contained in 

Alabama Air Regulations 335–3–14– 

.04—Air Permits Authorizing 

Construction in Clean Air Areas: 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Permitting (PSD). These regulations also 

show that ambient ozone monitoring is 

used, in conjunction with pre- and postconstruction ambient air monitoring, to 

track local and regional scale changes in 

ozone concentrations. These regulations 

further demonstrate that Alabama has 

the authority to provide relevant data 

for the purpose of predicting the effect 

on ambient air quality of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Additionally, Alabama 

supports a regional effort to coordinate 

the development of emissions 

inventories and conduct regional 

modeling for several NAAQS, including 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, for the 

Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, 

Alabama’s air quality regulations 

demonstrate that ADEM has the 

authority to provide relevant data for 

the purpose of predicting the effect on 

ambient air quality of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Alabama’s SIP and 

practices adequately demonstrate the 

State’s ability to provide for air quality 

and modeling, along with analysis of the 

associated data, related to the 1997 

8-hour NAAQS when necessary. 

13. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: 

Alabama addresses the review of 

construction permits as previously 

discussed in 110(a)(2)(C). Permitting 

fees are collected through the state’s 

title V fees program, which has been 

federally approved, and according to 

State regulations in 335–3–16–.04— 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1

14616 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Permit Application Requirements. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that Alabama’s SIP and practices 

adequately provide for permitting fees 

related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS when necessary. 

14. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/ 

participation by affected local entities: 

ADEM coordinates with local 

governments affected by the SIP. 

Alabama’s SIP also includes a 

description of the public participation 

process for SIP development. Alabama 

has consulted with local entities for the 

development of transportation 

conformity and has worked with the 

Federal Land Managers as a requirement 

of its regional haze rule. More 

specifically, Alabama adopted Statewide consultation procedures for the 

implementation of transportation 

conformity which includes the 

consideration of the development of 

mobile inventories for SIP development 

and the requirements that link 

transportation planning and air quality 

planning in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. These consultation 

and participation procedures have been 

approved in the Alabama SIP as nonregulatory provisions, ‘‘Alabama 

Interagency Transportation Conformity 

Memorandum of Agreement’’ and 

‘‘Conformity SIP for Birmingham and 

Jackson County.’’ These provisions were 

approved on May 11, 2000 and March 

26, 2009, respectively. See 65 FR 30362 

and 74 FR 13118. Required partners 

covered by Alabama’s consultation 

procedures include federal, state and 

local transportation and air quality 

agency officials. The state and local 

transportation agency officials are most 

directly impacted by transportation 

conformity requirements and are 

required to provide public involvement 

for their activities including the analysis 

which shows how they meet 

transportation conformity requirements. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Alabama’s SIP and 

practices adequately demonstrate 

consultation/by affected local entities 

related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS when necessary. 

IV. Proposed Action 

As described above, ADEM has 

addressed the elements of the CAA 

110(a)(1) and (2) SIP requirements 

pursuant to EPA’s October 2, 2007, 

guidance to ensure that the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS are implemented, 

enforced, and maintained in Alabama. 

EPA is proposing to approve Alabama’s 

infrastructure submission for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS because this 

submission is consistent with section 

110 of the CAA. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: March 7, 2011. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6229 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0046; FRL–9282–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

California; Interstate Transport of 

Pollution; Significant Contribution to 

Nonattainment and Interference With 

Maintenance Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

California for the purpose of addressing 

the interstate transport provisions of 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS or standards) and 

the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the 

CAA requires that each state have 

adequate provisions to prohibit air 

emissions from adversely affecting air 

quality in other states through interstate 

transport. EPA is proposing to approve 

California’s SIP revision for the 1997 

8-hour ozone and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to prohibit 

emissions that will contribute 

significantly to nonattainment of the 

these standards in any other state and to 

prohibit emissions that will interfere 

with maintenance of these standards by 

any other state. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 18, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R09–OAR–2011–0046, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1