Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70091 

County in the Birmingham Area for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 

CFR part 81, from nonattainment to 

attainment. 

XI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

this reason, these proposed actions: 

• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory 

action[s]’’ subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does not 

have Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: November 2, 2011. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29176 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0043–201110; FRL– 

9490–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of 

the Birmingham 2006 24-Hour Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On June 17, 2010, the State of 

Alabama, through the Alabama 

Department of Environmental 

Management (ADEM), Air Division, 

submitted a request for EPA to 

redesignate the Birmingham fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment 

area (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘Birmingham Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to 

attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS); and to approve a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

containing a maintenance plan for the 

Area. The Birmingham 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 nonattainment area is comprised 

of Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their 

entireties and a portion of Walker 

County. EPA is proposing to approve 

the redesignation request for the 

Birmingham Area, along with the 

related SIP revision, including 

Alabama’s 2009 emissions inventory for 

the Area and Alabama’s plan for 

maintaining attainment of the PM2.5

standard in the Area. EPA is also 

proposing to approve the motor vehicle 

emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and PM2.5 for the year 

2024 for the Birmingham Area. These 

actions are being proposed pursuant to 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and its 

implementing regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 12, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2011–0043, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0043, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2011– 

0043. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70092 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1See ‘‘Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and 

Ozone in 27 States; Correction of SIP Approvals for 

22 States’’ (76 FR 48208, August 8, 2011). 

2On March 2, 2011, ADEM submitted a proposed 

revision to the 24-hour NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs 

originally submitted on June 17, 2010. The final 

MVEBs were submitted on May 2, 2011, with 

ADEM’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS redesignation 

submittal. A copy of the submittal is included in 

the docket for this proposed rulemaking (EPA–R04– 

OAR–2011–0043) and can be obtained from the 

www.regulations.gov Web site. 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Huey of the Regulatory Development 

Section, in the Air Planning Branch, 

Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Joel 

Huey may be reached by phone at (404) 

562–9104, or via electronic mail at 

huey.joel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to 

take? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

III. What are the criteria for redesignation? 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions? 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the request? 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s 

proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the 

Birmingham Area? 

VII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the proposed NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the 

Birmingham area? 

VIII. What is EPA’s analysis of the proposed 

2009 base year emissions inventory for 

the Birmingham area? 

IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan SIP 

Revision Including Proposed Approval 

of the 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 

the Birmingham Area 

X. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What are the actions EPA is 

proposing to take? 

EPA is proposing to take the following 

three separate but related actions, some 

of which involve multiple elements: (1) 

To redesignate the Birmingham Area to 

attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, provided EPA approves the 

emissions inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan; (2) to approve, under 

CAA section 172(c)(3), the emissions 

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan; and (3) to approve 

into the Alabama SIP, under section 

175A of the CAA, Alabama’s 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, 

including the associated MVEBs (EPA is 

also notifying the public of the status of 

EPA’s adequacy determination for the 

Birmingham Area MVEBs for the PM2.5

NAAQS). These actions are summarized 

below and described in greater detail 

throughout this notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

First, EPA proposes to determine that, 

if EPA finalizes approval of the 2009 

baseline emissions inventory for the 

Birmingham Area, the Area has met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. In this 

action, EPA is proposing to approve a 

request to change the legal designation 

of Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their 

entireties and the designated portion of 

Walker County in the Birmingham Area 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. As 

discussed below, the emissions 

inventory is being proposed for 

approval today. 

Second, EPA is proposing to approve 

Alabama’s 2009 emissions inventory for 

the Birmingham Area (under CAA 

section 172(c)(3)). Alabama selected 

2009 as the attainment emissions 

inventory year for the Birmingham Area. 

This attainment inventory identifies a 

level of emissions in the Area that is 

sufficient to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS and is a current, 

comprehensive inventory that meets the 

requirements of section 172(c)(3). 

Third, EPA is proposing to approve 

Alabama’s 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan for the Birmingham 

Area as meeting the requirements of 

section 175A (such approval being one 

of the CAA criteria for redesignation to 

attainment status). The recently 

promulgated Cross State Air Pollution 

Rule (CSAPR),1 requires reductions of 

NOX and SO2 associated with power 

plants to be permanent and enforceable. 

The maintenance plan is designed to 

help keep the Birmingham Area in 

attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS through 2024. Consistent with 

the CAA, the maintenance plan that 

EPA is proposing to approve today also 

includes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the 

year 2024 for the Birmingham Area. 

EPA is proposing to approve (into the 

Alabama SIP) the 2024 MVEBs that are 

included as part of Alabama’s 

maintenance plan for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On a matter related matter to this 

third action, EPA is also notifying the 

public of the status of EPA’s adequacy 

process for the newly-established NOX

and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the 

Birmingham Area. ADEM submitted 

MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 in its original 

June 17, 2010, redesignation request. On 

May 2, 2011, ADEM submitted 

additional revisions to the MVEBs for 

the 24-hour redesignation request.2 The 

adequacy comment period for the new 

Birmingham Area 2024 MVEBs began 

on March 24, 2011, with EPA’s posting 

of the availability of this submittal on 

EPA’s Adequacy Web site (http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/currsips.htm). The adequacy 

comment period for these MVEBs closed 

on April 25, 2011. No adverse 

comments were received during the 

adequacy public comment period. 

Please see section VII of this proposed 

rulemaking for further explanation of 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70093 

3 In response to legal challenges of the annual 

standard promulgated in 2006, the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (DC Circuit) remanded this NAAQS to EPA 

for further consideration. See American Farm 

Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers 

Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (DC Circuit 

2009). However, given that the 1997 and 2006 

annual NAAQS are essentially identical, attainment 

of the 1997 Annual NAAQS would also indicate 

attainment of the remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS. 

this process and for more details on the 

MVEBs. 

Today’s notice of proposed 

rulemaking is in response to Alabama’s 

June 17, 2010, SIP submittal and 

subsequent supplement of May 2, 2011. 

Those documents addresses the specific 

issues summarized above and the 

necessary elements described in section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area 

to attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

Fine particle pollution can be emitted 

directly or formed secondarily in the 

atmosphere. The main precursors of 

PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide (SO2), NOX, 

ammonia and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC). Unless otherwise 

noted by the State or EPA, ammonia and 

VOCs are presumed to be insignificant 

contributors to PM2.5 formation, 

whereas SO2 and NOX are presumed to 

be significant contributors to PM2.5

formation. Sulfates are a type of 

secondary particle formed from SO2

emissions of power plants and 

industrial facilities. Nitrates, another 

common type of secondary particle, are 

formed from NOX emissions of power 

plants, automobiles, and other 

combustion sources. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

the first air quality standards for PM2.5. 

EPA promulgated an annual standard at 

a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter 

(mg/m3), based on a 3-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In 

the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated 

a 24-hour standard of 65 mg/m3, based 

on a 3-year average of the 98th 

percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On 

October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA 

retained the annual average NAAQS at 

15 mg/m3 but revised the 24-hour 

NAAQS to 35 mg/m3, based again on the 

3-year average of the 98th percentile of 

24-hour concentrations.3 Under EPA 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 

primary and secondary 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the 

annual arithmetic mean concentration, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than 

or equal to 35 mg/m3 at all relevant 

monitoring sites in the subject area over 

a 3-year period. 

On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and 

supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 70 

FR 19844, EPA designated the 

Birmingham Area as nonattainment for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air 

quality data for calendar years 2001– 

2003. In that action, EPA defined the 

1997 PM2.5 Birmingham nonattainment 

area to include Jefferson and Shelby 

Counties in their entireties and a 

portion Walker County. On November 

13, 2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA 

promulgated designations for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS, designating the 

Birmingham Area (with the same 

boundaries as for the 1997 PM2.5

nonattainment area) as nonattainment 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

based upon air quality data for calendar 

years 2006–2008. That action also 

clarified that the Birmingham Area was 

classified unclassifiable/attainment for 

the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

did not promulgate designations for the 

annual average NAAQS promulgated in 

2006 since that NAAQS was essentially 

identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. Therefore, the Birmingham 

Area is designated nonattainment for 

the annual NAAQS promulgated in 

1997 and for the 24-hour NAAQS 

promulgated in 2006. Today’s action 

only addresses the designation for the 

24-hour NAAQS promulgated in 2006. 

All 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were 

designated under subpart 1 of title I, 

part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains 

the general requirements for 

nonattainment areas for any pollutant 

governed by a NAAQS and is less 

prescriptive than the other subparts of 

title I, part D. On April 25, 2007 (72 FR 

20664), EPA promulgated its PM2.5

implementation rule, codified at 40 CFR 

part 51, subpart Z, in which the Agency 

provided guidance for state and Tribal 

plans to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

This rule, at 40 CFR 51.1004(c), 

specifies some of the regulatory impacts 

of attaining the NAAQS, as discussed 

below. 

On May 12, 2005, EPA published the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which 

addressed the interstate transport 

requirements of the CAA and required 

states to significantly reduce SO2 and 

NOX emissions from power plants (70 

FR 25162). The associated Federal 

Implementation Plans (FIPs) were 

published on April 28, 2006 (71 FR 

25328). However, on July 11, 2008, the 

DC Circuit Court issued its decision to 

vacate and remand both CAIR and the 

associated CAIR FIPs in their entirety 

(North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 

(DC Cir., 2008)). EPA petitioned for 

rehearing, and the Court issued an order 

remanding CAIR to EPA without 

vacating either CAIR or the CAIR FIPs 

(North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 

(DC Cir., 2008)). The Court left CAIR in 

place to ‘‘temporarily preserve the 

environmental values covered by CAIR’’ 

until EPA replaces it with a rule 

consistent with the Court’s opinion. Id. 

at 1178. The Court directed EPA to 

‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’ consistent with 

its July 11, 2008, opinion but declined 

to impose a schedule on EPA for 

completing that action. Id. As a result of 

these court rulings, the power plant 

emission reductions that resulted solely 

from the development, promulgation, 

and implementation of CAIR, and the 

associated contribution to air quality 

improvement that occurred solely as a 

result of CAIR in the Birmingham Area 

could not be considered to be 

permanent. 

On August 8, 2011, EPA published 

CSAPR in the Federal Register under 

the title, ‘‘Federal Implementation Plans 

to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 

States; Correction of SIP Approvals for 

22 States’’ (76 FR 48208, August 8, 

2011) to address interstate transport of 

emissions and resulting secondary air 

pollutants and to replace CAIR. The 

CAIR emission reduction requirements 

limit emissions in Alabama and states 

upwind of Alabama through 2011, and 

CSAPR requires similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond. The emission reductions 

that CSAPR mandates may be 

considered to be permanent and 

enforceable. In turn, the air quality 

improvement in the Birmingham Area 

that has resulted from electric 

generating units (EGUs) emission 

reductions associated with CAIR (as 

well as the additional air quality 

improvement that would be expected to 

result from full implementation of 

CSAPR) may also be considered to be 

permanent and enforceable. EPA 

proposes that the requirement in section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met 

because the emission reduction 

requirements of CAIR address emissions 

through 2011 and EPA has now 

promulgated CSAPR which requires 

similar or greater reductions in the 

relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. 

Because the emission reduction 

requirements of CAIR are enforceable 

through the 2011 control period, and 

because CSAPR has now been 

promulgated to address the 

requirements previously addressed by 

CAIR and gets similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the pollutant transport 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70094 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

part of the reductions that led to 

attainment in the Birmingham Area can 

now be considered permanent and 

enforceable. Therefore, EPA proposes to 

find that the transport requirement of 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has been 

met for the Birmingham Area. 

The 3-year ambient air quality data for 

2007–2009 indicated no violations of 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for the 

Birmingham Area. As a result, on June 

17, 2010, Alabama requested 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area 

to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. The redesignation request 

included three years of complete, 

quality-assured ambient air quality data 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 

2007–2009, indicating that the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS had been achieved 

for the Birmingham Area. Under the 

CAA, nonattainment areas may be 

redesignated to attainment if sufficient, 

complete, quality-assured data is 

available for the Administrator to 

determine that the area has attained the 

standard and the area meets the other 

CAA redesignation requirements in 

section 107(d)(3)(E). From 2007 through 

the present, the 24-hour PM2.5 design 

values for the Birmingham Area have 

declined. While 24-hour PM2.5

concentrations are dependent on a 

variety of conditions, the overall 

downtrend in PM2.5 concentrations in 

the Birmingham Area can be attributed 

to the reduction of emissions, as will be 

discussed in more detail in section V of 

this proposed rulemaking. 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation? 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for 

redesignation providing the following 

criteria are met: (1) The Administrator 

determines that the area has attained the 

applicable NAAQS; (2) the 

Administrator has fully approved the 

applicable implementation plan for the 

area under section 110(k); (3) the 

Administrator determines that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable SIP 

and applicable Federal air pollutant 

control regulations and other permanent 

and enforceable reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A; and (5) the state containing such 

area has met all requirements applicable 

to the area under section 110 and part 

D of title I of the CAA. 

EPA has provided guidance on 

redesignation in the General Preamble 

for the Implementation of title I of the 

CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 16, 

1992, 57 FR 13498, and supplemented 

on April 28, 1992, 57 FR 18070) and has 

provided further guidance on processing 

redesignation requests in the following 

documents: 

1. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni 

Memorandum’’); 

2. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions 

Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act 

(CAA) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from 

John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, October 28, 1992; 

and 

3. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment,’’ 

Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, October 14, 1994. 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these 

actions? 

On June 17, 2010, the State of 

Alabama, through ADEM, requested the 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area 

to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA’s evaluation indicates that 

the Birmingham Area has attained the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and meets 

the requirements for redesignation set 

forth in section 107(d)(3)(E), including 

the maintenance plan requirements 

under section 175A of the CAA. As a 

result, EPA is proposing to take the 

three related actions summarized in 

section I of this notice. 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

request? 

As stated above, in accordance with 

the CAA, EPA proposes in today’s 

action to: (1) Redesignate the 

Birmingham Area to attainment for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) 

approve the Birmingham Area 

emissions inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan; and (3) approve into 

the Alabama SIP Birmingham’s 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, 

including the associated MVEBs. These 

actions are based upon EPA’s 

determination that the Birmingham 

Area continues to attain the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other 

redesignation criteria have been met for 

the Birmingham Area, provided EPA 

approves the emissions inventory 

submitted with the maintenance plan. 

The five redesignation criteria provided 

under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are 

discussed in greater detail for the Area 

in the following paragraphs of this 

section. 

Criteria (1)—The Birmingham Area has 

attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). EPA is 

proposing to determine that the 

Birmingham Area continues to attain 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For 

PM2.5, an area may be considered to be 

attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS if it meets the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and 

Appendix N of part 50, based on three 

complete, consecutive calendar years of 

quality-assured air quality monitoring 

data. To attain these NAAQS, the 98th 

percentile 24-hour concentration, as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 50, Appendix N, is less than or 

equal to 35 mg/m3 at all relevant 

monitoring sites in the subject area over 

a 3-year period. The relevant data must 

be collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS). The monitors generally should 

have remained at the same location for 

the duration of the monitoring period 

required for demonstrating attainment. 

On September 20, 2010, at 75 FR 

57186, EPA determined that the 

Birmingham Area was attaining the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For that 

action EPA reviewed PM2.5 monitoring 

data from monitoring stations in the 

Birmingham Area for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007–2009. These 

data have been quality-assured and are 

recorded in AQS. EPA has reviewed 

more recent data which indicates that 

the Birmingham Area continues to 

attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

beyond the submitted 3-year attainment 

period of 2007–2009. The 98th 

percentiles of the PM2.5 concentrations 

for 2007–2010 and the 3-year average of 

these values (i.e., design values) are 

summarized in Table 1. Data available 

to date in AQS for 2011, which have not 

yet been certified, indicate the 

Birmingham Area continues to attain 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70095 

5On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued 

a NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia 

and 22 states to reduce emissions of NOX in order 

to reduce the transport of ozone and ozone 

precursors. In compliance with EPA’s NOX SIP Call, 

Alabama developed rules governing the control of 

NOX emissions from EGUs, major non-EGU 

industrial boilers, major cement kilns, and internal 

combustion engines. On December 27, 2002, EPA 

approved Alabama’s rules as fulfilling Phase I (67 

FR 78987). 6On May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), EPA 

promulgated CAIR, which required 28 upwind 

States and the District of Columbia to revise their 

SIPs to include control measures that would reduce 

emissions of SO2 and NOX. Various aspects of CAIR 

rule were petitioned in court and on December 23, 

2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit remanded CAIR to EPA (see 

Alabama v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Circuit, 

December 23, 2008)), which left CAIR in place to 

‘‘temporarily preserve the environmental values 

covered by CAIR’’ until EPA replaces it with a rule 

consistent with the Court’s ruling. The Court 

directed EPA to remedy various areas of the rule 

that were petitioned consistent with its July 11, 

2008 (see Alabama v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (DC 

Circuit, July 11, 2008)), opinion, but declined to 

Continued 

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE BIRMINGHAM 2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 AREA (μG/M3) 

Location County Monitor ID 

98th Percentile 24-hour concentrations 3-Year design 

values 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2007– 

2009 

2008– 

2010 

North Birmingham .............. Jefferson ................... 01–073–0023 42.8 33.5 24.4 28.7 34 29 

McAdory ............................. Jefferson ................... 01–073–1005 30.9 25.8 21.3 22.7 26 23 

Bruce Shaw Rd. (Providence).Jefferson ................... 01–073–1009 31.4 27.3 22.1 18.4 27 23 

Asheville Road (Leeds) ...... Jefferson ................... 01–073–1010 33.0 24.6 19.1 22.3 26 22 

Wylam ................................. Jefferson ................... 01–073–2003 37.7 33.5 25.2 25.4 32 28 

Hoover ................................ Jefferson ................... 01–073–2006 29.8 25.9 20.4 21.6 25 23 

Pinson High School ............ Jefferson ................... 01–073–5002 34.2 26.4 21.3 20.0 27 23 

Corner School Road ........... Jefferson ................... 01–073–5003 32.5 30.0 21.3 18.3 28 23 

Pelham High School ........... Shelby ....................... 01–117–0006 30.9 24.8 21.2 4 20.0 26 4 22 

Highland Avenue (Walker 

Co.).

Walker ....................... 01–127–0002 30.9 24.3 22.1 18.8 26 22 

4The Pelham High School site did not meet completeness criteria for the third quarter of 2010. However, the maximum third quarter value 

from 2008–2010 was 33.6 μg/m3 (which occurred in 2008). If this value were used as the 98th percentile 24-hour concentration for 2010, the 24- 

hour design value for the 2008–2010 period would be 27 μg/m3 and the 2010 design value for the Birmingham Area (from the North Birmingham 

site) would be unchanged at 29 μg/m3. 

The 3-year design value for 2007– 

2009 submitted by Alabama for 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area is 

34 mg/m3, which meets the NAAQS as 

described above. Air quality data for 

2010 show that the Area continues to 

attain the PM2.5 NAAQS, with a 3-year 

design value of 29 mg/m3, and that 

ambient 24-hour concentrations of PM2.5

continue to decline. As mentioned 

above, on September 20, 2010 (75 FR 

57186) EPA published a clean data 

determination for the Birmingham Area 

for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In 

today’s action, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Area is continuing to 

attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA will 

not go forward with the redesignation if 

the Area does not continue to attain 

until the time that EPA finalizes the 

redesignation. As discussed in more 

detail below, the State of Alabama has 

committed to continue monitoring in 

this Area in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 58. 

Criteria (5)—Alabama Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of Title I of the CAA; 

and Criteria (2)—Alabama Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Aection 110(k) for 

the Birmingham Area 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the state has met 

all applicable requirements under 

section 110 and part D of title I of the 

CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and 

that the state has a fully approved SIP 

under section 110(k) for the area (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA proposes 

to find that Alabama has met all 

applicable SIP requirements for the 

Birmingham Area under section 110 of 

the CAA (general SIP requirements) for 

purposes of redesignation. Additionally, 

EPA proposes to find that the Alabama 

SIP satisfies the criterion that it meet 

applicable SIP requirements for 

purposes of redesignation under part D 

of title I of the CAA (requirements 

specific to 2006 24-hour PM2.5

nonattainment areas) in accordance 

with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, 

EPA proposes to determine that the SIP 

is fully approved with respect to all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these 

determinations, EPA ascertained which 

requirements are applicable to the Area 

and, if applicable, that they are fully 

approved under section 110(k). SIPs 

must be fully approved only with 

respect to requirements that were 

applicable prior to submittal of the 

complete redesignation request. 

a. The Birmingham Area Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of the CAA 

General SIP requirements. Section 

110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates 

the general requirements for a SIP, 

which include enforceable emissions 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques; provisions for the 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices necessary to collect 

data on ambient air quality; and 

programs to enforce the limitations. 

General SIP elements and requirements 

are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of 

title I, part A of the CAA. These 

requirements include, but are not 

limited to, the following: submittal of a 

SIP that has been adopted by the state 

after reasonable public notice and 

hearing; provisions for establishment 

and operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)) and provisions for the 

implementation of part D requirements 

(New Source Review (NSR) permit 

programs); provisions for air pollution 

modeling; and provisions for public and 

local agency participation in planning 

and emission control rule development. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs 

contain certain measures to prevent 

sources in a state from significantly 

contributing to air quality problems in 

another state. To implement this 

provision, EPA has required certain 

states to establish programs to address 

the interstate transport of air pollutants 

(e.g., NOX SIP Call,5 CAIR,6 and 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70096 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

impose a schedule on EPA for completing that 

action. Id. Therefore, CAIR is currently in effect in 

Alabama. 

CSAPR). The section 110(a)(2)(D) 

requirements for a state are not linked 

with a particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification in that 

state. EPA believes that the 

requirements linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classifications are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. Thus, EPA does not 

believe that the CAA’s interstate 

transport requirements should be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. However, 

as discussed later in this notice, 

addressing pollutant transport from 

other states is an important part of an 

area’s maintenance demonstration. 

In addition, EPA believes other 

section 110 elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked with an area’s 

attainment status are applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. The area will still be 

subject to these requirements after the 

area is redesignated. The section 110 

and part D requirements which are 

linked with a particular area’s 

designation and classification are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. This 

approach is consistent with EPA’s 

existing policy on applicability (i.e., for 

redesignations) of conformity and 

oxygenated fuels requirements, as well 

as with section 184 ozone transport 

requirements. See Reading, 

Pennsylvania, proposed and final 

rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, 

October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 

1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, 

final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida, final 

rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December 

7, 1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio, 

redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 

2000), and in the Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 

50399, October 19, 2001). 

EPA has not yet completed 

rulemaking on a submittal from 

Alabama dated September 23, 2009, 

addressing ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ 

elements required under CAA section 

110(a)(2). However, these are statewide 

requirements that are not a consequence 

of the nonattainment status of the 

Birmingham Area. As stated above, EPA 

believes that section 110 elements not 

linked to an area’s nonattainment status 

are not applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. Therefore, 

notwithstanding the fact that EPA has 

not yet completed rulemaking on 

Alabama’s submittal for the PM2.5

infrastructure SIP elements of section 

110(a)(2), EPA believes it has approved 

all SIP elements under section 110 that 

must be approved as a prerequisite for 

redesignating the Birmingham Area to 

attainment. 

Title I, Part D requirements. EPA 

proposes that if EPA approves 

Alabama’s base year emissions 

inventory, which is part of the 

maintenance plan submittal, the 

Alabama SIP will meet applicable SIP 

requirements under part D of the CAA. 

As discussed in greater detail below, 

EPA believes the emissions inventory is 

approvable because the 2009 direct 

PM2.5, SO2, and NOX emissions for 

Alabama were developed consistent 

with EPA guidance for emission 

inventories and represent a 

comprehensive, accurate and current 

inventory as required by CAA section 

172(c)(3). 

Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP 

requirements. EPA has determined that 

if the approval of the base year 

emissions inventory, discussed in 

section VIII of this rulemaking, is 

finalized, the Alabama SIP will meet the 

applicable SIP requirements for the 

Birmingham Area for purposes of 

redesignation under title I, part D of the 

CAA. Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the 

basic nonattainment requirements 

applicable to all nonattainment areas. 

All areas that were designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under 

this subpart of the CAA and the 

requirements applicable to them are 

contained in sections 172 and 176. 

For purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation request, the applicable 

part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for 

all nonattainment areas are contained in 

sections 172(c)(1)–(9) and in section 

176. A thorough discussion of the 

requirements contained in section 172 

can be found in the General Preamble 

for Implementation of title I (57 FR 

13498, April 16, 1992). 

Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements. 

Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for 

all nonattainment areas to provide for 

the implementation of all Reasonable 

Available Control Measures (RACM) as 

expeditiously as practicable and to 

provide for attainment of the national 

primary ambient air quality standards. 

EPA interprets this requirement to 

impose a duty on all nonattainment 

areas to consider all available control 

measures and to adopt and implement 

such measures as are reasonably 

available for implementation in each 

area as components of the area’s 

attainment demonstration. Under 

section 172, states with nonattainment 

areas must submit plans providing for 

timely attainment and meeting a variety 

of other requirements. However, 

pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c), EPA’s 

September 20, 2010, determination that 

the Birmingham area was attaining the 

24-hour PM2.5 standard suspended 

Alabama’s obligation to submit most of 

the attainment planning requirements 

that would otherwise apply. 

Specifically, the determination of 

attainment suspended Alabama’s 

obligation to submit an attainment 

demonstration and planning SIPs to 

provide for reasonable further progress 

(RFP), reasonable available control 

measures, and contingency measures 

under section 172(c)(9). 

The General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992) also discusses the 

evaluation of these requirements in the 

context of EPA’s consideration of a 

redesignation request. The General 

Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

evaluating redesignation requests when 

an area is attaining a standard (General 

Preamble for Implementation of Title I 

(57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)). 

Because attainment has been reached 

in the Birmingham Area, no additional 

measures are needed to provide for 

attainment, and section 172(c)(1) 

requirements for an attainment 

demonstration and RACM are no longer 

considered to be applicable for purposes 

of redesignation as long as the Area 

continues to attain the standard until 

redesignation. See also 40 CFR 

51.1004(c). 

The RFP plan requirement under 

section 172(c)(2) is defined as progress 

that must be made toward attainment. 

This requirement is not relevant for 

purposes of redesignation because EPA 

has determined that the Birmingham 

Area has monitored attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 

General Preamble, 57 FR 13564. See 

also 40 CFR 51.1004(c). In addition, 

because the Birmingham Area has 

attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

and is no longer subject to a RFP 

requirement, the requirement to submit 

the section 172(c)(9) contingency 

measures is not applicable for purposes 

of redesignation. Id. 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate, and current inventory of actual 

emissions. As part of Alabama’s 

redesignation request for the 

Birmingham Area, Alabama submitted a 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70097 

7CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to 

submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain 

Federal criteria and procedures for determining 

transportation conformity. Transportation 

conformity SIPs are different from the MVEBs that 

are established in control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans. 

2009 base year emissions inventory. As 

discussed below in section VIII, EPA is 

proposing to approve the 2009 base year 

inventory submitted with the 

redesignation request as meeting the 

section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement. 

Section 172(c)(4) requires the 

identification and quantification of 

emissions for major new and modified 

stationary sources to be allowed in an 

area, and section 172(c)(5) requires 

source permits for the construction and 

operation of new and modified major 

stationary sources anywhere in the 

nonattainment area. EPA has 

determined that, since PSD 

requirements will apply after 

redesignation, areas being redesignated 

need not comply with the requirement 

that a NSR program be approved prior 

to redesignation, provided that the area 

demonstrates maintenance of the 

NAAQS without part D NSR. A more 

detailed rationale for this view is 

described in a memorandum from Mary 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ Alabama 

has demonstrated that the Birmingham 

Area will be able to maintain the 

NAAQS without part D NSR in effect, 

and therefore Alabama need not have 

fully approved part D NSR programs 

prior to approval of the redesignation 

request. Nonetheless, Alabama currently 

has a fully-approved part D NSR 

program in place. Alabama’s PSD 

program will become effective in the 

Birmingham Area upon redesignation to 

attainment. Section 172(c)(6) requires 

the SIP to contain control measures 

necessary to provide for attainment of 

the NAAQS. Because attainment has 

been reached, no additional measures 

are needed to provide for attainment. 

Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to 

meet the applicable provisions of 

section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA 

believes the Alabama SIP meets the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

Section 176 Conformity 

Requirements. Section 176(c) of the 

CAA requires states to establish criteria 

and procedures to ensure that federally 

supported or funded projects conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. The requirement to 

determine conformity applies to 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects that are developed, funded or 

approved under title 23 of the United 

States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal 

Transit Act (transportation conformity) 

as well as to all other federally 

supported or funded projects (general 

conformity). State transportation 

conformity SIP revisions must be 

consistent with Federal conformity 

regulations relating to consultation, 

enforcement and enforceability that EPA 

promulgated pursuant to its authority 

under the CAA. 

EPA interprets the conformity SIP 

requirements 7 as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request under section 107(d) because 

state conformity rules are still required 

after redesignation and Federal 

conformity rules apply where state rules 

have not been approved. See Wall v. 

EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) 

(upholding this interpretation); see also 

60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Tampa, Florida). Thus, 

the Birmingham Area has satisfied all 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation under section 110 and 

part D of title I of the CAA. 

b. The Birmingham Area Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 

110(k) of the CAA 

If EPA issues a final approval of the 

base year emissions inventory, EPA will 

have fully approved the applicable 

Alabama SIP for the Birmingham 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 nonattainment area under 

section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA may rely on prior 

SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (see Calcagni 

Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir. 

1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any 

additional measures it may approve in 

conjunction with a redesignation action 

(see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and 

citations therein). Following passage of 

the CAA of 1970, Alabama has adopted 

and submitted, and EPA has fully 

approved at various times, provisions 

addressing the various 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS SIP elements applicable 

in the Birmingham Area (May 31, 1972, 

37 FR 10842; July 13, 2011, 76 FR 

41100). 

As indicated above, EPA believes that 

the section 110 elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked to an area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. In addition, EPA believes 

that since the part D subpart 1 

requirements did not become due prior 

to submission of the redesignation 

request, they are also not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 

F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); 68 FR 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

the St. Louis-East St. Louis Area to 

attainment of the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS). With the approval of the 

emissions inventory, EPA will have 

approved all part D subpart 1 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

this redesignation. 

Criteria (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement in the Birmingham 2006 

24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment 

Area Is Due to Permanent and 

Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 

Resulting From Implementation of the 

SIP and Applicable Federal Air 

Pollution Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the air quality 

improvement in the area is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP and 

applicable Federal air pollution control 

regulations and other permanent and 

enforceable reductions (CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA believes that 

Alabama has demonstrated that the 

observed air quality improvement in the 

Birmingham Area is due to permanent 

and enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

SIP, Federal measures, and other state 

adopted measures. 

State, local and Federal measures 

enacted in recent years have resulted in 

permanent emission reductions. Most of 

these emission reductions are 

enforceable through regulations. A few 

non-regulatory measures also result in 

emission reductions. 

The state and local measures that 

have been implemented to date and 

relied upon by Alabama to demonstrate 

attainment and/or maintenance include 

local NOX controls on cement plants in 

the Area due to the 8-hour ozone 

contingency plan, Jefferson and Shelby 

County burn bans, and voluntary onroad and off-road diesel retrofit projects. 

As shown in Table 2, local reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) PM 

controls installed in the Birmingham 

Area have reduced direct PM2.5

emissions by approximately 62 tons per 

year (tpy) as of the end of 2009. These 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70098 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

8 Data in Tables 3 and 4 reflect reported actual 

emissions from the Clean Air Markets Division 

Database http://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/ 

index.cfm?fuseaction=emissions.wizard. 

controls are associated with the 

Birmingham Annual PM2.5 Attainment 

Demonstration SIP, submitted to EPA on 

March 13, 2009. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF RACT CONTROLS IN THE BIRMINGHAM AREA

Facility Source RACT controls PM2.5 reduction 

(tpy) Installation date 

W.J. Bullock .................................. Crucible furnaces ......................... Baghouse ..................................... 3 .891 2009 

McWane Pipe ................................ Charge handling area .................. Wet suppression .......................... 0 .385 2008 

Sloss Industries ............................. Coal piles ..................................... Wet suppression .......................... 0 .398 2008 

American Cast Iron Pipe ............... Charge make-up .......................... Wet suppression .......................... 11 .91 2008 

Roads & process areas ............... Paving .......................................... 3 .58 2007/2008 

Cupola melting furnace ................ New Cupola/Bag house & spray 

suppression.

5 .84 2007/2008 

Sand & cement silos .................... Baghouse ..................................... 0 .09 2008 

Nucor Steel ................................... Meltshop fugitives ........................ Baghouse & physical improvements.28 .1 2008 

U.S. Pipe ....................................... Cupola charge make-up .............. Wet suppression .......................... 1 .818 2008 

Sand & cement silos .................... Bin vents ...................................... 5 .93 2008 

Total ....................................... ...................................................... ...................................................... 61 .942 ............................

In addition, closures of certain 

facilities have resulted in continued 

reductions of local PM2.5 emissions in 

the Birmingham Area. In late 2009, W.J. 

Bullock and Sloss Mineral Wool in 

Jefferson County announced plans to 

cease operations, resulting in additional 

PM2.5 emission reductions of 0.13 tpy 

and 130 tpy, respectively. In March 

2010, U.S. Pipe ceased production, 

resulting in an additional emission 

reduction of 46 tpy of PM2.5. In total, the 

RACT controls and facility closures 

amount to reductions of greater than 

eight percent of direct PM2.5 point 

source emissions in Jefferson County. 

Furthermore, control equipment 

installed at utilities in the Birmingham 

Area have decreased emissions of NOX

and SO2. These reductions, prompted by 

the NOX SIP Call and CAIR, are 

summarized in Table 3 below. In 2007, 

flue gas desulfurization systems were 

added to units 8–10 of Alabama Power 

Company’s (APC) Gorgas Plant in 

anticipation of CAIR. Selective catalytic 

reduction (SCR) systems were installed 

on units 3 and 4 at APC Miller Plant in 

2003 as a result of the NOX SIP Call, 

with a consent decree requiring year 

round operation beginning in 2008 in 

preparation for CAIR. The year round 

SCR operation requirements have been 

incorporated into the facilities’ title V 

operating permits and are thus 

enforceable. 

TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS AND CONTROLS AT UTILITIES IN THE BIRMINGHAM AREA 8

Facility 

Date control installed Emissions reductions from 

2006–2009 (tpy) 

NOX SO2 NOX SO2 Percent 

APC Miller Unit 3 ......................................................................................................... 2008 ................ 4,680 ................ 71 

APC Miller Unit 4 ......................................................................................................... 2008 ................ 3,786 ................ 70 

APC Gorgas Unit 8 ...................................................................................................... ................ 2007 ................ 10,007 96 

APC Gorgas Unit 9 ...................................................................................................... ................ 2007 ................ 9,975 96 

APC Gorgas Unit 10 .................................................................................................... ................ 2007 ................ 40,779 97 

APC Gaston Unit 5 * .................................................................................................... ................ 2010 ................ 43,579 78 

Total Reductions ................................................................................................... ................ ................ 8,466 104,341 ................

* Gaston Unit 5 data reflects reductions from 2006–2010. 

The Federal measures that have been 

implemented include the following: 

Tier 2 vehicle standards. In addition 

to requiring NOX controls, the Tier 2 

rule reduced the allowable sulfur 

content of gasoline to 30 parts per 

million (ppm) starting in January of 

2006. Most gasoline sold in North 

Carolina prior to this had a sulfur 

content of approximately 300 ppm. 

Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel 

highway vehicle standards. The second 

phase of the standards and testing 

procedures, which began in 2007, 

reduces particulate matter (PM) and 

NOX from heavy-duty highway engines 

and also reduces highway diesel fuel 

sulfur content to 15 ppm. The total 

program is expected to achieve a 90 and 

95 percent reduction in PM and NOX

emissions from heavy-duty highway 

engines, respectively. 

Nonroad spark-ignition engines and 

recreational engines standards. Tier 1 of 

this standard, implemented in 2004, and 

Tier 2, implemented in 2007, have 

reduced and will continue to reduce PM 

emissions. 

Large nonroad diesel engine 

standards. Promulgated in 2004, this 

rule is being phased in between 2008 

and 2014. This rule will reduce sulfur 

content in nonroad diesel fuel and, 

when fully implemented, will reduce 

NOX and direct PM2.5 emissions by over 

90 percent from these engines. 

NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 

(63 FR 57356), EPA issued a NOX SIP 

Call requiring the District of Columbia 

and 22 states to reduce emissions of 

NOX. Affected states were required to 

comply with Phase I of the SIP Call 

beginning in 2004, and Phase II 

beginning in 2007. Emission reductions 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70099 

resulting from regulations developed in 

response to the NOX SIP Call are 

permanent and enforceable. 

CAIR and CSAPR. As previously 

discussed, the remanded CAIR, 

originally promulgated to reduce 

transported pollution, was left in place 

to ‘‘temporarily preserve the 

environmental values covered by CAIR’’ 

until EPA replaced it with a rule 

consistent with the Court’s opinion. To 

remedy CAIR’s flaws, EPA promulgated 

the final CSAPR on August 8, 2011. 

CSAPR addresses the interstate 

transport requirements of the CAA with 

respect to the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As noted 

previously, the requirements of CAIR 

address emissions through the 2011 

control period and CSAPR requires 

similar or greater emission reductions in 

the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. 

Because PM2.5 concentrations in the 

Birmingham area are impacted by the 

transport of sulfates and nitrates, the 

area’s air quality is affected by 

regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions 

from power plants. Table 4, below, 

presents statewide EGU emissions data 

compiled by EPA’s Clean Air Markets 

Division for the years 2002 and 2009. 

Emissions for 2009 reflect 

implementation of CAIR. Table 4 shows 

that Alabama and states impacting the 

Birmingham Area for the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, as indicated in CSAPR, 

reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from 

EGUs by 1,173,566 tpy and 2,425,474 

tpy, respectively, between 2002 and 

2009. 

TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2002 AND 2009 STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES IMPACTING

THE BIRMINGHAM AREA 8

State 

NOX SO2

2002 2009 Net change 

2002–2009 2002 2009 Net change 2002–2009 

Alabama ............................................................... 161,559 49,609 ¥111,950 448,248 277,972 ¥170,276 

Georgia ................................................................ 146,456 57,566 ¥88,890 512,654 262,258 ¥250,396 

Indiana ................................................................. 281,146 110,969 ¥170,177 778,868 413,726 ¥365,142 

Kentucky .............................................................. 198,599 78,767 ¥119,832 482,653 252,002 ¥230,651 

Ohio ...................................................................... 370,497 95,785 ¥274,712 1,132,069 600,687 ¥531,382 

Pennsylvania ........................................................ 200,909 110,239 ¥90,670 889,766 573,619 ¥316,147 

Tennessee ........................................................... 155,996 27,912 ¥128,084 336,995 108,042 ¥228,953 

West Virginia ........................................................ 225,371 36,120 ¥189,251 507,110 174,583 ¥332,527 

Total .............................................................. 1,740,533 566,967 ¥1,173,566 5,088,363 2,662,889 ¥2,425,474 

As was noted earlier, EPA 

promulgated CSAPR to address 

interstate transport of emissions and 

resulting secondary air pollutants and to 

replace CAIR. CAIR, among other 

things, required emission reductions 

that contributed to the air quality 

improvement in the Birmingham Area. 

CSAPR requires substantial reductions 

of SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs 

across most of the Eastern United States, 

with implementation beginning on 

January 1, 2012. CAIR will continue to 

be implemented through 2011, and will 

be replaced by CSAPR beginning in 

2012. CSAPR requires reductions of 

NOX and SO2 emissions to levels below 

the levels that led to attainment of the 

1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard in the 

Birmingham Area. Given the remanded 

status of CAIR, this air quality 

improvement could not be considered 

permanent at the time ADEM submitted 

its request for redesignation of the 

Birmingham Area. However, since that 

time CSAPR has been finalized, which 

mandates even greater reductions than 

have already occurred under CAIR and, 

more importantly, more reductions than 

are needed to maintain the standard in 

the Area. The reductions of EGU 

emissions of SO2 and NOX contributed 

to the air quality improvement in the 

Birmingham Area. Therefore, the final 

promulgation of CSAPR in combination 

with the other measures cited by 

Alabama and described above, ensure 

that the emission reductions that led the 

Area to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS can be considered permanent 

and enforceable for purposes of section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii). 

Criteria (4)—The Birmingham Area Has 

a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan 

Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has a 

fully approved maintenance plan 

pursuant to section 175A of the CAA 

(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In 

conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the Birmingham Area to 

attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, ADEM submitted a SIP 

revision to provide for the maintenance 

of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for at 

least 10 years after the effective date of 

redesignation to attainment. EPA 

believes this maintenance plan meets 

the requirements for approval under 

section 175A of the CAA. 

a. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. Under 

section 175A, the plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the Administrator approves a 

redesignation to attainment. Eight years 

after the redesignation, the State must 

submit a revised maintenance plan 

which demonstrates that attainment will 

continue to be maintained for the 10 

years following the initial 10-year 

period. To address the possibility of 

future NAAQS violations, the 

maintenance plan must contain 

contingency measures as EPA deems 

necessary to assure prompt correction of 

any future 2006 24-hour PM2.5

violations. The Calcagni Memorandum 

provides further guidance on the 

content of a maintenance plan, 

explaining that a maintenance plan 

should address five requirements: The 

attainment emissions inventory, 

maintenance demonstration, 

monitoring, verification of continued 

attainment, and a contingency plan. As 

is discussed more fully below, EPA 

finds that Alabama’s maintenance plan 

includes all the necessary components 

and is thus proposing to approve it as 

a revision to the Alabama SIP. 

b. Attainment Emissions Inventory 

The Birmingham Area attained the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70100 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

from 2007–2009. Alabama selected 2009 

as the attainment emissions inventory 

year. The attainment inventory 

identifies a level of emissions in the 

Area that is sufficient to attain the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Alabama began 

development of the attainment 

inventory by first generating a baseline 

emissions inventory for the Birmingham 

Area. As noted above, the year 2009 was 

chosen as the base year for developing 

a comprehensive emissions inventory 

for direct PM2.5 and the primary PM2.5

precursors, SO2 and NOX, for which 

projected emissions could be developed 

for 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021, and 2024. 

ADEM used actual point source 

emissions data for 2009 for all sources 

in Jefferson County and a majority of 

sources in Shelby County. The Visibility 

Improvement—State and Tribal 

Association of the Southeast (VISTAS) 

projected 2009 emissions were used 

only where actual emissions were 

unavailable. The projected inventory 

included with the maintenance plan 

estimates emissions forward to 2024, 

which is beyond the 10-year interval 

required in section 175A of the CAA. In 

addition to comparing the final year of 

the plan, 2024, to the base year, 2009, 

Alabama compared interim years to the 

baseline to demonstrate that these years 

are also expected to show continued 

maintenance of the 24-hour PM2.5

standard. On March 7, 2011, at the 

request of EPA, ADEM submitted a 

letter in support of the June 17, 2010, 

redesignation request. The letter 

contains revisions to emissions data in 

Tables 4.3–1, 4.3–2, and 4.3–3 of the 

redesignation request to correct 

administrative errors and a clarification 

on how the 2009 point source inventory 

was developed. A copy of the letter is 

included in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking (EPA–R04–OAR–2011– 

0043) and can be obtained from the 

www.regulations.gov Web site. 

The emissions inventory is composed 

of four major types of sources: Point, 

area, on-road mobile and non-road 

mobile. The future year emissions 

inventories have been estimated using 

projected rates of growth in population, 

traffic, economic activity, expected 

control programs, and other parameters. 

Due to the remand of CAIR, ADEM did 

not include any emissions reductions 

expected under the rule past 2012. The 

promulgation of CSAPR ensured that 

reductions expected under CAIR would 

remain, thus EPA considers ADEM’s 

projections to be conservative estimates. 

Non-road mobile emissions estimates 

were based on the EPA’s 

NONROAD2008a non-road mobile 

model, with the exception of the 

railroad locomotives, commercial 

marine, and aircraft engine. These 

emissions are estimated by taking 

activity data, such as landings and 

takeoffs, and multiplying by an 

Economic Growth Analysis System 

(EGAS) emission factor. On-road mobile 

source emissions were calculated using 

EPA’s MOVES2010 mobile emission 

factors model. The 2009 SO2, NOX and 

PM2.5 emissions for the Birmingham 

Area, as well as the emissions for other 

years, were developed consistent with 

EPA guidance and are summarized in 

Tables 5 through 8 of the following 

subsection discussing the maintenance 

demonstration. 

c. Maintenance Demonstration 

The June 17, 2010, final submittal 

includes a maintenance plan for the 

Birmingham nonattainment area. The 

maintenance plan: 

(i) Shows compliance with and 

maintenance of the 24-hour PM2.5

standard by providing information to 

support the demonstration that current 

and future emissions of SO2, NOX and 

PM2.5 remain at or below 2009 

emissions levels. 

(ii) Uses 2009 as the attainment year 

and includes future emissions inventory 

projections for 2012, 2015, 2018, 2021, 

and 2024. 

(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year’’ at least 10 

years (and beyond) after the time 

necessary for EPA to review and 

approve the maintenance plan. Per 40 

CFR part 93, NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs 

were established for the last year (2024) 

of the maintenance plan (see section VI 

below). 

(iv) Provides actual and projected 

emissions inventories, in tons per day 

(tpd), for the Birmingham 

nonattainment area, as shown in Tables 

5 through 8 below. 

TABLE 5—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR PM2.5 EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA

Sector 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 

Point ......................................................................................................... 11.22 9.75 10.29 10.88 11.47 12.10 

Area .......................................................................................................... 12.35 12.18 12.37 12.57 12.78 12.98 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 1.60 1.49 1.32 1.15 1.05 1.00 

Mobile ....................................................................................................... 2.36 1.90 1.45 1.30 1.15 0.96 

Total .................................................................................................. 27.53 25.32 25.43 25.90 26.45 27.04 

TABLE 6—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR NOX EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA

Sector 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 

Point ......................................................................................................... 96.25 96.41 98.01 99.66 101.65 103.69 

Area .......................................................................................................... 11.24 11.42 11.59 11.77 11.94 12.12 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 27.31 24.60 21.74 19.65 19.19 19.42 

Mobile ....................................................................................................... 72.05 57.74 43.43 37.34 31.25 25.20 

Total .................................................................................................. 206.85 190.17 174.77 168.42 164.03 160.43 

TABLE 7—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR SO2 EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA

Sector 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 

Point ......................................................................................................... 493.41 203.71 204.41 205.17 205.84 206.92 

Area .......................................................................................................... 1.06 1.09 1.11 1.14 1.16 1.19 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 0.50 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70101 

TABLE 7—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED 24-HOUR SO2 EMISSIONS (TPD) FOR THE BIRMINGHAM AREA—Continued 

Sector 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 

Mobile ....................................................................................................... 0.43 0.37 0.29 0.30 0.32 0.33 

Total .................................................................................................. 495.40 205.37 206.00 206.80 207.51 208.64 

TABLE 8—EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR BIRMINGHAM AREA

Year PM2.5 (tpd) NOX (tpd) SO2 (tpd) 

2009 ..................................................................................................................... 27.53 206.85 495.40 

2012 ..................................................................................................................... 25.32 190.17 205.37 

2015 ..................................................................................................................... 25.43 174.77 206.00 

2018 ..................................................................................................................... 25.90 168.42 206.80 

2021 ..................................................................................................................... 26.45 164.03 207.51 

2024 ..................................................................................................................... 27.04 160.43 208.64 

Difference from 2009 to 2024 .............................................................................. ¥0.49 ¥46.42 ¥286.76 

Tables 5 through 8 summarize the 

2009 and future projected emissions of 

direct PM2.5 and precursors from the 

counties in the Birmingham Area. In 

situations where local emissions are the 

primary contributor to nonattainment, 

the ambient air quality standard should 

not be violated in the future as long as 

emissions from within the 

nonattainment area remain at or below 

the baseline with which attainment was 

achieved. Alabama has projected 

emissions as described previously and 

determined that emissions in the 

Birmingham Area will remain below 

those in the attainment year inventory 

for the duration of the maintenance 

plan. 

As discussed in section VI of this 

proposed rulemaking, a safety margin is 

the difference between the attainment 

level of emissions (from all sources) and 

the projected level of emissions (from 

all sources) in the maintenance plan. 

The attainment level of emissions is the 

level of emissions during one of the 

years in which the area met the NAAQS. 

Alabama selected 2009 as the 

attainment emissions inventory year for 

the Birmingham Area. Alabama 

calculated the safety margins in its 

submittal as 46.42 tpd for NOX and 0.49 

tpd for PM2.5. The State has decided to 

allocate 23.21 tpd of the available NOX

safety margin and 0.245 tpd of the 

available PM2.5 safety margin to the 

2024 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area. 

Therefore, the remaining safety margin 

for NOX will be 23.21 tpd and the 

remaining safety margin for PM2.5 will 

be 0.245 tpd. This allocation and the 

resulting available safety margin for the 

Birmingham Area are discussed further 

in section VI of this proposed 

rulemaking. 

d. Monitoring Network 

There are currently ten monitors 

measuring PM2.5 in the Birmingham 

Area. The State of Alabama, through 

ADEM, has committed to continue 

operation of the monitors in the 

Birmingham Area in compliance with 

40 CFR part 58 and have thus addressed 

the requirement for monitoring. EPA 

approved Alabama’s 2010 monitoring 

plan on October 8, 2010. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

The State of Alabama, through ADEM, 

has the legal authority to enforce and 

implement the requirements of the 

Birmingham Area 2006 24-hour PM2.5

maintenance plan. This includes the 

authority to adopt, implement and 

enforce any subsequent emissions 

control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future PM2.5 attainment problems. 

ADEM will track the progress of the 

maintenance plan by performing future 

reviews of triennial emission 

inventories for the Birmingham Area as 

required in the Air Emissions Reporting 

Rule (AERR) and Consolidated 

Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR). For 

these periodic inventories, ADEM will 

review the assumptions made for the 

purpose of the maintenance 

demonstration concerning projected 

growth of activity levels. If any of these 

assumptions appear to have changed 

substantially, then ADEM will re-project 

emissions for the Birmingham Area. 

f. Contingency Measures in the 

Maintenance Plan 

The contingency measures are 

designed to promptly correct a violation 

of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA 

requires that a maintenance plan 

include such contingency measures as 

EPA deems necessary to assure that the 

state will promptly correct a violation of 

the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. The maintenance plan 

should identify the contingency 

measures to be adopted, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation, and a time limit for 

action by the State. A state should also 

identify specific indicators to be used to 

determine when the contingency 

measures need to be implemented. The 

maintenance plan must include a 

requirement that a state will implement 

all measures with respect to control of 

the pollutant that were contained in the 

SIP before redesignation of the area to 

attainment in accordance with section 

175A(d). 

In the June 17, 2010, submittal, 

Alabama affirms that all programs 

instituted by the State and EPA will 

remain enforceable and that sources are 

prohibited from reducing emissions 

controls following the redesignation of 

the Area. The contingency plan 

included in the submittal includes a 

triggering mechanism to determine 

when contingency measures are needed 

and a process of developing and 

implementing appropriate control 

measures. The State of Alabama will use 

actual ambient monitoring data as the 

triggering event to determine when 

contingency measures should be 

implemented. 

As previously mentioned, on March 7, 

2011, at the request of EPA, ADEM 

submitted a letter in support of the June 

17, 2010, redesignation request. The 

letter contains clarifying information 

regarding the contingency measures 

included in the maintenance plan and 

an additional emissions inventory-based 

contingency measure trigger. A copy of 

the letter is included in the docket for 

this proposed rulemaking (EPA–R04– 

OAR–2011–0043) and can be obtained 

from the www.regulations.gov Web site. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70102 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Alabama has identified a primary 

trigger as occurring when the 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, as described in section II 

above, are violated. Alabama commits to 

adopting, within 18 months of a 

certified violation of the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, one or more of the control 

measures discussed below. 

Additionally, Alabama has identified a 

secondary trigger to occur when the 

98th percentile 24-hour concentration 

for a single year at any monitor in the 

nonattainment area records a 

concentration of 36 mg/m3 or greater. In 

such a case, the state will evaluate 

existing controls measures and 

determine whether any further emission 

reduction measures should be 

implemented. ADEM will consider 

several factors in its evaluation of the 

need for additional controls measures in 

the event of a future year violation of 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Depending on the timing of the future 

year violations, additional local and 

regional emissions reductions may still 

be planned. ADEM will evaluate the air 

quality impacts of those regulatory 

programs in determining if further 

reductions are required to ensure 

continued maintenance of the 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the Birmingham 

Maintenance Area. 

In addition to the triggers indicated 

above, Alabama will monitor regional 

emissions through the CERR and AERR 

and compare them to the projected 

inventories and the attainment year 

inventory. If the actual emissions from 

these inventories are greater than ten 

percent above the projected emissions 

presented in the maintenance plan, than 

ADEM will evaluate whether additional 

planning or control measures are 

needed to prevent the Area from 

violating the NAAQS or to correct a 

potential violation. 

In the event that further reductions 

are needed to ensure continued 

maintenance, the list of ‘‘culpable 

sources’’ developed by Alabama in the 

State’s 2009 attainment demonstration 

for the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS will be 

evaluated for additional control of direct 

PM2.5 emissions. As additional 

information, a copy of section 8.2 of the 

Birmingham Annual PM2.5 Attainment 

Demonstration SIP, submitted to EPA on 

March 13, 2009, was included with the 

March 7, 2011, letter to EPA, which is 

included in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking (EPA–R04–OAR–2011– 

0043). This section contains the detailed 

contingency measures for the annual 

PM2.5 SIP and was referenced in the 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In 

addition, ADEM will consider the 

possibility of expanding the current 

voluntary diesel retrofit program 

currently in place in the Birmingham 

Area. 

Once a primary trigger is initiated, 

ADEM will commence analysis, 

including review of expected emissions 

reductions from local and regional 

regulatory programs, air quality 

modeling, and emissions inventory 

assessment to determine emission 

control measures that will be required to 

attain or maintain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. All controls that will be 

relied upon for contingency purposes 

are scheduled to be installed in 2012 or 

later and are therefore not already relied 

upon in for maintenance. The schedule 

for implementation of this plan and 

details of steps ADEM will take to bring 

the area back into compliance are 

outlined in Table 9. 

At least one of the following 

contingency measures will be adopted 

and implemented upon a primary 

triggering event: 

• Continued implementation of 

previously adopted controls which have 

not yet been realized but are sufficient 

to address the violation, including 

future year emission reductions from 

Federal measures to address interstate 

pollutant transport and from the Georgia 

multi-pollutant rule; 

• Additional controls of direct PM2.5

emissions from the list of ‘‘culpable 

sources’’ developed in the PM2.5 annual 

attainment SIP and included in the 

March 7, 2011, letter; 

• Expansion of the current voluntary 

diesel retrofit program in the 

Birmingham Area; 

• Any additional controls deemed 

beneficial to address the violation at the 

time of the trigger. 

TABLE 9—SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT REVISIONS AND/OR RULE REVISIONS FOR IMPLEMENTING CONTINGENCY MEASURES

Step Description of action Schedule 

1 ........................ Identify and quantify the emissions reductions expected to result from current and future state and Federal 

regulatory programs.

3 months. 

2 ........................ Use the best available air quality modeling to evaluate the air quality improvement expected from step 1 

above.

6 months. 

3 ........................ Draft any needed permit conditions or SIP regulations .................................................................................... 3 months. 

4 ........................ Complete rulemaking or permit revision process and submit to EPA .............................................................. 6 months. 

Maximum time required for completion 18 months. 

EPA has concluded that the 

maintenance plan adequately addresses 

the five basic components of a 

maintenance plan: Attainment 

inventory, monitoring network, 

verification of continued attainment, 

and a contingency plan. Therefore, the 

maintenance plan SIP revision 

submitted by the State of Alabama for 

the Birmingham Area meets the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA and is approvable. 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Alabama’s proposed NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs for the Birmingham area? 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects, such as the construction of 

new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., 

be consistent with) the part of the state’s 

air quality plan that addresses pollution 

from cars and trucks. Conformity to the 

SIP means that transportation activities 

will not cause new air quality 

violations, worsen existing violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the NAAQS 

or any interim milestones. If a 

transportation plan does not conform, 

most new projects that would expand 

the capacity of roadways cannot go 

forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 

set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

assuring conformity of such 

transportation activities to a SIP. The 

regional emissions analysis is one, but 

not the only, requirement for 

implementing transportation 

conformity. Transportation conformity 

is a requirement for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. Maintenance areas 

are areas that were previously 

nonattainment for a particular NAAQS 

but have since been redesignated to 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70103 

attainment with an approved 

maintenance plan for that NAAQS. 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIPs and maintenance plans for 

nonattainment areas. These control 

strategy SIPs (including RFP and 

attainment demonstration) and 

maintenance plans create MVEBs for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a 

MVEB must be established for the last 

year of the maintenance plan. A state 

may adopt MVEBs for other years as 

well. The MVEB is the portion of the 

total allowable emissions in the 

maintenance demonstration that is 

allocated to highway and transit vehicle 

use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. 

The MVEB serves as a ceiling on 

emissions from an area’s planned 

transportation system. The MVEB 

concept is further explained in the 

preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish the MVEB in the SIP 

and how to revise the MVEB. 

After interagency consultation with 

the transportation partners for the 

Birmingham Area, Alabama has elected 

to develop MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5

for the entire nonattainment area 

(Jefferson, Shelby, and the 

nonattainment portion of Walker 

Counties). Alabama is developing these 

MVEBs, as required, for the last year of 

its maintenance plan, 2024. The MVEBs 

reflect the total on-road emissions for 

2024, plus an allocation from the 

available NOX and PM2.5 safety margin. 

Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term ‘‘safety 

margin’’ is the difference between the 

attainment level (from all sources) and 

the projected level of emissions (from 

all sources) in the maintenance plan. 

The safety margin can be allocated to 

the transportation sector; however, the 

total emissions must remain below the 

attainment level. The NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs and allocation from the safety 

margin were developed in consultation 

with the transportation partners and 

were added to account for uncertainties 

in population growth, changes in model 

vehicle miles traveled and new 

emission factor models. The NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area 

are defined in Table 10 below. 

TABLE 10—BIRMINGHAM AREA PM2.5

NOX MVEBS

[tpd] 

PM2.5 NOX

2024 On-road Mobile Emissions 

(tpd) ..................... 0 .96 25.20 

Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB .... 0 .245 23.21 

2024 Conformity 

MVEB .................. 1 .21 48.41 

As mentioned above, the Birmingham 

Area has chosen to allocate a portion of 

the available safety margins to the NOX

and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024. This 

allocation is 23.21 tpd and 0.245 tpd for 

NOX and PM2.5, respectively. Therefore, 

the remaining safety margins for 2024 

are 23.21 tpd and 0.245 tpd for NOX and 

PM2.5, respectively. 

Through this rulemaking, EPA is 

proposing to approve the MVEBs for 

NOX and PM2.5 for 2024 for the 

Birmingham Area because EPA has 

determined that the Area maintains the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS with the 

emissions at the levels of the budgets. 

Once the MVEBs for the Birmingham 

Area are approved or found adequate 

(whichever is completed first), they 

must be used for future conformity 

determinations. After thorough review, 

EPA has determined that the budgets 

meet the adequacy criteria, as outlined 

in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), and is proposing 

to approve the budgets because they are 

consistent with maintenance of the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. 

VII. What is the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the 

proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 

2024 for the Birmingham Area? 

When reviewing submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans 

containing MVEBs, EPA may 

affirmatively find the MVEB contained 

therein adequate for use in determining 

transportation conformity. Once EPA 

affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB 

is adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes, that MVEB must 

be used by state and Federal agencies in 

determining whether proposed 

transportation projects conform to the 

SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. 

EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining adequacy of a MVEB are set 

out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process 

for determining adequacy consists of 

three basic steps: public notification of 

a SIP submission, a public comment 

period, and EPA’s adequacy 

determination. This process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

MVEBs for transportation conformity 

purposes was initially outlined in EPA’s 

May 14, 1999, guidance, ‘‘Conformity 

Guidance on Implementation of March 

2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.’’ 

EPA adopted regulations to codify the 

adequacy process in the Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments for the 

‘‘New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and 

Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing 

Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’ 

on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). 

Additional information on the adequacy 

process for transportation conformity 

purposes is available in the proposed 

rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments: 

Response to Court Decision and 

Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974, 

38984 (June 30, 2003). 

As discussed earlier, Alabama’s 

maintenance plan submission includes 

NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the 

Birmingham Area for 2024, the last year 

of the maintenance plan. EPA reviewed 

the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs through the 

adequacy process. The Alabama SIP 

submission, including the Birmingham 

Area NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs, was open 

for public comment on EPA’s adequacy 

Web site on March 24, 2011, found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/state

resources/transconf/currsips.htm. The 

EPA public comment period on 

adequacy for the MVEBs for 2024 for 

Birmingham Area closed on April 25, 

2011. EPA did not receive any 

comments on the adequacy of the 

MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any 

requests for the SIP submittal. 

EPA intends to make its 

determination on the adequacy of the 

2024 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area 

for transportation conformity purposes 

in the near future by completing the 

adequacy process that was started on 

March 24, 2011. After EPA finds the 

2024 MVEBs adequate or approves 

them, the new MVEBs for NOX and 

PM2.5 must be used for future 

transportation conformity 

determinations. For required regional 

emissions analysis years that involve 

2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets 

will be the new 2024 MVEBs 

established in the maintenance plan, as 

defined in section VI of this proposed 

rulemaking. 

VIII. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

proposed 2009 base year emissions 

inventory for the Birmingham area? 

As discussed above, section 172(c)(3) 

of the CAA requires areas to submit a 

base year emissions inventory. As part 

of Alabama’s request to redesignate the 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
70104 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Birmingham Area, the State submitted a 

2009 base year emissions inventory to 

meet this requirement. Emissions 

contained in the submittal cover the 

general source categories of point 

sources, area sources, on-road mobile 

sources, and non-road mobile sources. 

All emission summaries were 

accompanied by source-specific 

descriptions of emission calculation 

procedures and sources of input data. 

Alabama’s submittal documents 2009 

emissions in the Birmingham Area in 

units of tpd. Table 11 below provides a 

summary of the 2009 emissions of direct 

PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 for the 

Birmingham Area. In today’s notice, 

EPA is proposing to approve this 2009 

base year inventory as meeting the 

section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement. 

TABLE 11—BIRMINGHAM AREA 2009 EMISSIONS FOR PM2.5, NOX, AND SO2

[tpd (percent total)] 

Source PM2.5 NOX SO2

Point Source Total ................................................................................................................. 11.22 [40.8] 96.25 [46.5] 493.41 [99.6] 

Area Source Total .................................................................................................................. 12.35 [44.9] 11.24 [5.4] 1.06 [0.2] 

On-Road Mobile Source Total ............................................................................................... 2.36 [8.6] 72.05 [34.8] 0.43 [0.1] 

Non-Road Mobile Source Total ............................................................................................. 1.60 [5.8] 27.31 [13.2] 0.50 [0.1] 

Total for all Sources ....................................................................................................... 27.53 .......... 206.85 .......... 495.40 ..........

IX. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

EPA’s proposed actions establish the 

basis upon which EPA may take final 

action on the issues being proposed for 

approval today. Approval of Alabama’s 

redesignation request would change the 

legal designation of Jefferson and Shelby 

Counties and the designated portion of 

Walker County in Alabama for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR 

part 81, from nonattainment to 

attainment. Approval of Alabama’s 

request would also incorporate a plan 

for maintaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in the Birmingham Area 

through 2024 into the Alabama SIP. 

This maintenance plan includes 

contingency measures to remedy any 

future violations of the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS and procedures for 

evaluation of potential violations. The 

maintenance plan also establishes NOX

and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham 

Area. The NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 

2024 for the Birmingham Area are 48.41 

tpd and 1.21 tpd, respectively. Final 

action would also approve the Area’s 

emissions inventory under CAA section 

172(c)(3). Additionally, EPA is notifying 

the public of the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the newlyestablished PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for 

2024 for the Birmingham Area. 

X. Proposed Actions on the 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan SIP Revisions 

Including Approval of the NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for 2024 for the 

Birmingham Area 

EPA previously determined that the 

Birmingham Area was attaining the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on 

September 20, 2010, at 75 FR 57186. 

EPA is now taking three separate but 

related actions regarding the Area’s 

redesignation and maintenance of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

First, EPA is proposing to determine, 

based on complete, quality-assured and 

certified monitoring data for the 2007– 

2009 monitoring period, and after 

review of preliminary data in AQS for 

2008–2010, that the Birmingham Area 

continues to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Birmingham Area 

has met the criteria under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. On this 

basis, EPA is proposing to approve 

Alabama’s redesignation request for the 

Birmingham Area. 

Second, EPA is proposing to approve 

Alabama’s 2009 emissions inventory for 

the Birmingham Area (under CAA 

section 172(c)(3)). Alabama selected 

2009 as the attainment emissions 

inventory year for the Birmingham Area. 

This attainment inventory identifies a 

level of emissions in the Area that is 

sufficient to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS and also is a current, 

comprehensive inventory that meets the 

requirements of section 172(c)(3). 

Third, EPA is proposing to approve 

the maintenance plan for the 

Birmingham Area, including the PM2.5

and NOX MVEBs for 2024, into the 

Alabama SIP (under CAA section 175A). 

The maintenance plan demonstrates 

that the Area will continue to maintain 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 

budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria 

contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 

(5). Further, as part of today’s action, 

EPA is describing the status of its 

adequacy determination for the PM2.5

and NOX MVEBs for 2024 in accordance 

with 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24 

months from the effective date of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the MVEBs 

or the effective date for the final rule for 

this action, whichever is earlier, the 

transportation partners will need to 

demonstrate conformity to the new NOX

and PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 

93.104(e). 

If finalized, approval of the 

redesignation request would change the 

official designation of Jefferson and 

Shelby Counties in their entireties and 

the nonattainment portion of Walker 

County in the Birmingham Area for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 

CFR part 81, from nonattainment to 

attainment. 

XI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

this reason, these proposed actions: 

• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory 

action[s]’’ subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget under 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Proposed Rules 70105 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does not 

have Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: November 2, 2011. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29183 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9488–6] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan National 

Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the 

Tar Lake Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 5 is issuing a 

Notice of intent of Partial Deletion of the 

following two parcels of the Tar Lake 

Site Superfund (Site) located in 

Mancelona, Michigan from the National 

Priorities List (NPL): the non-East 

Tailings Area (ETA) part of property PIN 

05–11–129–006–00 (41.4 acres); and the 

non-ETA part of property PIN 05–11– 

129–007–00 (33.63 acres) and requests 

public comments on this proposed 

action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant 

to section 105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the 

State of Michigan, through the Michigan 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

have determined that all appropriate 

response actions at these two parcels 

under CERCLA have been completed. 

However, this deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains only to 

the two property PINs listed above. The 

deletion of these two parcels from the 

Site affects all surface soils, subsurface 

soils, structures and groundwater within 

the boundaries of these parcels. In 2005, 

the ETA, approximately 45.49 acres, in 

the northeastern part of the Site, was 

deleted from the NPL when EPA 

determined that the ETA was acceptable 

for unrestricted use and unlimited 

exposure (UU/UE). The two parcels 

being proposed for deletion are adjacent 

to and south of the ETA. The current 

remaining areas of the Site will remain 

on the NPL and are not being 

considered for deletion as part of this 

action. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

December 12, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1983–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Karen Cibulskis, Remedial 

Project Manager, at 

cibulskis.karen@epa.gov or Megan 

McSeveney, Community Involvement 

Coordinator, at 

mcseveney.megan@epa.gov. 

• Fax: Gladys Beard, Deletion Process 

Manager, at (312) 697–2077. 

• Mail: Karen Cibulskis, Remedial 

Project Manager, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (SR–6J), 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, 

(312) 886–1843, or Megan McSeveney, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886–1972 or 

(800) 621–8431. 

• Hand delivery: Megan McSeveney, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5 (SI–7J), 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

docket’s normal hours of operations, 

and special arrangements should be 

made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The normal business hours 

are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983– 

0002. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS