5306 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: November 6, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(404)(i)(A)(2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(404) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) * * * 

(2) Rule 1420.1, ‘‘Emissions Standard 

For Lead From Large Lead-Acid Battery 

Recycling Facilities,’’ adopted on 

November 5, 2010. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–01449 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0043; FRL–9771–2] 

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: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve a request submitted on June 17, 

2010, from the State of Alabama, 

through the Alabama Department of 

Environmental Management (ADEM), 

Air Division, to redesignate the 

Birmingham fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Birmingham Area’’ or 

‘‘Area’’) to attainment for the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). 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’s 

approval of the redesignation request is 

based on the determination that the 

State of Alabama has met the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment set forth in 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), 

including the determination that the 

Birmingham Area has attained the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, 

EPA is approving a revision to the 

Alabama state implementation plan 

(SIP) to include the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

maintenance plan for the Birmingham 

Area that contains the new 2024 motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5. This 

action also approves the 2009 emissions 

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective February 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2011–0043. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

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

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Huey, Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Joel Huey 

may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 

9104 or via electronic mail at 

huey.joel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What is the background for the actions? 

II. What are the actions EPA is taking? 

III. Why is EPA taking these actions? 

IV. What are the effects of these actions? 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 5307 

1On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which 

requires significant reductions in emissions of 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOX from electric 

generating units to limit the interstate transport of 

these pollutants and the ozone and fine particulate 

matter they form in the atmosphere. See 70 FR 

75163. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially vacated 

CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. 

Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA 

without vacatur to preserve the environmental 

benefits provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 

550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for the 

actions? 

As stated in our proposed approval 

notice published on November 10, 2011 

(76 FR 70091), this redesignation action 

addresses the Birmingham Area’s status 

solely with respect to the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, for which designations 

were finalized on November 13, 2009 

(74 FR 58688). On June 17, 2010, the 

State of Alabama, through ADEM, 

submitted a request to redesignate the 

Birmingham Area to attainment for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and for 

EPA approval of the Alabama SIP 

revisions containing a maintenance plan 

for the Area. In the November 10, 2011, 

notice, EPA proposed to take the 

following three separate but related 

actions, some of which involve multiple 

elements: (1) To redesignate the 

Birmingham Area to attainment for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, provided 

EPA approves the emissions inventory 

submitted with the maintenance plan; 

(2) to approve into the Alabama SIP, 

under section 175A of the CAA, 

Alabama’s 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan, including the 

associated MVEBs; and (3) to approve, 

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

emissions inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan. No comments were 

received on the proposed action. EPA is 

now taking final action on the three 

actions identified above. Additional 

background for today’s action, and other 

details regarding the proposed 

redesignation, is set forth in EPA’s 

November 10, 2011, proposal and is 

summarized below. The following 

information also: (1) Affirms that the 

most recent available ambient 

monitoring data continue to support this 

redesignation action, (2) summarizes the 

NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 

for the Birmingham Area, and (3) 

provides additional information on 

events that have occurred since the 

November 10, 2011, proposal. 

With regard to the data, EPA has 

reviewed the most recent ambient 

monitoring data, which indicate that the 

Birmingham Area continues to attain 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS beyond 

the 3-year attainment period of 2007– 

2009, which was provided with 

Alabama’s June 17, 2010, submittal and 

request for redesignation. As stated in 

EPA’s November 10, 2011, proposal 

notice, the 3-year design values of 34 

mg/m3 for 2007–2009 and 29 mg/m3 for 

2008–2010 meet the NAAQS of 35 mg/ 

m3. Quality assured and certified data 

now in EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) 

for 2011 provide a 3-year design value 

of 27 mg/m3 for 2009–2011. 

Furthermore, preliminary monitoring 

data for 2012 indicate that the Area is 

continuing to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2012 preliminary 

data are available in AQS although are 

not yet quality assured and certified. 

The MVEBs, specified in tons per day 

(tpd), included in the maintenance plan 

are as shown in Table 1 below. In the 

November 10, 2011, proposed action, 

EPA noted that the period for public 

comment on the adequacy of these 

MVEBs (as contained in Alabama’s 

submittal) began on March 24, 2011, 

and closed on April 25, 2011. No 

comments were received during the 

public comment period. Through this 

final action, EPA is finding the 2024 

NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes and 

finalizing the approval of the budgets. 

TABLE 1—BIRMINGHAM AREA PM2.5

NOX MVEBS

(tpd) 

PM2.5 NOX

2024 On-road Mobile 

Emissions .................... 0 .96 25.20 

Safety Margin Allocated 

to MVEBs .................... 0 .245 23.21 

2024 Conformity MVEBs 1 .21 48.41 

In the November 10, 2011, proposed 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area, 

EPA proposed to determine that the 

emission reduction requirements that 

contributed to attainment of the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 standard in the 

nonattainment area could be considered 

permanent and enforceable. See 76 FR 

at 70092, 70097–70099. At the time of 

proposal, EPA noted that the 

requirements of the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR),1 which had been in place 

since 2005, were to be replaced, starting 

in 2012, by the requirements in the then 

recently promulgated Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR), 76 FR 48208 

(August 8, 2011). CSAPR included 

regulatory changes to sunset (i.e., 

discontinue) the CAIR requirements for 

control periods in 2012 and beyond. See 

76 FR at 48322. Although Alabama’s 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan included reductions associated 

with CAIR, EPA proposed to approve 

the request based in part on the fact that 

CSAPR achieved similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond. See 76 FR at 70092, 70097– 

70099. Because CSAPR requirements 

were expected to replace the CAIR 

requirements starting in 2012, EPA 

considered the impact of CSAPR related 

reductions on the Birmingham Area. On 

this basis, EPA proposed to determine 

that, pursuant to CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii), the pollutant transport 

part of the reductions that led to 

attainment in the Birmingham Area 

could be considered permanent and 

enforceable. See 76 FR at 70092, 70097– 

70099. 

On December 30, 2011, shortly after 

EPA’s proposed approval of the 

Birmingham redesignation, the D.C. 

Circuit issued an order addressing the 

status of CSAPR and CAIR in response 

to motions filed by numerous parties 

seeking a stay of CSAPR pending 

judicial review. In that order, the court 

stayed CSAPR pending resolution of the 

petitions for review of that rule in EME 

Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (No. 

11–1302 and consolidated cases), also 

referred to as EME Homer City. The 

court also indicated that EPA was 

expected to continue to administer 

CAIR in the interim until judicial 

review of CSAPR was completed. 

Subsequently, on August 21, 2012, the 

D.C. Circuit issued a decision in EME 

Homer City to vacate and remand 

CSAPR and to keep CAIR in place. 

Specifically, the court ordered EPA to 

continue administering CAIR pending 

the promulgation of a valid 

replacement. EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 

(D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit has not 

yet issued the final mandate in EME 

Homer City as EPA (as well as several 

intervenors) petitioned for rehearing en 

banc, asking the full court to review the 

decision. While rehearing proceedings 

are pending, EPA intends to act in 

accordance with the panel opinion in 

the EME Homer City opinion. 

Subsequent to the EME Homer City 

opinion, EPA published several 

proposals to redesignate both particulate 

matter and ozone nonattainment areas 

to attainment. These proposals 

explained the legal status of CAIR and 

CSAPR, and provided a basis on which 

EPA would consider emissions 

reductions associated with CAIR to be 

permanent and enforceable for 

redesignation purposes, pursuant to 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(D)(iii). In those 

actions, EPA explained that in light of 

the August 21, 2012, order by the D.C. 

Circuit, CAIR remains in place and 

enforceable until substituted by a 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
5308 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

‘‘valid’’ replacement rule. See, e.g., 77 

FR 69409 (November 19, 2012); 77 FR 

68087 (November 15, 2012). 

Alabama’s June 17, 2010, SIP 

submittal supporting its redesignation 

request includes CAIR as a control 

measure, which became state-effective 

on April 3, 2007, and was approved by 

EPA on October 1, 2007, for the purpose 

of reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. See 

72 FR 55659. Due to the legal status of 

CSAPR at the time that EPA proposed 

approval of Alabama’s June 17, 2010, 

redesignation submittal, EPA was able 

to rely on CSAPR related reductions. 

EPA also recognized that the monitoring 

data used to demonstrate the 

Birmingham Area’s attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS included 

reductions associated with CAIR. Due to 

the uncertainty regarding the legal 

status of CAIR when Alabama provided 

its submittal on June 17, 2010, the 

State’s analysis assumed that no 

additional reductions in SO2 or NOX

emissions from utilities would occur 

above and beyond those achieved 

through 2012 as a result of CAIR. To the 

extent that the Alabama submittal relies 

on CAIR reductions that occurred 

through 2012, the recent directive from 

the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City 

ensures that the reductions associated 

with CAIR will be permanent and 

enforceable for the necessary time 

period for purposes of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii). EPA has been ordered 

by the court to develop a new rule, and 

the opinion makes clear that after 

promulgating that new rule EPA must 

provide states an opportunity to draft 

and submit SIPs to implement that rule. 

CAIR thus cannot be replaced until EPA 

has promulgated a final rule through a 

notice-and-comment rulemaking 

process; states have had an opportunity 

to draft and submit SIPs; EPA has 

reviewed the SIPs to determine if they 

can be approved; and EPA has taken 

action on the SIPs, including 

promulgating a Federal Implementation 

Plan, if appropriate. The court’s clear 

instruction to EPA is that it must 

continue to administer CAIR until a 

‘‘valid replacement’’ exists, and thus 

CAIR reductions may be relied upon 

until the necessary actions are taken by 

EPA and states to administer CAIR’s 

replacement. Furthermore, the court’s 

instruction provides an additional 

backstop; by definition, any rule that 

replaces CAIR and meets the court’s 

direction would require upwind states 

to have SIPs that eliminate significant 

contributions to downwind 

nonattainment and prevent interference 

with maintenance in downwind areas. 

Further, in deciding to vacate CSAPR 

and to require EPA to continue 

administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit 

emphasized that the consequences of 

vacating CAIR ‘‘might be more severe 

now in light of the reliance interests 

accumulated over the intervening four 

years.’’ EME Homer City, 696 F.3d at 38. 

The accumulated reliance interests 

include the interests of states who 

reasonably assumed they could rely on 

reductions associated with CAIR, which 

brought certain nonattainment areas 

into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA 

were prevented from relying on 

reductions associated with CAIR in 

redesignation actions, states would be 

forced to impose additional, redundant 

reductions on top of those achieved by 

CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the 

type of irrational result the court sought 

to avoid by ordering EPA to continue 

administering CAIR. For these reasons 

also, EPA believes it is appropriate to 

allow states to rely on CAIR, and the 

existing emissions reductions achieved 

by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and 

enforceable for purposes such as 

redesignation. Following promulgation 

of the replacement rule, EPA will 

review SIPs as appropriate to identify 

whether there are any issues that need 

to be addressed. 

In light of these unique circumstances 

and for the reasons explained above, 

EPA is approving the redesignation 

request and the related SIP revision for 

Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their 

entireties and a portion of Walker 

County in Alabama, including 

Alabama’s plan for maintaining 

attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in the Birmingham Area. EPA 

continues to implement CAIR in 

accordance with current direction from 

the court, and thus CAIR is in place and 

enforceable and will remain so until 

substituted by a valid replacement rule. 

Alabama’s SIP revision lists CAIR as a 

control measure, which became stateeffective on April 3, 2007, and was 

approved by EPA on October 1, 2007, 

for the purpose of reducing SO2 and 

NOX emissions. The monitoring data 

used to demonstrate the Area’s 

attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment 

deadline was impacted by CAIR. 

II. What are the actions EPA is taking? 

In today’s rulemaking, EPA is 

approving: (1) A change to the legal 

designation of the Birmingham Area 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

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

under CAA section 175A, Alabama’s 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan, including the 

associated MVEBs; and (3) under CAA 

section 172(c)(3), the emissions 

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan for the Area. The 

maintenance plan is designed to 

demonstrate that the Birmingham Area 

will continue to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. EPA’s 

approval of the redesignation request is 

based on EPA’s determination that the 

Birmingham Area meets the criteria for 

redesignation set forth in CAA, sections 

107(d)(3)(E) and 175A, including EPA’s 

determination that the Birmingham 

Area has attained the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s analyses of 

Alabama’s redesignation request, 

emissions inventory, and maintenance 

plan are described in detail in the 

November 10, 2011, proposed rule (76 

FR 70091). 

Consistent with the CAA, the 

maintenance plan that EPA is approving 

also includes 2024 NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs for the Birmingham Area. In this 

action, EPA is approving these NOx and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area 

for the purposes of transportation 

conformity. For required regional 

emissions analysis years that involve 

2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets 

will be the new 2024 NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs. 

III. Why is EPA taking these actions? 

EPA has determined that the 

Birmingham Area has attained the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and has also 

determined that all other criteria for the 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area 

from nonattainment to attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS have been 

met. See CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). One 

of those requirements is that the 

Birmingham Area has an approved plan 

demonstrating maintenance of the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also 

taking final action to approve the 

maintenance plan for the Birmingham 

Area as meeting the requirements of 

sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E) of the 

CAA. In addition, EPA is approving the 

new NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 

2024 for the Birmingham Area as 

contained in Alabama’s maintenance 

plan because these MVEBs are 

consistent with maintenance of the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 standard in the 

Birmingham Area. Finally, EPA is 

approving the emissions inventory as 

meeting the requirements of section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA. The detailed 

rationale for EPA’s determinations and 

actions are set forth in the proposed 

rulemaking and in other discussion in 

this final rulemaking. 

IV. What are the effects of these 

actions? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

changes the legal designation of the 

Birmingham Area from nonattainment 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 5309 

2The adequacy finding becomes effective upon 

the date of publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register. 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii). 

to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA is modifying the 

regulatory table in 40 CFR 81.301 to 

reflect a designation of attainment for 

these full and partial counties. EPA is 

also approving, as a revision to the 

Alabama SIP, Alabama’s plan for 

maintaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in the Birmingham Area 

through 2024. The maintenance plan 

includes contingency measures to 

remedy possible future violations of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and 

establishes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 

the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area. 

Additionally, this action approves the 

emissions inventory for the Birmingham 

Area pursuant to section 172(c)(3) of the 

CAA. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

three separate but related actions, some 

of which involve multiple elements: (1) 

The redesignation of the Birmingham 

Area to attainment for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) under CAA section 

175A, Alabama’s 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS maintenance plan, including 

the associated MVEBs; and (3) under 

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

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan for the Area. The 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 maintenance plan 

for the Birmingham Area includes the 

new 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs of 

48.41 tpd and 1.21 tpd, respectively. 

Within 24 months from the effective 

date of EPA’s adequacy determination, 

the transportation partners will need to 

demonstrate conformity to the new NOX

and PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 

93.104(e).2

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of the 

maintenance plan under CAA section 

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

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

required by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

impose any new requirements, but 

rather results in the application of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For these 

reasons, these actions: 

• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and, 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this final rule does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by March 26, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks. 

Dated: January 9, 2013. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart B—Alabama 

■ 2. Section 52.50(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry for ‘‘2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the 

Birmingham Area’’ at the end of the 

table to read as follows: 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
5310 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1See Relocation of and Spectrum Sharing by 

Federal Government Stations—Technical Panel and 

Dispute Resolution Board, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, Docket No. 110627357–2209–03, 77 

FR 41956 (July 17, 2012) (NPRM). 

§ 52.50 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED ALABAMA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of non-regulatory SIP 

provision 

Applicable geographic or 

non-attainment area 

State submittal 

date/effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

2006 24-hour PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the Birmingham Area.Birmingham PM2.5 Nonattainment Area.6/17/10 1/25/13 [Insert citation of 

publication].

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 4. In § 81.301, the table entitled 

‘‘Alabama—PM2.5 (24-hour NAAQS)’’ is 

amended under ‘‘Birmingham, AL’’ by 

revising the entries for ‘‘Jefferson 

County’’, ‘‘Shelby County’’, and 

‘‘Walker County (part)’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 81.301 Alabama. 

* * * * * 

ALABAMA—PM2.5 (24-HOUR NAAQS) 

Designation area 

Designation for the 1997 NAAQSa Designation for the 2006 NAAQSa

Date 1 Type Date 2 Type 

Birmingham, AL: 

Jefferson County ................... Unclassifiable/Attainment ............ This action is effective 1/25/13 .... Attainment. 

Shelby County ....................... Unclassifiable/Attainment ............ This action is effective 1/25/13 .... Attainment. 

Walker County (part). The 

area described by U.S. 

Census 2000 block group 

identifiers 01–127–0214–5, 

01–127–0215–4, and 01– 

127–0216–2.

Unclassifiable/Attainment ............ This action is effective 1/25/13 .... Attainment. 

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

2This date is 30 days after November 13, 2009, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–01209 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Telecommunications and 

Information Administration 

47 CFR Part 301 

[Docket No. 120620177–2445–02] 

RIN 0660–AA26 

Relocation of and Spectrum Sharing 

by Federal Government Stations— 

Technical Panel and Dispute 

Resolution Boards 

AGENCY: National Telecommunications 

and Information Administration, 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration (NTIA) adopts 

regulations governing the Technical 

Panel and dispute resolution process 

established by Congress to facilitate the 

relocation of, and spectrum sharing 

with, U.S. Government stations in 

spectrum bands reallocated from 

Federal use to non-Federal use or to 

shared use. This action is necessary to 

ensure the timely relocation of Federal 

entities’ spectrum-related operations 

and, where applicable, the timely 

implementation of arrangements for the 

sharing of radio frequencies. 

Specifically, this action implements 

certain additions and modifications to 

the NTIA Organization Act as amended 

by the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job 

Creation Act of 2012 (the Tax Relief 

Act). As required by the Tax Relief Act, 

this rule has been reviewed and 

approved by the Director of the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB). 

DATES: These regulations become 

effective February 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: A complete set of public 

comments filed in response to the 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Chief Counsel, National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration, Room 4713, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC.1 The public comments can also be 

viewed electronically at http:// 

www.ntia.doc.gov/federal-registernotice/2012/comments-technical-paneland-dispute-resolution-board-nprm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Milton Brown, NTIA, (202) 482–1816. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority: National Telecommunications 

and Information Administration Organization 

Act, 47 U.S.C. 901 et seq., as amended by the 

Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act 

of 2012, Pub. L. 112–96, Title VI, Subtitle G, 

126 Stat. 245 (Feb. 22, 2012) (47 U.S.C. 

923(g)–(i), 928). 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with