Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 4341 

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 GG—New Mexico 

■ 2. Section 52.1620(c) is amended by 

revising the entries for Parts 74 and 79 

under the first table titled ‘‘New Mexico 

Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20— 

Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air 

Quality’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 52.1620 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NEW MEXICO REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject 

State 

approval/ 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20—Environment Protection Chapter 2—Air Quality 

*******

Part 74 .................................... Permits—Prevention of Significant Deterioration.6/3/2011 1/22/2013 [Insert FR page 

number where document 

begins].

Revisions to 20.2.74.303(A) 

NMAC submitted 5/23/ 

2011, effective 6/3/2011, 

are NOT part of SIP. 

20.2.74.303 NMAC submitted 

12/1/2010, effective 1/1/ 

2011, remains SIP approved (6/20/2011, 76 FR 

43149). 

* * * * * * * 

Part 79 .................................... Permits—Nonattainment 

Areas.

6/3/2011 1/22/2013 [Insert FR page 

number where document 

begins].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–00729 Filed 1–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0114; FRL–9771–9] 

Approval, Disapproval and 

Promulgation of State Implementation 

Plans; State of Utah; Regional Haze 

Rule Requirements for Mandatory 

Class I Areas Under 40 CFR 51.309; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is supplementing 

the preamble to the final rule that 

appeared in the Federal Register on 

December 14, 2012. This final rule 

partially approved and partially 

disapproved a State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 

State of Utah on May 26, 2011 that 

addresses regional haze. The final rule 

preamble inadvertently did not include 

language pertaining to judicial review, 

and this document adds that language. 

DATES: Effective on January 14, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurel Dygowski, Air Program, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6144, 

dygowski.laurel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Federal 

Register document 2012–29406 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 14, 2012 (77 FR 74355), the 

following corrections are made: 

1. On page 74372, in the first column, 

in section V. Statutory and Executive 

Order Reviews, paragraph L. is added to 

read as follows: ‘‘L. Judicial Review— 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air 

Act, petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by March 25, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See CAA 

section 307(b)(2).)’’ 

Dated: December 20, 2012. 

James B. Martin, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2013–01081 Filed 1–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0316; FRL–9771–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Alabama; Redesignation of 

the Birmingham 1997 Annual Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve a request submitted on May 2, 

2011, from the State of Alabama, 

through the Alabama Department of 

Environmental Management (ADEM), 

Air Division, to redesignate the 

Birmingham fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Birmingham Area’’ or 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
4342 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

‘‘Area’’) to attainment for the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). The 

Birmingham 1997 Annual PM2.5

nonattainment area is comprised of 

Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their 

entireties and a portion of Walker 

County. EPA’s approval of the 

redesignation request is based on the 

determination that the State of Alabama 

has met the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment set forth in the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act), including the 

determination that the Birmingham 

Area has attained the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, EPA is 

approving a revision to the Alabama 

state implementation plan (SIP) to 

include the 1997 Annual PM2.5

maintenance plan for the Birmingham 

Area that contains the new 2024 motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5. This 

action also approves the 2009 emissions 

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective on February 21, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2011–0316. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Huey, Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Joel Huey 

may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 

9104 or via electronic mail at 

huey.joel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What is the background for the actions? 

II. What are the actions EPA is taking? 

III. Why is EPA taking these actions? 

IV. What are the effects of these actions? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for the 

actions? 

As stated in our proposed approval 

notice published on November 10, 2011 

(76 FR 70078), this redesignation action 

addresses the Birmingham Area’s status 

solely with respect to the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, for which designations 

were finalized on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 

944) and April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844). 

On May 2, 2011, the State of Alabama, 

through ADEM, submitted a request to 

redesignate the Birmingham Area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS and for EPA approval of the 

Alabama SIP revisions containing a 

maintenance plan for the Area. In the 

November 10, 2011, notice, EPA 

proposed to take the following three 

separate but related actions, some of 

which involve multiple elements: (1) To 

redesignate the Birmingham Area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS, provided EPA approves the 

emissions inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan; (2) to approve into 

the Alabama SIP, under section 175A of 

the CAA, Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS maintenance plan, including 

the associated MVEBs; and (3) to 

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

the emissions inventory submitted with 

the maintenance plan. No comments 

were received on the proposed action. 

EPA is now taking final action on the 

three actions identified above. 

Additional background for today’s 

action, and other details regarding the 

proposed redesignation, is set forth in 

EPA’s November 10, 2011, proposal and 

is summarized below. The following 

information also: (1) Affirms that the 

most recent available ambient 

monitoring data continue to support this 

redesignation action, (2) summarizes the 

NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2024 

for the Birmingham Area, and (3) 

provides additional information on 

events that have occurred since the 

November 10, 2011, proposal. 

With regard to the data, EPA has 

reviewed the most recent ambient 

monitoring data, which indicate that the 

Birmingham Area continues to attain 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond 

the 3-year attainment period of 2008– 

2010, which was provided with 

Alabama’s May 2, 2011, submittal and 

request for redesignation. As stated in 

EPA’s November 10, 2011, proposal 

notice, the 3-year design value of 13.7 

mg/m3 for 2008–2010 meets the NAAQS 

of 15.0 mg/m3. Quality assured and 

certified data now in EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) for 2011 provide a 3-year 

design value of 12.9 mg/m3 for 2009– 

2011. Furthermore, preliminary 

monitoring data for 2012 indicate that 

the Area is continuing to attain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2012 

preliminary data are available in AQS 

although are not yet quality assured and 

certified. 

The MVEBs, specified in tons per year 

(tpy), included in the maintenance plan 

are as shown in Table 1 below. In the 

November 10, 2011, proposed action, 

EPA noted that the period for public 

comment on the adequacy of these 

MVEBs (as contained in Alabama’s 

submittal) began on March 24, 2011, 

and closed on April 25, 2011. No 

comments were received during the 

public comment period. Through this 

final action, EPA is finding the 2024 

NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes and 

finalizing the approval of the budgets. 

TABLE 1—BIRMINGHAM AREA PM2.5 NOX MVEBS

[tpy] 

PM2.5 NOX

2024 On-road Mobile Emissions ............................................................................................................................. 335.70 8,738.39 

Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ......................................................................................................................... 106.37 7,243.11 

2024 Conformity MVEBs ......................................................................................................................................... 442.07 15,981.50 

In the November 10, 2011, proposed 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area, 

EPA proposed to determine that the 

emission reduction requirements that 

contributed to attainment of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 standard in the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 4343 

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 

25162. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 

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

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

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

without vacatur to preserve the environmental 

benefits provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 

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

nonattainment area could be considered 

permanent and enforceable. See 76 FR 

at 70092, 70097–70099. At the time of 

proposal, EPA noted that the 

requirements of the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR),1 which had been in place 

since 2005, were to be replaced, starting 

in 2012, by the requirements in the then 

recently promulgated Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR), 76 FR 48208 

(August 8, 2011). CSAPR included 

regulatory changes to sunset (i.e., 

discontinue) the CAIR requirements for 

control periods in 2012 and beyond. See 

76 FR at 48322. Although Alabama’s 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan included reductions associated 

with CAIR, EPA proposed to approve 

the request based in part on the fact that 

CSAPR achieved similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond. See 76 FR at 70092, 70097– 

70099. Because CSAPR requirements 

were expected to replace the CAIR 

requirements starting in 2012, EPA 

considered the impact of CSAPR related 

reductions on the Birmingham Area. On 

this basis, EPA proposed to determine 

that, pursuant to CAA section 

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

part of the reductions that led to 

attainment in the Birmingham Area 

could be considered permanent and 

enforceable. See 76 FR at 70079, 70084– 

70086. 

On December 30, 2011, shortly after 

EPA’s proposed approval of the 

Birmingham redesignation, the D.C. 

Circuit issued an order addressing the 

status of CSAPR and CAIR in response 

to motions filed by numerous parties 

seeking a stay of CSAPR pending 

judicial review. In that order, the court 

stayed CSAPR pending resolution of the 

petitions for review of that rule in EME 

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

11–1302 and consolidated cases), also 

referred to as EME Homer City. The 

court also indicated that EPA was 

expected to continue to administer 

CAIR in the interim until judicial 

review of CSAPR was completed. 

Subsequently, on August 21, 2012, the 

D.C. Circuit issued a decision in EME 

Homer City to vacate and remand 

CSAPR and to keep CAIR in place. 

Specifically, the court ordered EPA to 

continue administering CAIR pending 

the promulgation of a valid 

replacement. EME Homer City 

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

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

yet issued the final mandate in EME 

Homer City as EPA (as well as several 

intervenors) petitioned for rehearing en 

banc, asking the full court to review the 

decision. While rehearing proceedings 

are pending, EPA intends to act in 

accordance with the panel opinion in 

the EME Homer City opinion. 

Subsequent to the EME Homer City 

opinion, EPA published several 

proposals to redesignate both particulate 

matter and ozone nonattainment areas 

to attainment. These proposals 

explained the legal status of CAIR and 

CSAPR, and provided a basis on which 

EPA would consider emissions 

reductions associated with CAIR to be 

permanent and enforceable for 

redesignation purposes, pursuant to 

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

actions, EPA explained that in light of 

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

Circuit, CAIR remains in place and 

enforceable until substituted by a 

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

FR 69409 (November 19, 2012); 77 FR 

68087 (November 15, 2012). 

Alabama’s May 2, 2011, SIP submittal 

supporting its redesignation request 

includes CAIR as a control measure, 

which became state-effective on April 3, 

2007, and was approved by EPA on 

October 1, 2007, for the purpose of 

reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. See 

72 FR 55659. Due to the legal status of 

CSAPR at the time that EPA proposed 

approval of Alabama’s May 2, 2011, 

redesignation submittal, EPA was able 

to rely on CSAPR related reductions. 

EPA also recognized that the monitoring 

data used to demonstrate the 

Birmingham Area’s attainment of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS included 

reductions associated with CAIR. Due to 

the uncertainty regarding the legal 

status of CAIR when Alabama provided 

its submittal on May 2, 2011, the State’s 

analysis assumed that no additional 

reductions in SO2 or NOX emissions 

from utilities would occur above and 

beyond those achieved through 2012 as 

a result of CAIR. To the extent that the 

Alabama submittal relies on CAIR 

reductions that occurred through 2012, 

the recent directive from the D.C. 

Circuit in EME Homer City ensures that 

the reductions associated with CAIR 

will be permanent and enforceable for 

the necessary time period for purposes 

of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). EPA 

has been ordered by the court to 

develop a new rule, and the opinion 

makes clear that after promulgating that 

new rule EPA must provide states an 

opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to 

implement that rule. CAIR thus cannot 

be replaced until EPA has promulgated 

a final rule through a notice-andcomment rulemaking process; states 

have had an opportunity to draft and 

submit SIPs; EPA has reviewed the SIPs 

to determine if they can be approved; 

and EPA has taken action on the SIPs, 

including promulgating a Federal 

Implementation Plan, if appropriate. 

The court’s clear instruction to EPA is 

that it must continue to administer 

CAIR until a ‘‘valid replacement’’ exists, 

and thus CAIR reductions may be relied 

upon until the necessary actions are 

taken by EPA and states to administer 

CAIR’s replacement. Furthermore, the 

court’s instruction provides an 

additional backstop; by definition, any 

rule that replaces CAIR and meets the 

court’s direction would require upwind 

states to have SIPs that eliminate 

significant contributions to downwind 

nonattainment and prevent interference 

with maintenance in downwind areas. 

Further, in deciding to vacate CSAPR 

and to require EPA to continue 

administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit 

emphasized that the consequences of 

vacating CAIR ‘‘might be more severe 

now in light of the reliance interests 

accumulated over the intervening four 

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

The accumulated reliance interests 

include the interests of states who 

reasonably assumed they could rely on 

reductions associated with CAIR, which 

brought certain nonattainment areas 

into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA 

were prevented from relying on 

reductions associated with CAIR in 

redesignation actions, states would be 

forced to impose additional, redundant 

reductions on top of those achieved by 

CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the 

type of irrational result the court sought 

to avoid by ordering EPA to continue 

administering CAIR. For these reasons 

also, EPA believes it is appropriate to 

allow states to rely on CAIR, and the 

existing emissions reductions achieved 

by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and 

enforceable for purposes such as 

redesignation. Following promulgation 

of the replacement rule, EPA will 

review SIPs as appropriate to identify 

whether there are any issues that need 

to be addressed. 

In light of these unique circumstances 

and for the reasons explained above, 

EPA is approving the redesignation 

request and the related SIP revision for 

Jefferson and Shelby Counties in their 

entireties and a portion of Walker 

County in Alabama, including 

Alabama’s plan for maintaining 

attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS in the Birmingham Area. EPA 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
4344 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

2The adequacy finding becomes effective upon 

the date of publication of this notice in the Federal 

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

continues to implement CAIR in 

accordance with current direction from 

the court, and thus CAIR is in place and 

enforceable, and will remain so, until 

substituted by a valid replacement rule. 

Alabama’s SIP revision lists CAIR as a 

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

approved by EPA on October 1, 2007, 

for the purpose of reducing SO2 and 

NOX emissions. The monitoring data 

used to demonstrate the Area’s 

attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment 

deadline was impacted by CAIR. 

II. What are the actions EPA is taking? 

In today’s rulemaking, EPA is 

approving: (1) A change to the legal 

designation of the Birmingham Area 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) 

under CAA section 175A, Alabama’s 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan, including the 

associated MVEBs; and (3) under CAA 

section 172(c)(3), the emissions 

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan for the Area. The 

maintenance plan is designed to 

demonstrate that the Birmingham Area 

will continue to attain the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS through 2024. EPA’s 

approval of the redesignation request is 

based on EPA’s determination that the 

Birmingham Area meets the criteria for 

redesignation set forth in CAA, sections 

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

determination that the Birmingham 

Area has attained the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s analyses of 

Alabama’s redesignation request, 

emissions inventory, and maintenance 

plan are described in detail in the 

November 10, 2011, proposed rule (76 

FR 70078). 

Consistent with the CAA, the 

maintenance plan that EPA is approving 

also includes 2024 NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs for the Birmingham Area. In this 

action, EPA is approving these NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for the Birmingham Area 

for the purposes of transportation 

conformity. For required regional 

emissions analysis years that involve 

2024 or beyond, the applicable budgets 

will be the new 2024 NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs. 

III. Why is EPA taking these actions? 

EPA has determined that the 

Birmingham Area has attained the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and has also 

determined that all other criteria for the 

redesignation of the Birmingham Area 

from nonattainment to attainment of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS have been 

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

of those requirements is that the 

Birmingham Area has an approved plan 

demonstrating maintenance of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also 

taking final action to approve the 

maintenance plan for the Birmingham 

Area as meeting the requirements of 

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

CAA. In addition, EPA is approving the 

new NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 

2024 for the Birmingham Area as 

contained in Alabama’s maintenance 

plan because these MVEBs are 

consistent with maintenance of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 standard in the 

Birmingham Area. Finally, EPA is 

approving the emissions inventory as 

meeting the requirements of section 

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

rationale for EPA’s determinations and 

actions are set forth in the proposed 

rulemaking and in other discussion in 

this final rulemaking. 

IV. What are the effects of these 

actions? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

changes the legal designation of the 

Birmingham Area from nonattainment 

to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA is modifying the 

regulatory table in 40 CFR 81.301 to 

reflect a designation of attainment for 

these full and partial counties. EPA is 

also approving, as a revision to the 

Alabama SIP, Alabama’s plan for 

maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS in the Birmingham Area 

through 2024. The maintenance plan 

includes contingency measures to 

remedy possible future violations of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 

establishes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 

the year 2024 for the Birmingham Area. 

Additionally, this action approves the 

emissions inventory for the Birmingham 

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

CAA. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

three separate but related actions, some 

of which involve multiple elements: (1) 

The redesignation of the Birmingham 

Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) under CAA section 

175A, Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS maintenance plan, including 

the associated MVEBs; and (3) under 

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

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan for the Area. The 

1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan 

for the Birmingham Area includes the 

new 2024 NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs of 

15,981.50 tpy and 442.07 tpy, 

respectively. Within 24 months from the 

effective date of EPA’s adequacy 

determination, the transportation 

partners will need to demonstrate 

conformity to the new NOX and PM2.5

MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e).2

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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 4345 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and, 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this final rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by March 25, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks. 

Dated: January 9, 2013. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart B—Alabama 

■ 2. Section 52.50(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry for ‘‘1997 Annual 

PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the 

Birmingham Alabama Area’’ at the end 

of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.50 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED ALABAMA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP 

provision 

Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date/effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance 

Plan for the Birmingham Area.

Birmingham PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Area.

5/2/11 1/22/13 [Insert citation of publication].

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS 

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

PURPOSES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 81.301, the table entitled 

‘‘Alabama—PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ is 

amended under ‘‘Birmingham, AL’’ by 

revising the entry for ‘‘Jefferson County, 

Shelby County, Walker County (part)’’ 

to read as follows: 

§ 81.301 Alabama. 

* * * * * 

ALABAMA—PM2.5 (ANNUAL NAAQS) 

Designated area 

Designation a

Date 1 Type 

Birmingham, AL: 

Jefferson County ............................. This action is effective 1/22/13 .............................................. Attainment. 

Shelby County ................................. This action is effective 1/22/13 .............................................. 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.

This action is effective 1/22/13 .............................................. 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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with 
4346 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 14 / Tuesday, January 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–00954 Filed 1–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 111207737–2141–2] 

RIN 0648–XC452 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by 

Catcher/Processors Using Trawl Gear 

in the Western Regulatory Area of the 

Gulf of Alaska 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed 

fishing for Pacific cod by catcher/ 

processors (C/Ps) using trawl gear in the 

Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of 

Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary 

to prevent exceeding the A season 

allowance of the 2013 Pacific cod total 

allowable catch apportioned to C/Ps 

using trawl gear in the Western 

Regulatory Area of the GOA. 

DATES: Effective 1200 hours, Alaska 

local time (A.l.t.), January 20, 2013, 

through 1200 hours, A.l.t., September 1, 

2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Obren Davis, 907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

manages the groundfish fishery in the 

GOA exclusive economic zone 

according to the Fishery Management 

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of 

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act. Regulations governing 

fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance 

with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 

CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. 

Regulations governing sideboard 

protections for GOA groundfish 

fisheries appear at subpart B of 50 CFR 

part 680. 

The A season allowance of the 2013 

Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) 

apportioned to C/Ps using trawl gear in 

the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA 

is 188 metric tons (mt), as established by 

the final 2012 and 2013 harvest 

specifications for groundfish of the GOA 

(77 FR 15194, March 14, 2012) and 

inseason adjustment to the final 2013 

harvest specifications for Pacific cod (78 

FR 267, January 3, 2013). 

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), 

the Administrator, Alaska Region, 

NMFS (Regional Administrator) has 

determined that the A season allowance 

of the 2013 Pacific cod TAC 

apportioned to C/Ps using trawl gear in 

the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA 

will soon be reached. Therefore, the 

Regional Administrator is establishing a 

directed fishing allowance of 0 mt, and 

is setting aside the remaining 188 mt as 

bycatch to support other anticipated 

groundfish fisheries. In accordance with 

§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional 

Administrator finds that this directed 

fishing allowance has been reached. 

Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting 

directed fishing for Pacific cod by C/Ps 

using trawl gear in the Western 

Regulatory Area of the GOA. After the 

effective date of this closure the 

maximum retainable amounts at 

§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time 

during a trip. 

Classification 

This action responds to the best 

available information recently obtained 

from the fishery. The Assistant 

Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA 

(AA), finds good cause to waive the 

requirement to provide prior notice and 

opportunity for public comment 

pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. This requirement is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest as it would prevent NMFS from 

responding to the most recent fisheries 

data in a timely fashion and would 

delay the directed fishing closure of 

Pacific cod for C/Ps using trawl gear in 

the Western Regulatory Area of the 

GOA. NMFS was unable to publish a 

notice providing time for public 

comment because the most recent, 

relevant data only became available as 

of January 15, 2013. 

The AA also finds good cause to 

waive the 30-day delay in the effective 

date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). This finding is based upon 

the reasons provided above for waiver of 

prior notice and opportunity for public 

comment. 

This action is required by § 679.20 

and is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: January 16, 2013. 

Kara Meckley, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–01165 Filed 1–16–13; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with