39070 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

1Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 

2008 Ozone NAAQS (CSAPR Update), 81 FR 74504 

(October 26, 2016) (codified as amended at 40 CFR 

52.38 and 52.39 and subparts AAAAA through 

EEEEE of 40 CFR part 97); see also Federal 

Implementation Plans; Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP 

Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). EPA 

previously approved a SIP revision that replaced 

the CSAPR FIPs for the annual trading programs in 

Alabama. See 81 FR 59869 (Aug. 31, 2016). 

(c) Special and additional services 

provided at your request, such as 

certification or authentication, postal 

insurance, and special mailing 

arrangement costs, will be charged to 

you at the rates set forth in § 404.7(e) of 

this chapter. 

(d) You may request that a copying fee 

not be charged or, alternatively, be 

reduced, by submitting a written 

petition to ABMC’s General Counsel 

(see § 407.3) asserting that you are 

indigent. If the General Counsel 

determines, based on the petition, that 

you are indigent and that ABMC’s 

resources permit a waiver of all or part 

of the fee, the General Counsel may, in 

his or her discretion, waive or reduce 

the copying fee. 

(e) All fees shall be paid before any 

copying request is undertaken. 

Payments shall be made by check or 

money order payable to ‘‘American 

Battle Monuments Commission.’’ 

§ 407.9 Procedures for accessing 

accountings of disclosures made by ABMC 

from its systems of records. 

(a) The Office of the General Counsel 

shall maintain a log containing the date, 

nature, and purpose of each disclosure 

of a record to any person or to another 

agency. Such accounting also shall 

contain the name and address of the 

person or agency to whom each 

disclosure was made. This log need not 

include disclosures made to ABMC 

employees in the course of their official 

duties, or pursuant to the provisions of 

the Freedom of Information Act (5 

U.S.C. 552). 

(b) ABMC will retain the accounting 

of each disclosure for at least five years 

after the disclosure for which the 

accounting is made or for the life of the 

record that was disclosed, whichever is 

longer. 

(c) ABMC will make the accounting of 

disclosures of a record pertaining to you 

available to you at your request. Such a 

request should be made in accordance 

with the procedures set forth in § 407.4. 

This paragraph (c) does not apply to 

disclosures made for law enforcement 

purposes under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(7). 

[FR Doc. 2017–17281 Filed 8–16–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6120–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0415; FRL–9966–45– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; Alabama; CrossState Air Pollution Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of the October 26, 2015, and 

May 19, 2017, State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revisions from Alabama 

replacing the Cross-State Air Pollution 

Rule (CSAPR) federal implementation 

plan (FIP). Under CSAPR, large 

electricity generating units (EGUs) in 

Alabama are subject to FIP provisions 

requiring the units to participate in a 

federal allowance trading program for 

ozone season emissions of nitrogen 

oxides (NOX). This action would 

approve into Alabama’s SIP the State’s 

regulations requiring Alabama’s affected 

units to participate in a new state 

allowance trading program for ozone 

season NOX emissions integrated with 

the CSAPR federal trading programs, 

replacing the corresponding CSAPR FIP 

requirements for Alabama. This state 

trading program is substantively 

identical to the federal trading program 

except with regard to the provisions 

allocating emission allowances among 

Alabama units. Under the CSAPR 

regulations, final approval of these 

portions of the SIP revisions would 

automatically eliminate Alabama units’ 

FIP requirements to participate in 

CSAPR’s federal allowance trading 

program for ozone season NOX

emissions. Approval would also fully 

satisfy Alabama’s good neighbor 

obligation under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act) to prohibit emissions 

which will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) in any other state; and would 

partially satisfy Alabama’s good 

neighbor obligation under the CAA to 

prohibit emissions which will 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 18, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2017–0415 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ashten Bailey, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Bailey 

can be reached by telephone at (404) 

562–9164 or via electronic mail at 

bailey.ashten@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Summary 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions of the October 26, 2015, and 

May 19, 2017, SIP revisions from 

Alabama concerning CSAPR 1 allowance 

trading programs for ozone season 

emissions of NOX. Large EGUs in 

Alabama are currently subject to CSAPR 

FIPs that require the units to participate 

in the federal CSAPR NOX Group 2 

Ozone Season Trading Program. The 

CSAPR regulations provide a process for 

the submission and approval of SIP 

revisions to replace the requirements of 

CSAPR FIPs with SIP requirements 

under which a state’s units participate 

in CSAPR state trading programs that 

are integrated with and, with certain 

permissible exceptions, substantively 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39071 

2See 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). The CSAPR 

Update was promulgated to address interstate 

pollution with respect to the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS and to address a judicial remand of certain 

original CSAPR ozone season NOX budgets 

promulgated with respect to the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS. Id. at 74505. The CSAPR Update 

established new emission reduction requirements 

addressing the more recent ozone NAAQS and 

coordinated them with the remaining emission 

reduction requirements addressing the older 

NAAQS, so that starting in 2017, CSAPR includes 

two geographically separate trading programs for 

ozone season NOX emissions covering EGUs in a 

total of 23 states. See 40 CFR 52.38(b)(1)–(2). 

3States are required to submit good neighbor SIPs 

three years after a NAAQS is promulgated. CAA 

section 110(a)(1) and (2). Where EPA finds that a 

state fails to submit a required SIP or disapproves 

a SIP, EPA is obligated to promulgate a FIP 

addressing the deficiency. CAA section 110(c). EPA 

found that Alabama failed to make timely 

submissions required to address the good neighbor 

provision with respect to the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 

8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147, Apr. 25, 2005), 

and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961, 

June 13, 2015). In addition, EPA disapproved 

Alabama’s SIP revision submitted to address the 

good neighbor provision with respect to the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 43128 (July 20, 

2011). Accordingly, as a part of CSAPR and the 

CSAPR Update, EPA promulgated FIPs applicable 

to sources in Alabama addressing the good neighbor 

provision with respect to these standards. 

4See 40 CFR 52.38, 52.39. States also retain the 

ability to submit SIP revisions to meet their 

transport-related obligations using mechanisms 

other than the CSAPR federal trading programs or 

integrated state trading programs. 

5States covered by both the CSAPR Update and 

the NOX SIP Call have the additional option to 

expand applicability under the CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 2 Trading Program to include nonEGUs that would have participated in the NOX

Budget Trading Program. 

6CSAPR also provides for a third, more 

streamlined form of SIP revision that is effective 

only for control periods in 2016 (or 2018 for CSAPR 

NOX Ozone Season Group 2 units) and is not 

relevant here. See § 52.38(a)(3), (b)(3), (b)(7); 

§ 52.39(d), (g). 

identical to the CSAPR federal trading 

programs. 

The portions of the SIP revisions 

proposed for approval would 

incorporate into Alabama’s SIP state 

allowance trading program regulations 

for ozone season NOX emissions that 

would replace EPA’s federal trading 

program regulations for those emissions 

from Alabama units. EPA is proposing 

to approve these portions of the SIP 

revisions, as clarified in a letter 

provided on August 4, 2017, because 

they meet the requirements of the CAA 

and EPA’s regulations for approval of a 

CSAPR full SIP revision replacing a 

federal trading program with a state 

trading program that is integrated with 

and substantively identical to the 

federal trading program except for 

permissible differences with respect to 

emission allowance allocation 

provisions. Under the CSAPR 

regulations, approval of these portions 

of the SIP revisions would automatically 

eliminate the obligations of EGUs in 

Alabama (but not any units in Indian 

country within Alabama’s borders) to 

participate in CSAPR’s federal trading 

programs for ozone season NOX

emissions under the corresponding 

CSAPR FIPs. EPA proposes to find that 

approval of these portions of the SIP 

revisions would satisfy Alabama’s 

obligation pursuant to CAA section 

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

which will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state. EPA also 

proposes to find that approval of these 

portions of the SIP revisions would 

partially satisfy Alabama’s obligation 

pursuant to CAA section 

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

which will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state. 

Section II of this document 

summarizes relevant aspects of the 

CSAPR federal trading programs and 

FIPs as well as the range of 

opportunities states have to submit SIP 

revisions to modify or replace the FIP 

requirements while continuing to rely 

on CSAPR’s trading programs to address 

the states’ obligations to mitigate 

interstate air pollution. Section III 

describes the specific conditions for 

approval of such SIP revisions. Section 

IV contains EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s 

SIP submittal. Section V addresses 

incorporation by reference. Section VI 

sets forth EPA’s proposed action on the 

submittal. Section VII addresses 

statutory and Executive Order reviews. 

II. Background on CSAPR and CSAPRRelated SIP Revisions 

EPA issued CSAPR in July 2011 and 

the CSAPR Update 2 in 2016 to address 

the requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) concerning interstate 

transport of air pollution for specific 

NAAQS. As amended (including by the 

2016 CSAPR Update), CSAPR requires 

27 eastern states to limit their statewide 

emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and/ 

or NOX in order to mitigate transported 

air pollution unlawfully impacting other 

states’ ability to attain or maintain four 

NAAQS: the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS. The CSAPR emissions 

limitations are defined in terms of 

maximum statewide ‘‘budgets’’ for 

emissions of annual SO2, annual NOX, 

and/or ozone season NOX by each 

covered state’s large EGUs. The CSAPR 

state budgets are implemented in two 

phases of generally increasing 

stringency: The Phase 1 budgets apply 

to emissions in 2015 and 2016; and the 

Phase 2 and CSAPR Update budgets 

apply to emissions in 2017 and later 

years. As a mechanism for achieving 

compliance with the emissions 

limitations, CSAPR establishes five 

federal emissions trading programs: a 

program for annual NOX emissions; two 

geographically separate programs for 

annual SO2 emissions; and two 

geographically separate programs for 

ozone season NOX emissions. CSAPR 

also establishes FIP requirements 

applicable to the large EGUs in each 

covered state.3 Currently, the CSAPR 

FIP provisions require each state’s units 

to participate in up to three of the five 

CSAPR trading programs. 

CSAPR includes provisions under 

which states may submit and EPA will 

approve SIP revisions to modify or 

replace the CSAPR FIP requirements 

while allowing states to continue to 

meet their transport-related obligations 

using either CSAPR’s federal emissions 

trading programs or state emissions 

trading programs integrated with the 

federal programs, provided that the SIP 

revisions meet all relevant criteria.4

Through such a SIP revision, a state may 

replace EPA’s default provisions for 

allocating emission allowances among 

the state’s units, employing any stateselected methodology to allocate or 

auction the allowances, subject to 

timing conditions and limits on overall 

allowance quantities. In the case of 

CSAPR’s federal trading programs for 

ozone season NOX emissions (or an 

integrated state trading program), a state 

may also expand trading program 

applicability to include certain smaller 

EGUs.5 If a state wants to replace the 

CSAPR FIP requirements with SIP 

requirements under which the state’s 

units participate in a state trading 

program that is integrated with and 

identical to the federal trading program 

even as to the allocation and 

applicability provisions, the state may 

submit a SIP revision for that purpose 

as well. However, no emissions budget 

increases or other substantive changes 

to the trading program provisions are 

allowed. A state whose units are subject 

to multiple CSAPR federal trading 

programs may submit SIP revisions to 

modify or replace either some or all of 

those FIP requirements. 

States can submit two basic forms of 

CSAPR-related SIP revisions effective 

for emissions control periods in 2017 or 

later years.6 Specific conditions for 

approval of each form of SIP revision 

are set forth in the CSAPR regulations, 

as described in section III below. Under 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39072 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

7 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4), (b)(4), (b)(8); 52.39(e), (h). 

8 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5), (b)(5), (b)(9); 52.39(f), (i). 

9 40 CFR 52.38(a)(6), (b)(10)(i); 52.39(j). 

10 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iv)–(v), (a)(6), (b)(5)(v)–(vi), 

(b)(9)(vi)–(vii), (b)(10)(i); 52.39(f)(4)–(5), (i)(4)–(5), 

(j). 

11 40 CFR 52.38(a)(7), (b)(11); 52.39(k). 

12 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(ii), (a)(5)(vi), (b)(4)(iii), 

(b)(5)(vii), (b)(8)(iv), (b)(9)(viii); 52.39(e)(2), (f)(6), 

(h)(2), (i)(6). 

13 In the context of the approval conditions for 

CSAPR-related SIP revisions, an ‘‘existing unit’’ is 

a unit for which EPA has determined default 

allowance allocations (which could be allocations 

of zero allowances) in the rulemakings establishing 

and amending CSAPR. A document describing 

EPA’s default allocations to existing units is 

available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/2017-05/documents/csapr_allowance_

allocations_final_rule_tsd.pdf. 

14 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i), (a)(5)(i), (b)(4)(ii), 

(b)(5)(ii), (b)(8)(iii), (b)(9)(iii); 52.39(e)(1), (f)(1), 

(h)(1), (i)(1). 

15See 40 CFR 97.412(b)(10)(ii), 97.512(b)(10)(ii), 

97.612(b)(10)(ii), 97.712(b)(10)(ii), 97.812(b)(10)(ii). 

16 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i)(A), (a)(5)(i)(A), 

(b)(4)(ii)(A), (b)(5)(ii)(A), (b)(8)(iii)(A), (b)(9)(iii)(A); 

52.39(e)(1)(i), (f)(1)(i), (h)(1)(i), (i)(1)(i). 

17 40 CFR 52.38(b)(8)(iii)(A), (b)(9)(iii)(A). 

the first alternative—an ‘‘abbreviated’’ 

SIP revision—a state may submit a SIP 

revision that upon approval replaces the 

default allowance allocation and/or 

applicability provisions of a CSAPR 

federal trading program for the state.7

Approval of an abbreviated SIP revision 

leaves the corresponding CSAPR FIP 

and all other provisions of the relevant 

federal trading program in place for the 

state’s units. 

Under the second alternative—a 

‘‘full’’ SIP revision—a state may submit 

a SIP revision that upon approval 

replaces a CSAPR federal trading 

program for the state with a state trading 

program integrated with the federal 

trading program, so long as the state 

trading program is substantively 

identical to the federal trading program 

or does not substantively differ from the 

federal trading program except as 

discussed above with regard to the 

allowance allocation and/or 

applicability provisions.8 For purposes 

of a full SIP revision, a state may either 

adopt state rules with complete trading 

program language, incorporate the 

federal trading program language into its 

state rules by reference (with 

appropriate conforming changes), or 

employ a combination of these 

approaches. 

The CSAPR regulations identify 

several important consequences and 

limitations associated with approval of 

a full SIP revision. First, upon EPA’s 

approval of a full SIP revision as 

correcting the deficiency in the state’s 

SIP that was the basis for a particular set 

of CSAPR FIP requirements, the 

obligation to participate in the 

corresponding CSAPR federal trading 

program is automatically eliminated for 

units subject to the state’s jurisdiction 

without the need for a separate EPA 

withdrawal action, so long as EPA’s 

approval of the SIP revision as meeting 

the requirements of the CSAPR 

regulations is full and unconditional.9

Second, approval of a full SIP revision 

does not terminate the obligation to 

participate in the corresponding CSAPR 

federal trading program for any units 

located in any Indian country within the 

borders of the state, and if and when a 

unit is located in Indian country within 

a state’s borders, EPA may modify the 

SIP approval to exclude from the SIP, 

and include in the surviving CSAPR FIP 

instead, certain trading program 

provisions that apply jointly to units in 

the state and to units in Indian country 

within the state’s borders.10 Finally, if at 

the time a full SIP revision is approved 

EPA has already started recording 

allocations of allowances for a given 

control period to a state’s units, the 

federal trading program provisions 

authorizing EPA to complete the process 

of allocating and recording allowances 

for that control period to those units 

will continue to apply, unless EPA’s 

approval of the SIP revision provides 

otherwise.11

III. Conditions for Approval of CSAPRRelated SIP Revisions 

Each CSAPR-related abbreviated or 

full SIP revision must meet the 

following general submittal conditions: 

• Timeliness and completeness of SIP 

submittal. If a state wants to replace the 

default allowance allocation or 

applicability provisions of a CSAPR 

federal trading program, the complete 

SIP revision must be submitted to EPA 

by December 1 of the year before the 

deadlines described below for 

submitting allocation or auction 

amounts to EPA for the first control 

period for which the state wants to 

replace the default allocation and/or 

applicability provisions.12 This SIP 

submission deadline is inoperative in 

the case of a SIP revision that seeks only 

to replace a CSAPR FIP and federal 

trading program with a SIP and a 

substantively identical state trading 

program integrated with the federal 

trading program. The SIP submittal 

completeness criteria in section 2.1 of 

appendix V to 40 CFR part 51 also 

apply. 

In addition to the general submittal 

conditions, a CSAPR-related abbreviated 

or full SIP seeking to address the 

allocation or auction of emission 

allowances must meet the following 

further conditions: 

• Methodology covering all 

allowances potentially requiring 

allocation. For each federal trading 

program addressed by a SIP revision, 

the SIP revision’s allowance allocation 

or auction methodology must replace 

both the federal program’s default 

allocations to existing units 13 at 40 CFR 

97.411(a), 97.511(a), 97.611(a), 

97.711(a), or 97.811(a), as applicable, 

and the federal trading program’s 

provisions for allocating allowances 

from the new unit set-aside (NUSA) for 

the state at 40 CFR 97.411(b)(1) and 

97.412(a), 97.511(b)(1) and 97.512(a), 

97.611(b)(1) and 97.612(a), 97.711(b)(1) 

and 97.712(a), or 97.811(b)(1) and 

97.812(a), as applicable.14 In the case of 

a state with Indian country within its 

borders, while the SIP revision may 

neither alter nor assume the federal 

program’s provisions for administering 

the Indian country NUSA for the state, 

the SIP revision must include 

procedures addressing the disposition of 

any otherwise unallocated allowances 

from an Indian country NUSA that may 

be made available for allocation by the 

state after EPA has carried out the 

Indian country NUSA allocation 

procedures.15

• Assurance that total allocations will 

not exceed the state budget. For each 

federal trading program addressed by a 

SIP revision, the total amount of 

allowances auctioned or allocated for 

each control period under the SIP 

revision (prior to the addition by EPA of 

any unallocated allowances from any 

Indian country NUSA for the state) 

generally may not exceed the state’s 

emissions budget for the control period 

less the sum of the amount of any 

Indian country NUSA for the state for 

the control period and any allowances 

already allocated to the state’s units for 

the control period and recorded by 

EPA.16 Under its SIP revision, a state is 

free to not allocate allowances to some 

or all potentially affected units, to 

allocate or auction allowances to 

entities other than potentially affected 

units, or to allocate or auction fewer 

than the maximum permissible quantity 

of allowances and retire the remainder. 

Under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program only, 

additional allowances may be allocated 

if the state elects to expand applicability 

to non-EGUs that would have been 

subject to the NOX Budget Trading 

Program established for compliance 

with the NOX SIP Call.17

• Timely submission of statedetermined allocations to EPA. The SIP 

revision must require the state to submit 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39073 

18 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i)(B)–(C), (a)(5)(i)(B)–(C), 

(b)(4)(ii)(B)–(C), (b)(5)(ii)(B)–(C), (b)(8)(iii)(B)–(C), 

(b)(9)(iii)(B)–(C); 52.39(e)(1)(ii)–(iii), (f)(1)(ii)–(iii), 

(h)(1)(ii)–(iii), (i)(1)(ii)–(iii). 

19 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i)(D), (a)(5)(i)(D), 

(b)(4)(ii)(D), (b)(5)(ii)(D), (b)(8)(iii)(D), (b)(9)(iii)(D); 

52.39(e)(1)(iv), (f)(1)(iv), (h)(1)(iv), (i)(1)(iv). 

20 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4), (a)(5), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(8), 

(b)(9); 52.39(e), (f), (h), (i). 

21 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i), (a)(5)(ii), (b)(4)(ii), 

(b)(5)(iii), (b)(8)(iii), (b)(9)(iv); 52.39(e)(1), (f)(2), 

(h)(1), (i)(2). 

22 40 CFR 52.38(b)(4)(i), (b)(5)(i), (b)(8)(i), (b)(9)(i). 

23 40 CFR 52.38(b)(8)(ii), (b)(9)(ii). 

24 40 CFR 52.38(b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(8), (b)(9). 

25 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5), (b)(5), (b)(9); 52.39(f), (i). 

26 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iii), (b)(5)(iv), (b)(9)(v); 

52.39(f)(3), (i)(3). 

27 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iv), (b)(5)(v), (b)(9)(vi); 

52.39(f)(4), (i)(4). 

to EPA the amounts of any allowances 

allocated or auctioned to each unit for 

each control period (other than 

allowances initially set aside in the 

state’s allocation or auction process and 

later allocated or auctioned to such 

units from the set-aside amount) by the 

following deadlines.18 Note that the 

submission deadlines differ for amounts 

allocated or auctioned to units 

considered existing units for CSAPR 

purposes and amounts allocated or 

auctioned to other units. 

CSAPR NOX ANNUAL, CSAPR NOX OZONE SEASON GROUP 1, CSAPR SO2 GROUP 1, AND CSAPR SO2 GROUP 2 

TRADING PROGRAMS

Units Year of the control period Deadline for submission to EPA of allocations or auction results 

Existing ............................................ 2017 and 2018 .............................. June 1, 2016. 

2019 and 2020 .............................. June 1, 2017. 

2021 and 2022 .............................. June 1, 2018. 

2023 and later years ..................... June 1 of the fourth year before the year of the control period. 

Other ............................................... All years ......................................... July 1 of the year of the control period. 

CSAPR NOX OZONE SEASON GROUP 2 TRADING PROGRAM

Units Year of the control period Deadline for submission to EPA of allocations or auction results 

Existing ............................................ 2019 and 2020 .............................. June 1, 2018. 

2021 and 2022 .............................. June 1, 2019. 

2023 and 2024 .............................. June 1, 2020. 

2025 and later years ..................... June 1 of the fourth year before the year of the control period. 

Other ............................................... All years ......................................... July 1 of the year of the control period. 

• No changes to allocations already 

submitted to EPA or recorded. The SIP 

revision must not provide for any 

change to the amounts of allowances 

allocated or auctioned to any unit after 

those amounts are submitted to EPA or 

any change to any allowance allocation 

determined and recorded by EPA under 

the federal trading program 

regulations.19

• No other substantive changes to 

federal trading program provisions. The 

SIP revision may not substantively 

change any other trading program 

provisions, except in the case of a SIP 

revision that also expands program 

applicability as described below.20 Any 

new definitions adopted in the SIP 

revision (in addition to the federal 

trading program’s definitions) may 

apply only for purposes of the SIP 

revision’s allocation or auction 

provisions.21

In addition to the general submittal 

conditions, a CSAPR-related abbreviated 

or full SIP revision seeking to expand 

applicability under the CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 1 or CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 2 Trading 

Programs (or an integrated state trading 

program) must meet the following 

further conditions: 

• Only electricity generating units 

with nameplate capacity of at least 15 

MWe. The SIP revision may expand 

applicability only to additional fossil 

fuel-fired boilers or combustion turbines 

serving generators producing electricity 

for sale, and only by lowering the 

generator nameplate capacity threshold 

used to determine whether a particular 

boiler or combustion turbine serving a 

particular generator is a potentially 

affected unit. The nameplate capacity 

threshold adopted in the SIP revision 

may not be less than 15 MWe.22 In 

addition or alternatively, applicability 

under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program may be 

expanded to non-EGUs that would have 

been subject to the NOX Budget Trading 

Program established for compliance 

with the NOX SIP Call.23

• No other substantive changes to 

federal trading program provisions. The 

SIP revision may not substantively 

change any other trading program 

provisions, except in the case of a SIP 

revision that also addresses the 

allocation or auction of emission 

allowances as described above.24

In addition to the general submittal 

conditions and the other applicable 

conditions described above, a CSAPRrelated full SIP revision must meet the 

following further conditions: 

• Complete, substantively identical 

trading program provisions. The SIP 

revision must adopt complete state 

trading program regulations 

substantively identical to the complete 

federal trading program regulations at 

40 CFR 97.402 through 97.435, 97.502 

through 97.535, 97.602 through 97.635, 

97.702 through 97.735, or 97.802 

through 97.835, as applicable, except as 

described above in the case of a SIP 

revision that seeks to replace the default 

allowance allocation and/or 

applicability provisions.25

• Only non-substantive substitutions 

for the term ‘‘State.’’ The SIP revision 

may substitute the name of the state for 

the term ‘‘State’’ as used in the federal 

trading program regulations, but only to 

the extent that EPA determines that the 

substitutions do not substantively 

change the trading program 

regulations.26

• Exclusion of provisions addressing 

units in Indian country. The SIP 

revision may not impose requirements 

on any unit in any Indian country 

within the state’s borders and must not 

include the federal trading program 

provisions governing allocation of 

allowances from any Indian country 

NUSA for the state.27


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39074 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

28See 76 FR 48208, 48210, 48213 (August 8, 

2011). EPA also determined in the CSAPR 

rulemaking that air pollution transported from 

Alabama would unlawfully affect other states’ 

ability to attain or maintain the 1997 annual PM2.5

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

Alabama previously submitted, and EPA previously 

approved, a SIP revision that replaces the CSAPR 

FIPs for the annual trading programs in Alabama. 

See 81 FR 59869 (August 31, 2016). 

29CSAPR Update, 81 FR at 74507–08. 

30 Id. at 74525. 

31 Id. at 74563 n.169. 

32 40 CFR 52.38(b)(2), (b)(2)(iii); 52.54(a), (b). 

33As discussed above, the October 26, 2015 

submittal also contained provisions related to the 

annual NOX and SO2 trading programs, which EPA 

approved in a separate rulemaking. See 81 FR 

59869 (August 31, 2016). 

34For the purposes of this rulemaking, the 

October 26, 2015, and May 19, 2017, submittals 

together may also be referred to as the ‘‘Alabama 

ozone season submittals.’’ 

35Alabama’s rules use the terms ‘‘Transport Rule’’ 

and ‘‘TR’’ instead of the updated terms ‘‘Cross-State 

Air Pollution Rule’’ and ‘‘CSAPR.’’ For simplicity, 

EPA uses the updated terms here except where 

otherwise noted. 

36EPA notes that in the CSAPR Update, the 

allocations of Alabama’s allowance budget to the 

state’s units under the federal CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 2 Trading Program were determined 

using a methodology similar to the methodology in 

Alabama’s October 26, 2015 SIP submittal, 81 FR 

at 74564. 

37See 81 FR 59869 (August 31, 2016). 

IV. Alabama’s SIP Submittal and EPA’s 

Analysis 

A. Alabama’s SIP Submittal 

In the CSAPR rulemaking, among 

other findings, EPA determined that air 

pollution transported from Alabama 

would unlawfully affect other states’ 

ability to attain or maintain the 1997 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS.28 In the CSAPR 

Update rulemaking, EPA determined 

that air pollution transported from 

Alabama would unlawfully affect other 

states’ ability to attain or maintain the 

2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS and 

established an ozone season NOX budget 

for Alabama’s EGUs representing a 

partial remedy for the State’s interstate 

transport obligations with respect to that 

NAAQS; 29 determined that Alabama’s 

previous ozone season NOX budget 

established in the CSAPR rulemaking as 

a partial remedy for the State’s interstate 

transport obligations with respect to the 

1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS now 

represented a full remedy with respect 

to that NAAQS; 30 and coordinated 

compliance requirements by allowing 

compliance with the new CSAPR 

Update budget to serve the purpose of 

addressing the State’s obligations with 

respect to both NAAQS.31 Alabama 

units meeting the CSAPR applicability 

criteria are consequently subject to 

CSAPR FIP requirements for 

participation in the CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 2 Trading Program in 

order to address the State’s interstate 

transport obligations with respect to 

both the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS 

(full remedy) and the 2008 8-hour 

Ozone NAAQS (partial remedy).32

On October 26, 2015, Alabama 

submitted to EPA a SIP revision 

including provisions that, if approved, 

would incorporate into Alabama’s SIP 

state trading program regulations that 

would replace the CSAPR federal 

trading program regulations with regard 

to Alabama units’ ozone season NOX

emissions.33 On May 19, 2017, Alabama 

submitted to EPA a SIP revision that 

supersedes portions of the October 26, 

2015, submittal to reflect changes from 

the CSAPR Update.34 On August 4, 

2017, Alabama sent a letter clarifying 

the State’s interpretation concerning the 

allowances for the Indian country 

NUSA for Alabama. The Alabama ozone 

season submittals include duly adopted 

state rules at rules 335–3–8–.39 through 

335–3–8–.70, which establish Alabama’s 

‘‘TR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 

Trading Program.’’ 35 In general, each 

individual rule in Alabama’s CSAPR 

state trading program rules is designed 

to replace one individual section (or in 

a few cases two or three sections) of the 

corresponding federal trading program 

regulations, and the set of rules is 

designed to collectively replace all 

sections of the corresponding federal 

trading program regulations at subpart 

EEEEE of 40 CFR part 97 (i.e., 40 CFR 

97.801 through 97.835). 

With regard to form, some of the 

individual rules for each Alabama 

CSAPR state trading program are set 

forth as full regulatory text—notably the 

rules addressing program applicability, 

emissions budgets and variability limits, 

and allowance allocations—but most of 

the rules incorporate the corresponding 

federal trading program section or 

sections by reference. Several of the 

Alabama rules adopt cross-references to 

other Alabama rules in place of crossreferences to specific federal trading 

program sections that would be replaced 

by those other Alabama rules. 

With regard to substance, the rules for 

the Alabama CSAPR state ozone season 

trading program differ from the 

corresponding CSAPR federal trading 

program regulations in three main ways. 

First, the applicability provisions in the 

Alabama rules require participation in 

Alabama’s CSAPR state trading 

programs only for units in Alabama, not 

for units in any other state or in Indian 

country within the borders of Alabama 

or any other state. Second, the Alabama 

rules set forth a methodology for 

allocating emission allowances among 

Alabama units that differs from the 

default allowance allocation provisions 

in the federal trading program 

regulations.36 Finally, the Alabama 

rules omit a number of federal trading 

program provisions not applicable to 

Alabama’s state trading programs, 

including: provisions setting forth the 

amounts of emissions budgets, NUSAs, 

Indian country NUSAs, and variability 

limits for other states; provisions 

addressing EPA’s procedures for 

allocating allowances from Indian 

country NUSAs; and provisions 

addressing EPA’s recordation of certain 

allowance allocations. 

Each SIP revision was submitted to 

EPA by a letter from the Director of the 

Alabama Department of Environmental 

Management. The letters and enclosures 

describe steps taken by Alabama to 

provide public notice prior to adoption 

of the state rules. 

EPA has previously approved 

portions of Alabama’s October 26, 2015, 

submittal replacing the FIPs for the 

CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program 

and the CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading 

Program for Alabama.37

B. EPA’s Analysis of Alabama’s 

Submittals 

As described in section IV.A above, at 

this time EPA is taking action on the 

portions of Alabama’s ozone season 

submittals designed to replace the 

federal CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program. The analysis 

discussed in this section addresses only 

the portions of Alabama’s ozone season 

submittals on which EPA is taking 

action at this time. For simplicity, 

throughout this section EPA refers to the 

portions of the submittals on which EPA 

is proposing to take action as ‘‘the 

Alabama ozone season submittals’’ or 

‘‘the SIP revisions’’ without repeating 

the qualification that at this time EPA is 

analyzing and proposing to act on only 

portions of the SIP submittal. 

1. Timeliness and Completeness of SIP 

Submittal 

Together, the Alabama ozone season 

submittals seek in part to replace the 

default allowance allocation provisions 

in the CSAPR federal trading program 

regulations for ozone season NOX

emissions as applied to Alabama units 

with state regulations establishing a 

different state-determined methodology, 

starting with the control periods in 

2019. Under 40 CFR 52.38(b)(9)(iii)(B), 

the deadline for submission of statedetermined allowance allocations for 

the 2019 and 2020 control periods is 

June 1, 2018, which under 

§ 52.38(b)(9)(viii) makes December 1, 

2017, the deadline for submission to 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39075 

38 40 CFR 97.810(a)(1)(i). 

39August 4, 2017, Letter from R. Gore (ADEM) to 

B. Banister (EPA, Region 4), available in the docket 

for this action. 

40 Id. 

41The CSAPR federal regulations explicitly 

provide that terms in the federal CSAPR regulations 

that include ‘‘CSAPR’’ are considered synonymous 

with otherwise identical terms in approved SIP 

revisions that include ‘‘TR’’ instead of ‘‘CSAPR’’. 40 

CFR 97.802 (introductory text). 

42 40 CFR 52.38(b)(9)(iv). 

43 Instances where Alabama’s CSAPR state trading 

program rules omit provisions of the CSAPR federal 

trading program regulations are discussed in 

sections IV.B.7 and 9 below. 

EPA of a complete SIP revision 

establishing state-determined 

allocations for those control periods. 

Alabama submitted its SIP revisions on 

October 26, 2015 and May 19, 2017, and 

EPA has determined that the submittals 

comply with the applicable minimum 

completeness criteria in section 2.1 of 

appendix V to 40 CFR part 51. Because 

Alabama’s SIP revisions were timely 

submitted and meet the applicable 

completeness criteria, they meet the 

conditions under 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(9)(viii) for timely submission of 

a complete SIP revision. 

2. Methodology Covering All 

Allowances Potentially Requiring 

Allocation 

Paragraph 335–3–8–.46(1) of the 

Alabama rules sets forth total amounts 

of 13,211 CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 allowances that would be 

allocated to Alabama units for each 

control period in 2019 and later years 

according to the allocation procedures 

set forth under the remaining 

paragraphs of Alabama rule 335–3–8– 

.46 (Paragraph 335–3–8–.45(1) sets forth 

the same amounts as the respective state 

emissions budgets, in conjunction with 

the corresponding variability limits). 

These totals match the amounts of the 

Phase 2 emissions budgets for Alabama 

established under the federal trading 

program regulations for ozone NOX

emissions, thereby addressing the full 

quantities of allowances that could be 

allocated to Alabama units under the 

default allocation provisions for the 

federal trading programs.38 In addition, 

Alabama’s rule—through provisions that 

create an iterative process for allocating 

allowances—addresses the disposition 

of otherwise unallocated allowances 

from an Indian country NUSA. The 

allocation provisions in the Alabama 

rules therefore enable Alabama’s SIP 

revision to meet the condition under 40 

CFR 52.38(b)(9)(iii) that the state’s 

allocation or auction methodology must 

cover all allowances potentially 

requiring allocation by the state. 

3. Assurance That Total Allocations 

Will Not Exceed the State Budget 

As discussed in section IV.B.2 above, 

paragraph 335–3–8–.46(1) of the 

Alabama rules sets forth the total 

amount of CSAPR Ozone Season Group 

2 NOX allowances to be allocated to 

Alabama units for each control period 

under the state trading program and this 

amount equals the amount of the ozone 

season NOX emissions budget 

established for Alabama units under the 

CSAPR federal trading program 

regulations. Although under the State’s 

rules, Alabama will provide EPA with 

allocations for allowances equal to the 

total amount of the state budget, the 

State has clarified in its August 4, 2017, 

letter that, under the State’s 

interpretation of its rules, the 

allocations of a portion of the total state 

budget equal to the Indian country 

NUSA are to be implemented by EPA 

only if and when the total quantity of 

allowances in the State’s Indian country 

NUSA is released for state allocation 

pursuant to 40 CFR 97.812(b)(10)(ii), 

and if that total quantity of allowances 

is not released for state allocation, then 

the State’s allocations of that portion of 

the budget are void.39 To clarify the 

separate, contingent nature of the State’s 

allocations of the Indian country NUSA 

allowances, the State will submit its 

allocations of those allowances to the 

EPA as a separate set of allocations from 

the allocations of the remaining 

allowances in the state budget.40 EPA 

has not yet allocated or recorded CSAPR 

allowances for the control periods in 

2019 or later years. As interpreted by 

the State, the allocation methodology in 

Alabama’s SIP revision therefore meets 

the condition under 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(9)(iii)(A) that the total amount 

of allowances allocated under the SIP 

revision (before the addition of any 

otherwise unallocated allowances from 

an Indian country NUSA) may not 

exceed the state’s budget for the control 

period less the amount of the Indian 

country NUSA for the state and any 

allowances already allocated and 

recorded by EPA. 

4. Timely Submission of StateDetermined Allocations to EPA 

Paragraphs 335–3–8–.46(2)(a) through 

(d) of the Alabama rules provide for all 

allowance allocations to Alabama units 

established under the Alabama rules to 

be submitted to EPA by the following 

deadlines: Allocations for the control 

periods in 2019 and 2020, by June 1, 

2017; allocations for the control periods 

in 2021 and 2022, by June 1, 2018; and 

allocations for later control periods, by 

June 1 of the fourth or fifth year before 

the year of the control period. These 

submission deadlines match or precede 

the submission deadlines discussed in 

section III above (specifically, the 

deadlines under 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(9)(iii)(B) for allocations to units 

considered existing units for CSAPR 

purposes and the submission deadlines 

under § 52.38(b)(9)(iii)(C) for allocations 

to other units). Alabama’s SIP revision 

therefore meets the conditions under 40 

CFR 52.38(b)(9)(iii)(B) and (C) requiring 

that the SIP revision provide for 

submission of state-determined 

allowance allocations to EPA by the 

deadlines specified in those provisions. 

5. No Changes to Allocations Already 

Submitted to EPA or Recorded 

The Alabama rules include no 

provisions allowing alteration of 

allocations after the allocation amounts 

have been provided to EPA and no 

provisions allowing alteration of any 

allocations made and recorded by EPA 

under the federal trading program 

regulations, thereby meeting the 

condition under 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(9)(iii)(D). 

6. No Other Substantive Changes to 

Federal Trading Program Provisions 

With the exception of the provisions 

addressing the allowance allocation 

methodology discussed above, the 

Alabama state trading program rules 

generally incorporate sections of the 

corresponding federal trading program 

regulations by reference or set forth full 

text that is very similar to the text in the 

corresponding federal trading program 

regulations.41 Some of the differences 

between the Alabama rules and the 

corresponding federal trading program 

regulations are clearly non-substantive. 

For example, in instances where an 

Alabama rule contains full text 

substituting for the text of a section of 

the federal trading program regulations, 

the remaining Alabama rules adopt 

cross-references to the full-text Alabama 

rule in place of cross-references to the 

section of the federal trading program 

regulations that would be replaced by 

the full-text Alabama rule. The Alabama 

rules also contain definitions for certain 

terms used in the State trading 

program’s allocation provisions that are 

not used in the federal trading program 

regulations, as expressly permitted 

under the CSAPR regulations.42 Most of 

the remaining differences between the 

Alabama rules and the corresponding 

sections of the federal trading program 

regulations consist of non-substantive 

renumbering of the provisions.43

In addition to the clearly nonsubstantive or expressly authorized 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39076 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

44For the same reason, Alabama’s state rules 

could permissibly omit 40 CFR 97.821(g), which 

address recordation of first-round NUSA 

allocations. Note that notwithstanding the lack of 

provisions addressing recordation of NUSA 

allocations in Alabama’s state trading program 

rules, EPA would retain authority to complete the 

recordation of 2017 NUSA allocations to Alabama 

units because EPA has already started recording 

allocations to Alabama units of allowances for the 

compliance periods in 2017. See 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(11)(i). 

differences summarized above, a few of 

Alabama’s rules contain other 

differences from the federal trading 

program regulations. In each case, EPA 

has determined that the changes do not 

represent substantive changes to the 

federal trading program regulations. 

First, paragraphs 335–3–8–.40(1)(c), 

335–3–8–.41(1)(a), and 335–3–8– 

.66(2)(a), of the Alabama rules require 

Alabama units to submit certain 

petitions, statements, and notices not 

only to EPA but also to the Alabama 

Department of Environmental 

Management. In addition, paragraph 

335–3–8–.42(e) of the Alabama rules 

allow the Department to extend on-site 

storage of records beyond five years. 

Because the additional notification 

requirements do not alter the respective 

authorities or responsibilities of EPA 

and the Department, EPA considers the 

requirements to be non-substantive 

changes. 

Second, paragraphs 335–3–8– 

.52(2)(a), and 335–3–8–.55(2)(a) of the 

Alabama rules provide that, like EPA, 

the Department will not adjudicate 

certain private legal disputes. Because 

the Department is not required to 

adjudicate such disputes under the 

federal trading program regulations in 

any event, these additions to the text of 

the state trading program rules merely 

clarify that the Department is not 

undertaking a new adjudication 

responsibility under the state trading 

programs. EPA therefore considers these 

additions to be non-substantive changes. 

Third, paragraph 335–3–8–.61 of the 

Alabama rule substitutes references to 

Alabama rule 335–3–8–.46(3)(i) (the 

Alabama rule addressing units 

incorrectly allocated allowances). 

Because the Alabama rule substitution 

seeks to replace 40 CFR 97.811(c) with 

333–3–8.46(3)(i), which in turn 

incorporates by reference 40 CFR 

97.811(c), EPA proposes to find that the 

provisions are substantively identical. 

Fourth, paragraph 335–3–8–.65 of the 

Alabama rules substitutes references for 

Alabama rule 335–3–8–.41 (the Alabama 

rule covering retired unit exemptions). 

This substitution is appropriate as it 

substitutes Alabama’s retired unit 

exemption for the CSAPR retired unit 

exemptions at 40 CFR 97.805. With the 

exception of the notification required 

above and changes related to 

identification of the state trading 

program instead of the federal trading 

program, Alabama has incorporated the 

text of 40 CFR 97.805 into Alabama Rule 

335–3–8–.41. Because the referenced 

provisions are substantively identical, 

EPA proposes to determine that these 

substitutions have no substantive effect. 

Finally, paragraphs 335–3–8–.42(2)(a) 

and (b) of the Alabama rules substitute 

references to Alabama rule 335.3.16– 

.13(3) (the Alabama rule addressing 

minor permit modification procedures) 

for references to 40 CFR 70.7(e)(2) (the 

minor permit modification procedures 

section of the federal regulations 

governing state operating permit 

programs under CAA title V) in the 

federal trading program regulations 

regarding title V permit requirements. 

As applied to Alabama units only, the 

substituted Alabama rule provisions are 

substantively identical to the provisions 

in 40 CFR 70.7(e)(2) that would be 

replaced. Because in the context of 

Alabama’s CSAPR state trading 

programs these particular provisions 

need to address only Alabama units and 

not units from other states participating 

in the CSAPR trading programs, EPA 

proposes to determine that these 

substitutions have no substantive effect. 

For the reasons discussed above, EPA 

has preliminarily determined that none 

of the textual additions or substitutions 

made to the CSAPR federal trading 

program regulations in Alabama’s 

corresponding CSAPR state trading 

program rules are substantive, and that 

Alabama’s SIP revision therefore meets 

the condition under 40 CFR 52.38(b)(9) 

of making no substantive changes to the 

provisions of the federal trading 

program regulations beyond the 

provisions addressing allowance 

allocations. 

7. Complete, Substantively Identical 

Trading Program Provisions 

With the following exceptions, the 

Alabama rules comprising Alabama’s 

CSAPR state trading program for ozone 

season NOx emissions either 

incorporate by reference or adopt fulltext replacements for all of the 

provisions of 40 CFR 97.802 through 

97.835. The first exception is that 

Alabama rule 335–3–8–.46, which 

generally addresses the amount of 

emissions budget and related quantities, 

omits the provisions of 40 CFR 97.810 

setting forth the amounts of all 

emissions budgets, NUSAs, Indian 

country NUSAs, and variability limits 

for other states. Omission of the budget, 

NUSA, Indian country NUSA, and 

variability limit provisions for other 

states from state trading programs in 

which only Alabama units participate 

does not undermine the completeness of 

the state trading programs. 

The second exception is that Alabama 

rule 335–3–8–.46, generally addressing 

allowance allocations, omits 40 CFR 

97.811(b)(2) and 97.812(b), concerning 

EPA’s administration of Indian country 

NUSAs. Omission of these provisions 

from Alabama’s state trading program 

rules is required, as discussed in section 

IV.B.9 below. 

The third exception is that Alabama 

rule 335–3–8–.56, which generally 

incorporates by reference the federal 

trading programs’ recordation schedule 

provisions, excludes from incorporation 

by reference 40 CFR 97.821(a), (b), (h), 

(i) and (j) concerning EPA’s schedule for 

recording certain allowance allocations. 

The federal trading program provisions 

at § 97.821(a) and (b), which address 

recordation of allocations to units 

considered existing units for CSAPR 

purposes of allowances for the 

compliance periods in 2017 and 2018, 

do not need to be included in Alabama’s 

state trading program rules because 

those allocations have already been 

recorded. The federal trading program 

provision at § 97.821(h), which address 

recordation of allocations from Indian 

country NUSAs, are appropriately 

excluded from state trading programs 

because a state may not administer an 

Indian country NUSA. The federal 

trading program provision at § 97.821(i) 

and (j), which address recordation of 

second-round NUSA allocations, are not 

needed in Alabama’s state trading 

program rules because Alabama would 

provide EPA the amounts of its NUSA 

allocations on the earlier schedule 

applicable to allocations to units 

considered existing units for CSAPR 

purposes.44 Omission of these 

provisions from Alabama’s state trading 

programs therefore does not undermine 

the completeness of the state trading 

programs. 

Because none of the omissions 

undermines the completeness of 

Alabama’s state trading programs and 

because, as discussed in section IV.B.6 

above, EPA has preliminarily 

determined that Alabama’s SIP revision 

makes no other substantive changes to 

the provisions of the federal trading 

program regulations beyond the 

provisions addressing allowance 

allocations, Alabama’s SIP revision 

meets the condition under 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(9) that the SIP revision must 

adopt complete state trading program 

regulations substantively identical to 

the complete federal trading program 

regulations at 40 CFR 97.802 through 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39077 

45The Alabama rules use the terms ‘‘Transport 

Rule’’ and ‘‘TR’’ instead of the updated terms 

‘‘Cross-State Air Pollution Rule’’ and ‘‘CSAPR,’’ 

which is permissible under the CSAPR Update. 81 

FR at 74579. 

97.835, except for permissible 

differences in allowance allocation and/ 

or applicability provisions. 

8. Only Non-Substantive Substitutions 

for the Term ‘‘State’’ 

Paragraph 335–3–8–.40(1)(a)1 of the 

Alabama rules substitute the term ‘‘the 

State of Alabama,’’ and paragraph 335– 

3–8–.40(1)(b) of the Alabama rules 

similarly substitute the term ‘‘the State’’ 

(meaning Alabama), for the phrase ‘‘a 

State (or Indian country within the 

borders of such State)’’ in the 

corresponding federal trading program 

regulations at 40 CFR 97.810(a)(1) and 

(b). These provisions of the Alabama 

rules define the units that are required 

to participate in Alabama’s CSAPR state 

trading programs. The substitutions 

appropriately exclude units located in 

other states and units located in Indian 

country within the borders of Alabama 

or any other state, thereby limiting the 

applicability of Alabama’s state trading 

programs to units that are subject to 

Alabama’s jurisdiction. These 

substitutions do not substantively 

change the provisions of CSAPR’s 

federal trading program regulations. The 

remaining Alabama rules do not 

substitute for the term ‘‘State’’ as used 

in the federal trading program 

regulations. EPA proposes to find that 

Alabama’s SIP revision therefore meets 

the condition under 40 CFR 

52.38(b)(9)(v) that the SIP revision may 

substitute the name of the state for the 

term ‘‘State’’ as used in the federal 

trading program regulations, but only to 

the extent that EPA determines that the 

substitutions do not substantively 

change the provisions of the federal 

trading program regulations. 

9. Exclusion of Provisions Addressing 

Units in Indian Country 

The Alabama rules do not set forth 

any full text provisions directly 

addressing units in Indian country 

within the state’s borders. As discussed 

in section IV.B.8 above, paragraph 335– 

3–8–.40(1)(a)1 of the Alabama rule 

define the units required to participate 

in Alabama’s state trading programs in 

a manner that appropriately excludes 

units located in Indian country within 

Alabama’s borders from coverage under 

Alabama’s CSAPR state trading 

programs. Although various other 

provisions of the CSAPR federal trading 

program regulations incorporated by 

reference into the Alabama rules 

without modification refer to units in 

Indian country, the clear exclusion of 

any such units from coverage under the 

state trading program applicability 

provisions—in other words, the fact that 

such units are not ‘‘TR NOx Ozone 

Season Group 2 units’’ for purposes of 

the state trading program—renders the 

remaining provisions of Alabama’s state 

trading program rules inoperative as to 

the units. EPA therefore interprets the 

Alabama rules as not imposing any 

requirements on units located in Indian 

country within the State’s borders. 

As discussed in section IV.B.7 above, 

Alabama rule 335–3–8–.46, which 

addresses allowance allocations under 

the state trading programs, contains no 

provisions replacing 40 CFR 

97.811(b)(2) or 97.812(b), the portions of 

the federal trading program regulations 

governing allocations of allowances 

from Indian country NUSAs. Thus, the 

Alabama rules do not include any 

express state rule provisions concerning 

administration of Indian country 

NUSAs. Further, Alabama rules 335–3– 

8–.56, which generally incorporate by 

reference the federal trading programs’ 

recordation schedule provisions, 

excludes 40 CFR 97.821(h), addressing 

recordation of Indian country NUSA 

allocations. Similarly, paragraph 335–3– 

8–.46(3)(i) of the Alabama rules, which 

incorporates by reference the federal 

trading program regulations generally 

addressing corrections of incorrect 

allocations, excludes 40 CFR 

97.811(c)(5)(iii), addressing corrections 

of certain incorrect Indian country 

NUSA allocations. EPA therefore 

interprets the Alabama state rules as 

sufficiently excluding provisions 

addressing administration of the Indian 

country NUSA provisions under the 

federal trading programs. 

In summary, EPA has preliminarily 

determined that Alabama’s SIP revision 

adequately meets the condition under 

40 CFR 52.38(b)(9)(vi) that a SIP 

submittal must not impose any 

requirement on any unit in Indian 

country within the borders of the State 

and must exclude certain provisions 

related to administration of Indian 

country NUSAs. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

ADEM Administrative Code rules 335– 

3–8–.39 through 335–3–8–.70, state 

effective on June 9, 2017, comprising 

Alabama’s TR NOX Ozone Season 

Trading Program. EPA has made, and 

will continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA 

Region 4 office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

VI. EPA’s Proposed Action on 

Alabama’s Submittal 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions the Alabama ozone season 

submittals concerning the establishment 

for Alabama units of CSAPR state 

trading programs for ozone season NOX

emissions for compliance periods in 

2019 and later years. The proposed 

revision would adopt into the SIP the 

state trading program rules codified in 

ADEM Administrative Code rules 335– 

3–8-.39 through 335–3–8–.70 

(establishing Alabama’s ‘‘TR NOX Ozone 

Group 2 Trading Program’’), as 

interpreted by the State in the August 5, 

2017, clarification letter.45 This 

Alabama CSAPR state trading program 

would be integrated with the federal 

CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 

Trading Program and would be 

substantively identical to the federal 

trading program except with regard to 

the allowance allocation provisions. If 

EPA approves these portions of the SIP 

revisions, Alabama units would 

generally be required to meet 

requirements under Alabama’s CSAPR 

state trading program equivalent to the 

requirements the units otherwise would 

have been required to meet under the 

corresponding CSAPR federal trading 

program, but allocations to Alabama 

units of CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 allowances for compliance 

periods in 2019 and later years would 

be determined according to the SIP’s 

allocation provisions at Alabama rule 

335–3–8–.46 instead of EPA’s default 

allocation provisions at 40 CFR 

97.811(a), 97.811(b)(1), and 97.812(a). 

EPA is proposing to approve these 

portions of the SIP revisions because, as 

clarified by the State’s August 4, 2017, 

letter, they meet the requirements of the 

CAA and EPA’s regulations for approval 

of a CSAPR full SIP revision replacing 

a federal trading program with a state 

trading program that is integrated with 

and substantively identical to the 

federal trading program except for 

permissible differences with respect to 

emission allowance allocation 

provisions, as discussed in section IV 

above. 

EPA promulgated the FIP provisions 

requiring Alabama units to participate 

in the federal CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 2 Trading Program in 

order to address Alabama’s obligations 

under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39078 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

46 40 CFR 52.38(b)(10); see also 40 CFR 

52.54(b)(1) & (2). 

with respect to the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS and the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in the absence of SIP provisions 

addressing those requirements. Under 

the CSAPR regulations, upon EPA’s full 

and unconditional approval of a SIP 

revision as correcting the SIP’s 

deficiency that is the basis for a 

particular CSAPR FIP, the obligation to 

participate in the corresponding CSAPR 

federal trading program is automatically 

eliminated for units subject to the state’s 

jurisdiction (but not for any units 

located in any Indian country within the 

state’s borders).46 Approval of the 

portions of Alabama’s SIP submittal 

adopting CSAPR state trading program 

rules for ozone season NOX

substantively identical to the 

corresponding CSAPR federal trading 

program regulations (or differing only 

with respect to the allowance allocation 

methodology) would satisfy Alabama’s 

obligation pursuant to CAA section 

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

which will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state. This 

proposed approval would also partially 

satisfy Alabama’s obligation pursuant to 

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

emissions which will significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2008 8-hour 

Ozone NAAQS in any other state. Thus, 

the proposed approval would correct 

the same deficiency in the SIP that 

otherwise would be corrected by those 

CSAPR FIPs. The proposed approval of 

the portions of Alabama’s SIP submittal 

establishing CSAPR state trading 

program rules for ozone season NOX

emissions therefore would result in 

automatic termination of the obligations 

of Alabama units to participate in the 

federal CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 7, 2017. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17341 Filed 8–16–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0174; FRL–9966–27– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; Alabama; 

Transportation Conformity 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

the portion of a revision to the Alabama 

State Implementation plan submitted by 

the State of Alabama on May 8, 2013, for 

the purpose of amending the 

transportation conformity rules to be 

consistent with Federal requirements. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 18, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2017–0174 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS