The EPA published a proposed rule on July 2, 2026 (Docket No. 2026-13403) to approve Alabama's updated transportation conformity memorandum of agreement. If your organization operates in Alabama's nonattainment or maintenance areas — or if you work in transportation planning, metropolitan planning, or air quality management — this revision affects how conformity determinations get made in your region.
What Is Transportation Conformity and Why Does It Matter?
Transportation conformity is a Clean Air Act requirement that ensures federally funded or approved transportation plans, programs, and projects don't cause new air quality violations, worsen existing ones, or delay the timely attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The legal authority sits in Clean Air Act Section 176(c), and the implementing federal regulations live at 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A.
In practice, transportation conformity affects Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), state departments of transportation, transit agencies, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). These agencies can't move forward with certain transportation actions in nonattainment or maintenance areas without a conformity determination — and that determination depends on an interagency consultation process that has to be formalized through a state-level agreement.
That agreement is called a Memorandum of Agreement, or MOA. Alabama's existing MOA had been in place for years. This proposed SIP revision replaces it with an updated version.
What Changed: The Alabama MOA Revision
On April 7, 2026, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) submitted a SIP revision to EPA Region 4. The core of the revision is straightforward: Alabama is replacing its previously approved transportation conformity MOA with an updated MOA that reflects current federal requirements and operational realities.
According to the Federal Register notice published July 2, 2026, the updated MOA specifically addresses four areas:
1. Interagency Consultation Procedures. The revised MOA updates how transportation and air quality agencies coordinate during conformity determinations. Under 40 CFR 93.105, states must establish a consultation process among state and local transportation and air quality agencies. Alabama's updated procedures reflect changes in agency roles, contacts, and coordination timelines that had drifted from the original MOA over time.
2. Conflict Resolution. The original MOA's conflict resolution process hadn't kept pace with how disputes actually surface in practice. The updated language provides a clearer path for resolving disagreements between agencies during the conformity review process — which matters when projects are on a schedule and a disputed conformity determination can hold up funding or approvals.
3. Public Participation. Federal conformity rules require that the public have an opportunity to participate in conformity-related decisions. The revised MOA updates Alabama's public participation procedures to align with current federal requirements, including how notices are issued and how comment periods are structured.
4. Enforceability. SIP revisions must contain provisions that are enforceable — this is a foundational requirement under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(A). The updated MOA strengthens the enforceability framework to satisfy this requirement and to give EPA a clean basis for approval.
These aren't cosmetic changes. An MOA that's out of alignment with actual agency operations creates conformity determinations that sit on a shaky procedural foundation — and that's the kind of gap that surfaces during litigation or federal reviews.
The Regulatory Timeline: Key Dates
| Milestone | Date |
|---|---|
| Alabama (ADEM) submits SIP revision | April 7, 2026 |
| EPA publishes proposed rule in Federal Register | July 2, 2026 (91 FR ___) |
| Public comment period opens | July 2, 2026 |
| Public comment period closes (typical 30-day window) | On or around August 1, 2026 |
| EPA final rule (estimated) | Q4 2026 (post-comment review) |
| SIP revision effective upon final rule publication | 30 days after final rule publication |
Note: The exact public comment deadline should be confirmed against the official Federal Register notice at 2026-13403. The 30-day comment period is standard for this type of rulemaking under 40 CFR Part 93.
EPA is proceeding under the "parallel processing" authority that allows states to submit SIP revisions while the federal rule is being finalized. Alabama's updated MOA is already operational at the state level — the SIP approval makes it federally enforceable and formally incorporated into the SIP.
Who Needs to Pay Attention
If you're tempted to skim this one because it looks like a housekeeping rulemaking, I'd push back on that. The agencies and organizations that should be watching this closely include:
Metropolitan Planning Organizations in Alabama. Alabama has multiple MPOs operating in areas with active NAAQS designations. The Birmingham, Mobile, and Huntsville metro areas each have transportation planning activities subject to conformity requirements. An updated MOA changes the procedural framework those MPOs operate under — including consultation timelines, who gets notified, and how disputes get resolved.
ALDOT and Alabama Transit Agencies. The Alabama Department of Transportation and transit operators in nonattainment or maintenance areas are parties to the conformity process. The revised consultation procedures may change the sequence or substance of coordination required before a conformity determination can be made.
Federal Partners — FHWA and FTA. Federal highway and transit agencies make conformity determinations based on the state's established procedures. When the MOA changes, the federal process adapts accordingly. Project-level approvals in covered areas depend on this working smoothly.
Air Quality Consultants and Environmental Attorneys. If you're advising clients on project-level conformity determinations or helping MPOs navigate their long-range transportation plan (LRTP) or transportation improvement program (TIP) conformity processes, the updated MOA is the operative document going forward.
What the SIP Approval Process Actually Means
EPA's proposed approval under Clean Air Act Section 110(k)(3) means the agency has reviewed the submission and determined it meets applicable requirements. A few things worth understanding about what that approval does and doesn't do.
It makes the MOA federally enforceable. Once the SIP revision is finalized, Alabama's updated transportation conformity procedures are part of the federally approved SIP. That's not just a technicality — it means deviation from those procedures has regulatory consequences, not just administrative ones.
It doesn't change the underlying NAAQS designations. This rulemaking doesn't reclassify any areas in Alabama or alter their attainment status. It only updates the procedural framework for how conformity is determined in areas that are already subject to conformity requirements.
It doesn't affect the emissions budgets. Transportation conformity also requires that regional emissions from the transportation system not exceed the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) established in the SIP. This revision doesn't touch those budgets. If your project-level or regional analysis was already consistent with the applicable budgets, that analysis remains valid.
It updates the interagency consultation roster and procedures. In practice, this is where many organizations will feel the change most directly. The consultation process — who gets notified, when, in what format, and how comments are resolved — is the procedural DNA of a conformity determination. When that changes, MPOs and transportation agencies need to update their internal workflows.
How Transportation Conformity Rulemaking Typically Unfolds: A Comparison
Understanding where this Alabama action fits in the broader regulatory picture helps contextualize what to expect.
| Feature | Standard SIP Revision | Transportation Conformity MOA Update (This Action) |
|---|---|---|
| Primary authority | CAA §110 | CAA §176(c) + 40 CFR Part 93 |
| Who submits | State air agency (ADEM) | State air agency on behalf of interagency group |
| Who is directly affected | Sources, general public | MPOs, DOTs, transit agencies, federal partners |
| EPA action type | Proposed approval | Proposed approval |
| Public comment required | Yes | Yes |
| Enforceability upon approval | Yes — in SIP | Yes — in SIP |
| Effect on emissions limits | May change | Does not change |
| Frequency of revision | Varies | Periodic (often driven by agency changes or federal rule updates) |
The comparison matters because transportation conformity MOA updates are sometimes treated as low-stakes administrative actions. They're not. The procedural framework they establish is the mechanism through which billions of dollars in federal transportation funding flows — or doesn't.
Practical Compliance Guidance: What to Do Now
Here's what I'd recommend for organizations affected by this rulemaking, roughly in order of priority.
Submit comments if you have substantive input. The public comment period is open now. If your organization has operational concerns about the updated consultation procedures, conflict resolution process, or public participation requirements, this is the moment to put them on the record. EPA does read and respond to substantive comments in the final rule preamble. After the comment period closes, the window for influencing the final language is effectively shut.
Pull the updated MOA and compare it to your current workflows. If you're an MPO or state transportation agency, your internal conformity procedures should mirror the MOA. Where they don't, you'll need to update them. Don't wait for the final rule — ADEM submitted this on April 7, 2026, and the updated MOA is already the operative state document.
Update your interagency consultation contact lists. MOA revisions frequently reflect personnel and organizational changes at partner agencies. If the updated MOA identifies new contacts or revised notification pathways, update your internal records now. A conformity determination that goes to the wrong person at the wrong agency doesn't satisfy the consultation requirement.
Review your pending conformity determinations for procedural alignment. If you have a regional or project-level conformity determination in progress, check whether your consultation process aligns with the updated MOA procedures. It's better to identify a gap now than after a determination is challenged.
Flag this for your legal and compliance counsel. Transportation conformity litigation is real. Procedural defects in conformity determinations have been successfully challenged in federal court, including cases where the interagency consultation process was found to be inadequate. The updated MOA, once finalized in the SIP, defines what "adequate" means in Alabama.
A Note on What EPA's Approval Doesn't Guarantee
EPA's approval of the SIP revision means the agency found the submission consistent with applicable federal requirements. It doesn't mean every future conformity determination made under the updated MOA will be litigation-proof. The quality of any individual conformity determination still depends on how well the agencies implement the procedures the MOA establishes.
In my experience working with transportation and air quality agencies across the country, the gap between what an MOA says and what agencies actually do in practice is where conformity determinations become vulnerable. An updated MOA is an opportunity to close that gap — but only if the agencies involved treat it as a real operational update, not just a paperwork change.
Citation Hooks
-
As of July 2, 2026, the EPA has proposed to approve Alabama's updated transportation conformity MOA as a SIP revision under Clean Air Act Section 110(k)(3), replacing a previously approved agreement with updated procedures for interagency consultation, conflict resolution, and public participation.
-
Under 40 CFR 93.105, states with nonattainment or maintenance areas must establish and maintain a formal interagency consultation process as a prerequisite for valid transportation conformity determinations; Alabama's revised MOA is the mechanism through which that requirement is satisfied.
-
Transportation conformity under Clean Air Act Section 176(c) prohibits federal agencies from funding or approving transportation projects in nonattainment or maintenance areas unless those projects conform to the applicable SIP — making MOA procedural updates a compliance-critical development for MPOs, state DOTs, and federal transportation partners.
What This Looks Like Six Months From Now
Once the final rule publishes — likely in Q4 2026 — Alabama's updated conformity MOA becomes part of the federally approved SIP. At that point, the procedural requirements it contains are federal law, not just state policy. MPOs will reference it in their conformity determinations. Federal partners will use it as the baseline for evaluating whether state processes were followed. And if a conformity determination is challenged, the updated MOA is what a court will look at.
The organizations that handle this transition well are the ones that don't treat a final rule publication as the starting line. The comment period, the comparison of current workflows to the updated MOA, the contact list updates — those are the actions that protect the integrity of conformity determinations made between now and finalization, and they're available to you right now.
If you have questions about how this rulemaking affects your specific conformity obligations or want to discuss whether your current processes align with the updated MOA requirements, the team at Certify Consulting is available to help.
Source: EPA Federal Register Notice, Docket No. 2026-13403, published July 2, 2026. Available at federalregister.gov/documents/2026/07/02/2026-13403.
For additional compliance guidance on air quality regulatory submissions, see our SIP compliance resources at certify.consulting.
Last updated: 2026-07-17
Jared Clark
Principal Consultant, Certify Consulting
Jared Clark is the founder of Certify Consulting, helping organizations achieve and maintain compliance with international standards and regulatory requirements.