# Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Implementation Plan Elements

Required Under Sectio n 110(a)(2) for the

1997 and 2008 8-hour Ozone and 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 

# ) NAAQS

Docket ID EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0648

Technical Support Document (TSD)

March 30, 2012

Table of Contents:

I. Introduction and Background

II. SIP elements required under Sectio n 110(a)(2) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone

and 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter NAAQS, the State submittals and EPA

analysis

III. EPA’s Recommendation

IV. References

Appendix A: TSD for Part 8 Ambi ent Air Quality Standards (20.11.8 NMAC)

Appendix B: TSD for Part 60 Prevention of Si gnificant Deterioration (PSD) (20.11.61 NMAC)

I. Introduction

In this technical support document (TSD), EP A is evaluating the submittals from the

Governor and provided by the Albuquerque/Ber nalillo County Air Quality Control Board to

meet the requirements of sect ion 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Ac t (CAA or Act) for the 1997 and

2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 

# ) national ambient air

quality standards (NAAQS or standards). More de tail on these standards, section 110(a)(1) and

(2) of the Act, and the submittals we are review ing to satisfy the section 110(a)(2) requirements

for Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, New Mexico (t he “County” or “BC”) are provided below.

Throughout this document, “we,” “us,” and “our” means EPA.

Section II of this TSD provides a descripti on of each element required under section

110(a)(2) of the Act, the State’s re sponse, and our analysis of the State’s response. Copies of the

BC’s submittals are in the docket for this rulemaking.

Section III of this TSD includes our recomm endation for action on each of the elements

reviewed herein.

Section IV of this TSD contains a list of the guidance documents referenced herein.

Copies of these guidance documents are in the docket for this rulemaking.

Additionally, we are evaluating several other submittals for BC. Appendix A of this TSD

contains EPA’s evaluation for the SIP submittal for Part 8, Ambient Air Quality Standards

(20.11.8 NMAC). Appendix B of this TSD contains EPA’s evaluation for the SIP submittal for

Part 61, Prevention of Significant De terioration (PSD) (20.11.61 NMAC).

Background for this rulemaking

Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act, states are required to submit SIPs that

provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement (the infrastructure) of a new or

revised NAAQS within three y ears following the promulgation of the NAAQS, or within such

# 2 shorter period as EPA may prescr ibe. Section 110(a)(2) lists the specific infrastructure elements

that must be incorporated into the SIPs, including for example, requirements for emission

inventories, new source review (NSR), air pollu tion control measures, an d monitoring that are

designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. Table 1 in Section D of this

rulemaking provides a list of a ll 14 infrastructure elements. 1 

# EPA refers to the requirements of

section 110(a)(2)(A)-(C), (D)(ii), (E)-(H), and (J )-(M) as the “infrastructure” SIPs. Additionally,

EPA refers to the requirements of section 110(a)(2 )(D)(i) as the “interstat e transport” SIPs. EPA

provided separate guidance to states on each type of SIP, infrastructure and interstate transport,

and these actions are on sepa rate tracks and timelines.

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a new NAA QS for ozone (published in volume 62

of the Federal Register (FR), beginning on page 38856, denoted 62 FR 38856) and a new

standard for fine particulate matter (62 FR 38652). For ozone, EPA revised the NAAQS to

provide an 8-hour averaging period (versus the 1-hour averaging peri od for the 1-hour ozone

standard) and set the level of the standard to 0.08 parts per million (ppm). The 1-hour ozone

NAAQS was 0.12 ppm. For particulate matter (P M), EPA promulgated a new 24-hour and new

annual standard for fine PM, which applies to particles with an aerodyna mic diameter less than

or equal to 2.5 micrometers (denoted as PM 2.5 

# ). The annual PM 2.5 

# standard was set at 15

micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 

# ) and the 24-hour standard was set at 65 μ g/m 3 

# . On October

17, 2006, we published revised standa rds for PM (71 FR 61144). For PM 2.5 

# the annual standard

of 15 μ g/m 3 

# was retained, and the 24-hour standard was revised to 35 μ g/m 3 

# . For PM 10 

# the

annual standard was revoked and the 24-hour standard (150 μ g/m 3 

# ) was retained. On March 27,

2008, we published revised standards for ozone (73 FR 16436) of 0.75 ppm to replace the 1997

8-hour standard. For more information on these standards, please see 1997, 2006, and 2008

Federal Register notices (62 FR 38856, 62 FR 38652, 71 FR 61114, and 73 FR 16436).

Thus, states were required to submit such SIPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 

# NAAQS to EPA no later than June 2000. However, intervening litigation over the 1997 8-hour

ozone and PM 2.5 

# NAAQS created uncertainty about how to proceed, and many states did not

provide the required “infrast ructure” SIP submission for th ese newly promulgated NAAQS.

On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice submitted a not ice of intent to su e related to EPA’s

failure to issue findings of failure to submit re lated to the infrastructure requirements for the

1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. EPA entered into a cons ent decree with Earthjustice

which required EPA, among other things, to co mplete a Federal Regi ster notice announcing

EPA’s determinations pursuant to section 110(k)( 1)(B) of the Act as to whether each state had

made complete submissions to meet the requ irements of section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour

ozone NAAQS by December 15, 2007. Subsequently, EP A received an extension of the date to

complete this Federal Register notice until March 17, 2008, based upon agreement to make the

findings with respect to submissions made by January 7, 2008. In accordance with the consent

decree, EPA made completeness findings fo r each state based upon what the Agency had

received from each state as of January 7, 2008. With regard to the 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS, EPA

1 

# Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the 3- year submission deadline of section

110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating n ecessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within 3 years after

promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements

are due pursuant to section 172 of the CAA. These elements are: (1) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to

the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required in part D Title I of the CAA and (2) submissions

required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonatt ainment planning requirements of part D Title I of the

CAA. Therefore, this action does no t cover these specific SIP elements.

# 3 entered into a consent decree with Earthjustice, which required EPA, among other things, to

complete a Federal Register notice announcing EPA’s determinations pursuant to section

110(k)(1)(B) of the Act as to whether each state had made complete submissions to meet the

requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS by October 5, 2008.

On October 2, 2007, we issued “Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and 1997 PM 2.5 

# National Ambient Air Quality

Standards,” Memorandum from William T. Harn ett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division

(AQPD), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS). 2 

# On September 25, 2009, we

issued “Guidance on SIP Elements Required U nder Sections 110(a)(l) and (2) for the 2006 24-

Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 

# ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),” Memorandum

also from William T. Harnett, Director, AQPD, OAQPS. Each of these guidance memos

addresses the SIP elements found in 110(a)(2). However, the October 2, 2007 Guidance does not

address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (d ealing with interstate transpor t), which is being addressed

separately. 3 

# In each of these guidance memos, the guidan ce states that to the extent that existing

SIPs already meet the requirements, stat es need only certify that fact to us.

EPA received the December 11, 2007 “certification letter” cer tifying that the BC portion

of the Infrastructure SIP include s all the requirements in section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act for

implementation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

On March 27, 2008 we published findings c oncerning whether states had made the

110(a)(2) submissions for the 1997 8-hour oz one NAAQS (73 FR 16205) and on October 22,

2008 we published findings concerning whether st ates had made the 110(a)(2) submissions for

the 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS (73 FR 62902). In the March 27, 2008 action, we found that New

Mexico (including BC) addressed all but one of the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the Act

necessary to implement the 1997 ozone NAAQS. As required by section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J),

New Mexico failed to submit a SIP addressing cha nges to the part C Prev ention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) permit program require d by the November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612, page

71699) final rule that made NOx a precursor fo r ozone in the part C regulations at 40 CFR

51.166 and in 40 CFR 52.21. Subsequent to this finding, the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County

PSD program was revised to implement the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by adopting regulations to

implement NO X 

# as a precursor for ozone on Dece mber 22, 2005 and April 13, 2006. These

revisions were submitted to EPA as SIP revisi ons by the Governor of New Mexico on May 24,

2006. EPA SIP-approved the December 22, 2005 PSD revisions on April 26, 2007 (72 FR

20728). In the October 22, 2008 action, we found that New Mexico (i ncluding BC) made

complete SIP submissions to satisfy the requiremen ts of section 110(a)(2) of the Act necessary to

implement the 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

On April 7, 2008 the Office of the Governor su bmitted a letter certifying that the BC SIP

did not comply with all of the requirements in section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act for

implementation of the 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS and outlined what sections of the New Mexico SIP

(including Bernalillo County) needed to be re vised to comply with the 110(a)(1) and (2)

2 

# This and any other guidance documents referenced in this action are in the docket for this rulemaking.

3 

# EPA finalized a FIP on July 6, 2011, to limit emissions of ozone precursors and PM that affect the ability of

downwind states to attain the 1997 ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS (76 FR 48208, August 8, 2011).

Known as EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, it requires the District of Columbia and 28 other states in the

eastern half of the United States must significantly improv e air quality by reducing power plant emissions that cross

state lines and contribute to ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution in other states. For additional information,

please see www.epa.gov/crossstaterule.

# 4 requirements. Attached to the ce rtification letter was supporting in formation that identified the

BC SIP proposed revisions and schedule.

On October 22, 2008, EPA published its “Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State

Implementation Plans Pertaining to th e 1997 Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 

# ) NAAQS” listing

New Mexico (which included Albuquerque/Bernali llo County) as ones of the states making a

complete SIP submission to satisfy Section 110(a)(2) requirements. The submittal became

complete by operation of law.

On May 6, 2008, the Governor submitted a revi sion to the SIP to add a new regulation

20.11.47 to New Mexico’s Administrative Code (N MAC) to meet EPA’s emission inventory

requirements under the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule and the National Emissions

Inventory Input Format which a pplies to Bernalillo County.

On December 15, 2010, the Governor submitted a revision to the SIP to establish

appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and modification

projects become subject to BC’s Prevention of Significant De terioration (PSD) permitting

requirements for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. That submittal was handled separately

from this proposed action (76 FR 59334). EP A proposed approval of the December 15, 2010

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County PSD SIP because EPA made the determination that the SIP

revision is in accordance with section 110 and part C of the Federal Clean Air Act and EPA

regulations regarding PSD permitting for GHGs. The final rule dated December 29, 2011 is

effective January 30, 2012 (see 76 FR 81836).

II. SIP elements required under Section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the

1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter NAAQS, the State submittals, and EPA analysis

The Federally approved SIP for each state is lis ted in Title 40, Part 52, of the US Code of

Federal Regulations (denoted 40 CFR 52). The first section in this subpart for any state is the

“Identification of plan.” The Identification of plan lists the EPA-approved provisions of the SIP

for each state, as provided under section 110 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7410, and 40 CFR 51 to meet

the NAAQS. The status of the BC SIP is provide d in 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG, section 1620.

The Identification of plan for the County is in section 1620; this constitu tes the applicable SIP

for the County, for purposes of the Act.

Per the General Preamble to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (April 16, 1992 at 57

FR 13498), section 110(a)(2) sets forth elements th at a SIP must contain in order to be fully

approved. 4 

# Below we examine the elements required in section 110(a)(2) and the documentation

provided by the County. Where it is useful, we include tables showing the date that the

applicable state rules were approved by EPA into the SIP.

1. Enforceable emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a )(2)(A) requires

SIPs to include enforceable emission limits a nd other control measures, means or techniques,

schedules for compliance and other related matte rs. EPA notes that the specific nonattainment

area plan requirements of secti on 110(a)(2)(I) are subj ect to the timing requirement of section

172 (non-attainment plan provisions).

4 

# The discussion of section 110(a)(2), subsection (A) through (M) begins of p. 13556 of the General Preamble.

# 5 The BC’s response :

States are to include enforceable emission lim itations and other control measures, means,

or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and

auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance as may

be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of the Act.

Bernalillo County‘s enforceable emission limitations and other control measures are

covered in the Air Quality Control Ac t and those provisions of New Mexico

Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20— Environment Protection , Chapter 11—

Albuquerque – Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board , listed at 40 CFR 52.GG,

and source specific provisions codified at 40 CFR 52.GG. Enacted in 1967, the New

Mexico Air Quality Control Act [NM STAT ANN § § 74-2-1 through 74-2-17] allowed

for the establishment of the Albuquerque-Ber nalillo County Air Quality Control Board

(Air Board) as a local board a nd gave it authority to administ er and enforce its air quality

regulations within th e boundaries of Bernalillo Count y. The regulations filed under New

Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC), Title 20— Environment Protection , Chapter 11—

Albuquerque – Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board , were duly adopted by the

Air Board. Where these provisions relate to Section 110 requirements, SIP revisions

have been submitted to EPA for approval. EP A-approved SIP revisions are codified at

40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG. Bernalillo C ounty has an EPA-approved air permitting

program for both major and minor sources , which ensures that all applicable

requirements are included in the source's permit.

EPA analysis : Section 110(a)(2)(A) requi res that all measures and other elements in the

SIP be enforceable. This subsection also auth orizes SIPs to contain certain nontraditional

techniques for reducing pollution – economic incen tives, marketable permits, and auctions of

emissions rights. The EPA reads this language to require even these other means of achieving

reductions to be enforceable. 5



# Enacted in 1967, the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (AQCA) provided for the

establishment of the Albuquerque-Bernalillo C ounty AQCB as a joint local authority, acting on

behalf of both the County of Bernalillo and the City of Albuquerque. Within the exterior

boundary of Bernalillo County, the AQCB is aut horized to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend

and repeal regulations consistent with the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act, and to maintain

national ambient air quality standards and preven t or abate air pollution, including regulations

prescribing air standards, within Bernali llo County. Through the City of Albuquerque’s

Department of Environmental Health, the Albuqu erque Air Quality Division (AQD) serves as

the administrative agency for the AQCB. The AQD is authorized to administer and enforce the

provisions of the New Mexico Air Quality C ontrol Act within the boundary of Bernalillo

County.

Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act, states are required to submit SIPs that

provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement (the infrastructure) of a new or

revised NAAQS within three y ears following the promulgation of the NAAQS, or within such

shorter period as EPA may prescr ibe. Section 110(a)(2) lists the specific infrastructure elements

5 

# General Preamble to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (April 16, 1992 at 57 FR 13498, p. 13556)

# 6 that must be incorporated into the SIPs, including for example, requirements for emission

inventories, new source review (NSR), air pollu tion control measures, an d monitoring that are

designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.

The AQCB has promulgated rules to limit and control emissions of, among other things,

PM, sulfur compounds (including sulfur dioxide or SO2), nitr ogen compounds (including NOx),

and VOCs. These rules include emission limits , control measures, programs for banking and

trading of emissions, emission reduction incen tive programs, permits, fees, and compliance

schedules and are found within Title 20, Chapter 11 of the New Mexico Administrative Code

(denoted 20.11 NMAC).

EPA has found the following from the NMAC as relevant in helping the BC SIP meet the

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A):

Regulation 20.11.1 NMAC General Provisions

Regulation 20.11.40 NMAC Source Registration

Regulation 20.11.41 NMAC Authority to Construct

Regulation 20.11.42 NMAC Operating Permits

Regulation 20.11.46 NMAC Western Back stop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program

Regulation 20.11.60 NMAC Permitting in Nonattainment Areas

Regulation 20.11.61 NMAC Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

Regulation 20.11.63 NMAC New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)

Regulation 20.11.64 NMAC Emission Sta ndards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

Regulation 20.11.1 provides for the genera l permit requirements and permit fees.

Regulation 20.11.40 provides for source registrations. Regulation 20.11.41 provides for stack

height limitations, construction permit applications and conditions, and relocation permits.

Regulation 20.11.42 addresses operating permit requirements and conditions. Regulation

20.11.60 identifies the requirements for sources lo cated in nonattainme nt areas. Regulation

20.11.60 identifies the applicability of PSD requirements and describes the control technology

required to be installed by applicable sour ces. Regulation 20.11.63 describes the new source

performance standards that stationary sources must meet. Regulation 20.11.64 provides for the

emission standards for hazardous air contaminants.

EPA has also found the following from Title 20 of the NMAC as relevant in helping the

BC SIP meet the requirement s of section 110(a)(2)(A):

Regulation 20.11.2 NMAC Fees

Regulation 20.11.3 NMAC Transportation Conformity

Regulation 20.11.4 NMAC General Conformity

Regulation 20.11.5 NMAC Visible Air Contaminants

Regulation 20.11.6 NMAC Emergency Action Plan

Regulation 20.11.7 NMAC Variance Procedure

Regulation 20.11.8 NMAC Ambient Air Quality Standards

Regulation 20.11.20 NMAC Fugitive Dust Control

Regulation 20.11.21 NMAC Open Burning

# 7 Regulation 20.11.22 NMAC Wood Burning

Regulation 20.11.23 NMAC Strato spheric Ozone Protection

Regulation 20.11.43 NMAC St ack Height Requirements

Regulation 20.11.46 NMAC Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Inventory Requirements

Regulation 20.11.47 NMAC Emissions Inventory Requirements

Regulation 20.11.48 NMAC Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting

Regulation 20.11.49 NMAC Excess Emissions

Regulation 20.11.62 NMAC Acid Rain

Regulation 20.11.65 NMAC Vola tile Organic Compounds

Regulation 20.11.66 NMAC Process Equipment

Regulation 20.11.67 NMAC Equipment, Emissions, Limitations

Regulation 20.11.68 NMAC Incine rators and Crematories

Regulation 20.11.69 NMAC Pathological Waste Destructors

Regulation 20.11.71 NMAC Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

Regulation 20.11.80 NMAC Adjudicat ory Procedures - Enforcement

Regulation 20.11.81 NMAC Adjudicat ory Procedures – Air Board

Regulation 20.11.82 NMAC Rulemaki ng Procedures – Air Board

Regulation 20.11.90 NMAC Administration, Enforcement, Inspection

Regulation 20.11.100 NMAC Motor Vehi cle Inspection - Decentralized

Regulation 20.11.101 NMAC Motor Vehi cle Inspection - Centralized

Regulation 20.11.102 NMAC Oxygenated Fuels

Regulation 20.11.103 NMAC Motor Vehicle Visible Emissions

Regulation 20.11.104 NMAC Emission Sta ndards for New Motor Vehicles

We conclude that BC’s SIP meets the requi rements of section 110( a)(2)(A) for the 1997

and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

Table 1: BC rules relevant to meeting sect ion 110(a)(2)(A), as determined by EPA:

Relevant Section of BC’s SIP EPA Approval/Federal Register

Part 1 (20.11.1 NMAC) General Provisions

Part 3 (20.11.3 NMAC) Tran sportation Conformity

Part 4 (20.11.4 NMAC) General Conformity

Part 5 (20.11.5 NMAC) Visi ble Air Contaminants

Part 6 (20.11.6 NMAC) Emergency Action Plan

Part 7 (20.11.7 NMAC) Variance Procedure

Part 8 (20.11.8 NMAC) Ambient AQ Standards

Part 20 (20.11.20 NMAC) Fugitive Dust Control

Part 21 (20.11.21 NMAC) Open Burning

Part 22 (20.11.22 NMAC) Woodburning

Part 40 (20.11.40 NMAC) Source Registration

Part 41 (20.11.41 NMAC) Authority to Construct

Part 43 (20.11.43 NMAC) Stack Height Req’s

Part 49 (20.11.49 NMAC) Excess Emissions

Part 60 (20.11.60 NMAC) Permitting in NA Areas

Part 61 (20.11.61 NMAC) PSD July 21, 2005 at 70 FR 41963

April 22, 2010 at 75 FR 20922

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

May 31, 2006 at 71 FR 30805

May 31, 2006 at 71 FR 30805

April 1, 2009 at 74 FR 14731

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728

April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728

# 8 Relevant Section of BC’s SIP EPA Approval/Federal Register

Part 63 (20.11.63 NMAC) NSPS

Part 64 (20.11.64 NMAC) Emission Standards for

HAPs

Part 65 (20.11.65 NMAC) Volatile Organic

Compounds

Part 66 (20.11.66 NMAC) Process Equipment

Part 67 (20.11.67 NMAC) Equipment, Emissions,

Limitations

Part 68 (20.11.68 NMAC) Incinerators and

Crematories

Part 90 (20.11.90 NMAC) Source Surveillance

Part 100 (20.11.100 NMAC) Motor Vehicle

Inspection – Decentralized

Part 102 (20.11.102 NMAC) Oxygenated Fuels

Part 103 (20.11.103 NMAC) Motor Vehicle Visible

Emissions December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314\

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

July 21,2005 at 70 FR 41963

February 11, 2010 at 75 FR 6813

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

2. Ambient air quality monitoring and data analysis system : Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires

SIPs to include provisions for establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors,

collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to EPA upon

request.

The BC’s response :

States are to establis h and operate devices, methods, systems, and procedures to monitor,

compile, and analyze ambient air quality da ta and to provide the data to EPA.

Bernalillo County has an extensive air qua lity monitoring network operated by the Air

Quality Division that collects air quality data that are compiled, analyzed, and reported to

EPA. The Air Quality Division’s website c ontains up-to-date information about air

quality monitoring, including a descripti on of the network and information about

monitoring of ozone and PM 2.5 

# , as well as the daily Air Quality Index (AQI). See

http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/ with links to all elem ents of the program.

In addition to the current network of federa lly-approved reference monitors that measure

PM 2.5 

# mass, the Air Quality Division also operates a continuous PM 2.5 

# mass monitor.

The Air Quality Division collects speciation filters every 6 th 

# day from this prospective

New Mexico NCore site in Bernalillo Count y, and then sends these filters to the EPA

national contractor, RTI for analysis.

The Air Quality Division is committed to managing the grant and City of Albuquerque

match resources so that the air quality monito ring network continues to comply with EPA

requirements and quarterly reports of compile d and analyzed air qua lity monitoring data

are provided to EPA. Current resource le vels do not allow for any expansion of the

network or program services.

# 9 EPA analysis : EPA has found the following from Title 20 – Environmental Protection, Chapter

11 as relevant in demonstrating that the BC SIP satisfies the requirements of section

110(a)(2)(B):

Chapter 11 Albuquerque/Bernalil lo County Air Quality Control Board

Part 8 (20.11.8 NMAC): Air Quality Standards and Increments

Part 8 of Chapter 11 enumerates the federal and state primary and secondary ambient air

quality standards. These ambient air quality st andards are consistent with the NAAQS for ozone

and PM 2.5 

# which EPA promulgated on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38651). This rule was approved by

EPA for adoption into the SIP and is also part of this rulemaking. See Table 2.

Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to include provisions for establishment and operation

of ambient air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making

these data available to EPA upon request. The AQD operates and maintains a network of air

quality monitors throughout Bernalillo County; da ta are collected, results are quality assured and

the data are submitted to EPA’s Air Quality System 6 

# on a quarterly basis. The air quality

surveillance network undergoes annual review by EPA. EP A evaluated Albuquerque’s 2011

Annual Monitoring Network Plan (AAMNP ) and approved it on January 13, 2012. 7 

# The AQD’s

AAMNP addresses each of the criteria pol lutants, including 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 

# and thus

allows the AQD to measure the BC air quality for compliance with the 1997 and 2008 8-hour

ozone standards, and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# standards.

The AQD’s air quality surveilla nce network consists of ni ne stations that measure

ambient concentrations of the criteria pollutants for which standards have been established in 40

CFR Part 50 (46 FR 2655), including ozone and PM 2.5 

# . The AQD works closely with EPA

Region 6 and the New Mexico Air Quality Bureau to ensure that its monitoring network meets

the requirements for ozone monitoring networks at 40 CFR part 58 Appendix D. The AQD’s

website (www.cabq.gov/airquality ) and EPA’s AirNow website (www.airnow.gov ) contain upto-date information about air quality monito ring, including a descri ption of the network,

information about monitoring of ozone and PM 2.5 

# , and the daily Air Quality Index (AQI)

.



# In summary, BC meets the requirements to establish, operate, and maintain an ambient

air monitoring network, collect a nd analyze the monitoring data, and make the data available to

EPA upon request. Based on this analysis, we conc lude that the BC SIP meets the requirements

of section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

Table 2: BC rules relevant to meeting sect ion 110(a)(2)(B), as determined by EPA:

Relevant Section of BC’s SIP EP A Approval/Federal Register

Part 8 (20.11.8 NMAC) Ambient Air Quality

Standards May 31, 2006 at 71 FR 30805

6 

# The Air Quality System (AQS) is EPA's repository of ambient air quality data. AQS stores data from over 10,000

monitors, 5,000 of which are currently ac tive. State, Local and Tribal agencies collect the data and submit it to AQS

on a periodic basis.

7 

# A copy of EPA’s evaluation and approval is in the docket for this rulemaking.

# 10 3. Program for enforcement of control measures : Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to

include a program providing for enforcement of th e measures described in subparagraph (A), and

the regulation of the modification and constructio n of any stationary source within the areas

covered by the SIP as necessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved, including a permit

program as required in part C of the Act.

The BC's response :

Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to incl ude a program providing fo r enforcement of all

SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or modified stationary sources to

meet Prevention of Significant Deteri oration (PSD) and nonattainment NSR

requirements.

The Air Quality Division commits to the continued enforcement of control measures for

which it has jurisdiction and the continue d operation of permitting and enforcement

programs with respect to m easures required by the CAA.

Evidence of the Air Quality Division’s commitment, is shown by its submittal of

proposed changes to the current PSD and NNS R rules as well as this submittal of a

complete infrastructure SIP to address PM 2.5 

# and ozone. These amendments will cure the

deficiency noted by EPA requiring that NO X 

# be delineated as a precursor to ozone

formation.

EPA analysis : EPA has found the following from the NM AC as relevant in helping the BC SIP

meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

Regulation 20.11.1 NMAC General Provisions

Regulation 20.11.41 NMAC Authority to Construct

Regulation 20.11.42 NMAC Operating Permits

Regulation 20.11.60 NMAC Permitting in Nonattainment Areas

Regulation 20.11.61 NMAC Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

Regulation 20.11.63 NMAC New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)

EPA has found the following sections of NMAC as relevant in showing the BC SIP

satisfies the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

Regulation 20.11.3 NMAC Transportation Conformity

Regulation 20.11.4 NMAC General Conformity

Regulation 20.11.5 NMAC Visible Air Contaminants

Regulation 20.11.6 NMAC Emergency Action Plan

Regulation 20.11.7 NMAC Variance Procedure

Regulation 20.11.8 NMAC Ambient Air Quality Standards

Regulation 20.11.20 NMAC Fugitive Dust Control

Regulation 20.11.21 NMAC Open Burning

Regulation 20.11.22 NMAC Wood Burning

Regulation 20.11.23 NMAC Strato spheric Ozone Protection

Regulation 20.11.43 NMAC St ack Height Requirements

# 11 Regulation 20.11.46 NMAC Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Inventory Requirements

Regulation 20.11.47 NMAC Emissions Inventory Requirements

Regulation 20.11.48 NMAC Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting

Regulation 20.11.49 NMAC Excess Emissions

Regulation 20.11.62 NMAC Acid Rain

Regulation 20.11.65 NMAC Vola tile Organic Compounds

Regulation 20.11.66 NMAC Process Equipment

Regulation 20.11.67 NMAC Equipment, Emissions, Limitations

Regulation 20.11.68 NMAC Incine rators and Crematories

Regulation 20.11.69 NMAC Pathological Waste Destructors

Regulation 20.11.71 NMAC Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

Regulation 20.11.80 NMAC Adjudicat ory Procedures - Enforcement

Regulation 20.11.81 NMAC Adjudicat ory Procedures – Air Board

Regulation 20.11.82 NMAC Rulemaki ng Procedures – Air Board

Regulation 20.11.90 NMAC Administration, Enforcement, Inspection

EPA has found the following from 595 OAC as relevant in showing the BC SIP satisfies

the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

Regulation 20.11.100 NMAC Motor Vehi cle Inspection - Decentralized

Regulation 20.11.101 NMAC Motor Vehi cle Inspection - Centralized

Regulation 20.11.102 NMAC Oxygenated Fuels

Regulation 20.11.103 NMAC Motor Vehicle Visible Emissions

Regulation 20.11.104 NMAC Emission Sta ndards for New Motor Vehicles

The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act provides the AQCB with enforcement

authority and BC has an EPA-approved air permitting program for both major and minor

sources. The administrative proceedings for enforcement actions, including administrative

compliance orders and determination of pena lty, are provided in 20.11.90 NMAC (February 4,

2010 at 75 FR 5698). The rules in 20.11 NMAC addr ess allowable emission rates, compliance,

control technology requirements, control schedules, monitoring and testing requirements, and

reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Thes e clarify the boundaries beyond which regulated

entities in BC can expect enforcement action.

For example, 20.11.20 NMAC addresses fugitive dust control and has provisions for

assessment of administrative enforcement actions a nd administrative penalties for violations of

permit terms and conditions, along with injuncti ve relief (SIP-approved April 1, 2009 at 74 FR

14731). The permitting rules for BC at 20.11.41, 20.11.42, 20.11.60 and 20.11.61 NMAC are

governed by Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5, known as the Joint Air Quality Control Board

Ordinance, provides the AQD with authority to enforce permitti ng provisions, and provide for

assessment of administrative enforcement actions a nd administrative penalties for violations of

those permit terms and conditions, and injunctiv e relief (Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5,

Sections 9-18). The Albuquerque/Bernalillo Co unty AQCB and AQD have the necessary legal

authority to have reasonable requirements for measuring and monitoring air emissions and to

require owners and operators of sources to ma ke and maintain records of the emissions.

Therefore, the Albuquerque/Bernalillo Count y AQCB and AQD have the requisite legal

# 12 authority to implement and enforce the minor and major permit revision procedures in

accordance with the requir ements of the CAA.

To meet the requirement for having a program for the regulation of the modification and

construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure

that NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required by part C and part D of the

CAA, generally, the State is re quired to have SIP-approved PSD, Nonattainment, and Minor

NSR permitting programs adequate to implement the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997

and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. As discussed previously, we are not evaluating nonattainment-related

provisions, such as the nonattainment NSR program required by part D in 110(a)(2)(C) and

measures for attainment required by section 110(a)(2 )(I), as part of the infrastructure SIPs for

these four NAAQS because these submittals are re quired beyond the date (3 years from NAAQS

promulgation) that section 110 infras tructure submittals are required.

PSD programs apply in areas that are meeti ng the NAAQS or are uncl assifiable, referred

to as areas in attainment. PSD applies to new major sources and major mo difications at existing

sources. The BC PSD program, f ound at 20.11.61 NMAC, was initia lly approved into the SIP on

December 21, 1993, effective January 20, 1994 at 58 FR 67330. Subsequent revisions to the BC

PSD program were approved into the SI P on April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728. The BC has

authority to issue PSD permits and enfo rce them under its approved PSD SIP.

PSD requirements for 1997 and 2008 Ozone NAAQS:

To implement section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 and 2008 NAAQS, a state must have

updated its PSD rules to address NO X 

# as an ozone precursor (70 FR 71612). On May 24, 2006

and August 16, 2010, the Governor submitted the provisions for NO X 

# as a precursor consistent

with EPA’s November 29, 2005, Phase 2 rule fo r the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612) as part

of its revisions to 20.11.61 PSD NMAC. Based on our review and analysis of the May 24, 2006

and August 16, 2010 submittals, EPA is proposing to approve the following revisions to the

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County PSD SIP as n ecessary to implement the provision for NO X 

# as a

precursor to ozone consistent with 70 FR 71612: revisions to 20.11.61.7.HH Major Modification

adopted April 13, 2006 and submitted May 24, 2006, revisions to 20.11.61.7.YY Significant, and

20.11.61.27 Table 2 – Significant Emission Rates adopted July 14, 2010 and submitted August

16, 2010; revisions to 20.11.61.7.VV Re gulated New Source Review Pollutant adopted July 12,

2010 and submitted August 16, 2010; and revisions to 20.11.61.28 Table 3 – Significant

Monitoring Concentrations adopted on Apr il 13, 2006 and July 14, 2010 and submitted on May

24, 2006 and August 16, 2010, respectively. Please s ee section II.B of the proposed notice and

this TSD accompanying this rulemaking for additional information about how the May 24, 2006

and August 16, 2010 PSD SIP revisions satisfy section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 and 2008 8-

hour ozone NAAQS.

PM 2.5 

# Permitting: To implement section 110( a)(2)(C) for the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS, a state must provide revisions to implement the NAAQS, due May 16, 2011 (May 16,

2008 Federal Register, 73 FR 28321). On July 14, 2010 the AQCB adopted these revisions

effective August 30, 2010. On August 16, 2010, the G overnor submitted necessary revisions to

the BC SIP to amend the PSD program to meet the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS

implementation requirements. EPA is proposing to approve the following revisions to the BC

PSD SIP adopted on July 14, 2010 and submitted on August 16, 2010 in today’s action: revisions

to 20.11.61.7.YY Significant and 20.11.61.27 Table 2 – Significant Emission Rates; revisions to

20.11.61.7.VV Regulated NSR Pollutant ; and revisions to 20.11.61.18(H) – Monitoring

Requirements Air Quality Analysis. Please see s ections I.C and II.B of the notice and Appendix

# 13 B of this TSD for more information on our appr oval of revisions to the PSD Program for PM 2.5 

# permitting.

GHG PSD Permitting:

The Tailoring Rule established thresholds that phase in the applicability of PSD

requirements to GHG sources, starting with the largest GHG emitters, and were designed to

relieve the overwhelming administrative burdens and costs associated with the dramatic increase

in permitting burden that would have result ed from applying PSD requirements to GHG

emission increases at or above only the mass-based statutory thre sholds of 100/250 tons per year

generally applicable to all PSD-regulated pollutants starti ng on January 2, 2011. However, EPA

recognized that even after it finalized the Tailoring Rule, many SIPs with approved PSD

programs would, until they were revised, continue to apply PSD at the stat utory thresholds, even

though the States would not have sufficient reso urces to implement the PSD program at those

levels. EPA consequently implemented its “PSD SIP Narrowing Rule” and narrowed its approval

of those provisions of previously approved SI Ps that apply PSD to GHG emissions increases

from sources emitting GHGs below the Tailoring Rule thresholds (75 FR 82536, December 30,

2010). Through the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA w ithdrew its previous approvals of those

programs to the extent the SIPs apply PSD to increases in GHG emissions from GHG-emitting

sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. Th e portions of the PSD programs regulating GHGs

from GHG-emitting sources with emission increases at or above the Tailoring Rule thresholds

remained approved. The effect of EPA narrowing its approval in this manner is that the

provisions of previously appr oved SIPs that apply PSD to GHG emissions increases from

sources emitting GHGs below the Tailoring Rule thresholds have the status of having been

submitted by the State but not yet acted upon by EPA (75 FR 82536).

On December 15, 2010, the Governor submitted a revision to the SIP to establish

appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and modification

projects become subject to BC’s PSD permitti ng requirements for GHG emissions. The BC PSD

SIP revision to address GHGs was approved by the EPA on December 29, 2011 (76 FR 81836).

Thus, the GHG emission thresholds for PSD appli cability set forth in EPA’s Tailoring Rule,

ensuring that smaller GHG sources emitting less than these thresholds are not subject to section

110 of the CAA were approved.

EPA has determined that Albuquerque/Berna lillo County’s minor NSR program adopted

pursuant to section 110(a)(2)( C) of the Act regulated emissions of ozone and PM 2.5 

# and their

precursors. EPA has also been made aware of con cerns that certain provisions of some states’

minor NSR programs adopted pursuan t to section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act ma y not meet all the

requirement s found in EPA’s regulations im plementing that provi sion. See 40 CFR 51.160 –

51.164. EPA previously approved Albuquerque/Berna lillo County’s minor NSR program in to

the SIP (see 69 FR 78314). Sin ce then, Albuquerque/Bernalillo County and EPA have relied

upon Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s existing minor NSR program to assure that new and

modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting program do not interfere with

attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 and 2008 ozone and 1997 and

2006 PM 2.5 

# standards with respect to th e general requirement in sec tion 110(a)(2)(C) to include a

program in the SIP that regulat es the modification and construc tion of any stationary source

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved.

Minor Source Permitting:

# 14 Section 110(a)(2)(C) creates a “general duty on States to include a program in their SIP

that regulates the modification a nd construction of any stationary source as necessary to assure

that the NAAQS are achieved” (70 FR 71612, 71677). EPA provides states with a “broad degree

of discretion” in implem enting their minor NSR progr ams (71 FR 48696, 48700, August 21,

2006). The “considerably less detailed” regulatio ns for minor NSR are provided in 40 CFR

51.160 through 51.164. We approved the Albuquerque /Bernalillo County minor NSR program

on December 30, 2004. We have determined th at the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County minor

NSR regulations at 20.11.41 NMAC adopted pur suant to section 110( a)(2)(C) regulated

emissions of ozone and its precursors and PM. See 69 FR 78312. Albuquerque/Bernalillo County

and EPA have relied upon the BC SIP-approved ex isting minor NSR program to ensure that new

and modified sources not captured by the major NSR or PSD permitting programs do not

interfere with attainment a nd maintenance of the NAAQS.

In this action, EPA is proposing to a pprove Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s

Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 and 2008 ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# standards with respect

to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP that regulates

the modification and construction of any stationary source necessa ry to assure that the NAAQS

are achieved. EPA did not reevaluate Albuquerque /Bernalillo County’s minor source program at

this time, and therefore, is not proposing to approve or disapprove the Albuquerque/Bernalillo

County existing minor NSR SIP program itself to th e extent that it may be inconsistent with

EPA’s regulations governing this program. EPA believes that a num ber of states may have minor

NSR provisions that are contrary to the existing EPA regulations for this program. EPA intends

to work with states to reconc ile state minor NSR SI P programs with EPA’s regulatory provisions

for the program. The statutory requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable

flexibility in designing minor NS R programs, and EPA believes it may be time to revisit the

regulatory requirements for this pr ogram in order to give the st ates an appropriate level of

flexibility to design programs th at meet their particular air quality concerns, while assuring

reasonable consistency across the country in pr otecting the NAAQS with respect to new and

modified minor sources.

Based on the above, we are proposing that the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP meets

the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) fo r the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and

2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

Table 3: BC rules relevant to meeting sect ion 110(a)(2)(C), as determined by EPA:

Relevant Section of BC’s SIP EPA Approval/Federal Register Citation

Part 1 (20.11.1 NMAC) General Provisions

Part 3 (20.11.3 NMAC) Transportation

Conformity

Part 4 (20.11.4 NMAC) General Conformity

Part 5 (20.11.5 NMAC) Visible Air

Contaminants

Part 6 (20.11.6 NMAC) Emergency Action Plan

Part 7 (20.11.7 NMAC) Variance Procedure

Part 8 (20.11.8 NMAC) Ambient AQ Standards

Part 20 (20.11.20 NMAC) Fugitive Dust Control

Part 21 (20.11.21 NMAC) Open Burning July 21, 2005 at 70 FR 41963

April 22, 2010 at 75 FR 20922

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

May 31, 2006 at 71 FR 30805

May 31, 2006 at 71 FR 30805

April 1, 2009 at 74 FR 14731

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

# 15 Part 22 (20.11.22 NMAC) Woodburning

Part 40 (20.11.40 NMAC) Source Registration

Part 41 (20.11.41 NMAC) Authority to

Construct

Part 43 (20.11.43 NMAC) Stack Height Req’s

Part 49 (20.11.49 NMAC) Excess Emissions

Part 60 (20.11.60 NMAC) Permitting in

Nonattainment Areas

Part 61 (20.11.61 NMAC) PSD

Part 63 (20.11.63 NMAC) NSPS

Part 64 (20.11.64 NMAC) Emission Standards

for HAPs

Part 65 (20.11.65 NMAC) Volatile Organic

Compounds

Part 66 (20.11.66 NMAC) Process Equipment

Part 67 (20.11.67 NMAC) Equipment,

Emissions, Limitations (includes SO 2 

# and NO X 

# )

Part 68 (20.11.68 NMAC) Incinerators and

Crematories

Part 90 (20.11.90 NMAC) Source Surveillance

Part 100 (20.11.100 NMAC) Motor Vehicle

Inspection – Decentralized

Part 102 (20.11.102 NMAC) Oxygenated Fuels

Part 103 (20.11.103 NAMC) Motor Vehicle

Visible Emissions December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728

April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

July 21,2005 at 70 FR 41963

February 11, 2010 at 75 FR 6813

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

4. Interstate transport, and interstate and international pollution abatement : Section

110(a)(2)(D) is divided into two components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110( a)(2)(D)(ii). Section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) addresses in terstate transport and requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting

any source or other type of emi ssions activity in one state from contributing significantly to

nonattainment, interfering with ma intenance of the NAAQS in another state, or from interfering

with measures required to prevent significant deterior ation of air quality or to protect visibility in

another state. Section 110(a)(2)(D )(ii) addresses interstate and international pollution abatement,

and requires SIPs to include provisions insuri ng compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the

Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.

The BC’s response :

A separate SIP was required to fulfill thes e requirements (See Docket ID EPA-R006-OAR-2007-

119.)

EPA analysis : Section 110(a)(2)(D ) has two components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D )(i) requires SIPs to incl ude provisions prohibiting any

source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contri buting significantly to

nonattainment, interfering with ma intenance of the NAAQS in another state, or from interfering

with measures required to prevent significant deterior ation of air quality or to protect visibility in

# 16 another state. Section 110(a)(2 )(D)(ii) requires SIPs to includ e provisions insuring compliance

with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and internati onal pollution abatement.

PSD and interstate transport, pursu ant to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): One of the four prongs

in section 110(a)(2)(D)( i) requires a SIP to contain adequa te provisions prohibiting emissions

that interfere with any other st ate’s required measures to prevent significant deterioration of its

air quality. This is the only el ement of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on which EP A is proposing action in this

rulemaking. EPA’s 2006 Guidance made recommendations for SIP submissions to meet this

requirement with respect to both th e 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

The 2006 Guidance states that the PSD permitting program is the primary measure that

each state must include to prevent interference with any other state’s required measures to

prevent significant deterioration of its air quality in accordance with section 110(a )(2)(D)(i)(II).

As discussed previously in this rulemaking with regards to section 110(a)(2)(C) and in

this TSD, the Albuquerque/Berna lillo County PSD program is in the SIP and meets the basic

requirements for implementing the Ozone and PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. We are proposing to approve the

portion of the submission from August 16, 2010 that has adequately addressed section

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of th e CAA, for the element that requires that the SIP prohibit air pollutant

emissions from sources within a state from in terfering with measures required to prevent

significant deterioration of air quality in any other state.

Consistent with EPA’s November 29, 2005, Phase 2 rule for the 1997 8-hour ozone

NAAQS, the State submitted SIP re visions to modify its PSD provi sions to address NOx as an

ozone precursor. Also consistent with EPA’s 2008 PM 2.5 

# NSR rule, the State submitted SIP

revisions to modify its PSD provisions to adequately implement the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. EPA is approving these revisions and they have been discussed previously in this

notice. EPA believes that the PSD revision for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS that makes NOx

a precursor for ozone for PSD purposes, and the PSD revisions to implement the 2008 PM 2.5 

# NSR rule, taken together with the PSD SIP and the interstate transport SIP satisfies the

requirements of the third element of secti on 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone

and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS, i.e., there will be no inte rference with any other state’s

required PSD measures.

We are proposing to determine that emissi ons from sources in Albuquerque/Bernalillo

County do not interfere with measures required to prevent significant deteri oration of air quality

for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS in any other state. The

remaining three elements of section 110(a)(2 )(D)(i): (1) do not signi ficantly contribute to

nonattainment of the relevant NAAQS in any other state for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the

2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS ; 2) interferen ce with the maintenance of th e NAAQS in any other state

for all four NAAQS ; (3) interference with measur es required to protect visibility in any other

state will be evaluated and addressed in future rulemakings. This rulemaking action is being

taken under section 110(a) of the CAA.

In a prior action, EPA approved Albuquerque /Bernalillo County SIP revisions that

addressed the requirements of section (110)(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA that emissions from

sources in Albuquerque/Bernalillo County do not si gnificantly contribute to nonattainment of the

1997 8-hour ozone and 1997 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS in any other state (75 FR 68447). The final rule was

effective December 8, 2010. The SIP revision demonstrated that air pollutant emissions from

sources within Albuquerque/Bernalillo County do not significan tly contribute to nonattainment

of the relevant NAAQS in any other state for thos e pollutants. The remaining three elements of

# 17 section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): (1) do not significantly contribute to nonattainment of the relevant

NAAQS in any other state for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS; (2)

interference with the maintena nce of the NAAQS in any other state for all four NAAQS; (3)

interference with measures required to protect visi bility in any other stat e will be evaluated and

addressed in future rulemakings.

Interstate and international pollution abatem ent, pursuant to sec tion 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) :

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act requires compliance with s ections 115 and 126 of the Act,

relating to interstate and in ternational pollution abatemen t. Section 115(a) addresses

endangerment of public health or welfare in foreign countries from pollution emitted in the

United States. Pursuant to section 115, the Administ rator has neither received nor issued a formal

notification that emissions from Albuquerque/Ber nalillo County are endangering public health or

welfare in a foreign country. Se ction 126(a) of the Ac t requires new or modified sources to

notify neighboring states of pot ential impacts from such sour ces. Albuquerque/Bernalillo County

also has no pending obligations und er section 126 of the Act.

EPA is proposing to find that the Alb uquerque/Bernalillo County SIP meets the

requirements of section 110(a)(2 )(D)(ii) of the Act for the 1997 and 2008 ozone and 1997 and

2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

5. Adequate resources and authority : Section 110(a)(2)(E) requi res states to provide for

adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority unde r state law to carry out its SIP and related

issues.

The BC’s response :

Funding and personnel resources for carrying out the programs of the SIP to demonstrate

attainment of the PM 2.5 

# and 8-hour ozone standards ar e provided by the City of

Albuquerque and EPA. Budgets are approved annually by the City Council. The annual

budget process provides a periodic update that enables the Air Quality Division to adjust

funding and personnel needs. The annual budge t appropriations proc ess undertaken by

the Mayor and the City Council, enables the Ai r Quality Division to present a request for

resources required to meet the ma ndates of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

The Clean Air Act authorizes the federal government to provi de grants for up to 60% of

the cost of state and local ai r quality programs, while stat es must provide a 40% match

( Section 105 of the CAA).

The Air Quality Division assures EPA that it has adequate personnel and funding to carry

out the SIP.

Legal Authority

EPA delegated to the Air Board and the Air Qu ality Division, overall regulatory authority

for Bernalillo County’s air quality program s, and will undertake these air pollution

control programs if the EPA determines that the Air Board or the Air Quality Division

has failed to meet their responsibilities assi gned to them by the CAA or by any other

provision in State law. Enabli ng legislation for this arrange ment is found within the New

# 18 Mexico Air Quality Control Act (Air Ac t) and Albuquerque and Bernalillo County

Ordinances.

The Air Quality Division, as agent for the Air Board, is not prohibited by any provision

of law from carrying out the SIP.

(ii) A majority of its state board memb ers represent the publ ic interest and do

not derive a significant portion of their income from entities that are subject to

permits, and that conflicts of interest of members be adequately disclosed

Public interest requirements and safeguards against conflict of interest are codified at:

City of Albuquerque Ordi nances, 2-6-1-3(A)(4):

“No person shall be a member of more than one public board, commissions or committee

at any one time”; and at:

COA 9-5-1-3(B)(4):

“Nominations and appointments to the Board shall be made as follows: (a) At least a

majority of the membership of the Board sh all be individuals w ho represent the public

interest and meet the requirements of the st ate and federal guidelines set forth in the New

Mexico Air Quality Control Act, as amended, and the CAA, 42 U.S.C.A. Section 7401, et

seq., as amended. Further, to the extent that the requirement does not conflict with this

division (a), Board members wi ll be selected for their c oncerns about, and commitment

to, the local ambient air quality. Therefore, selections may be made from a broad range

of persons representing the public interest and who are experienced or trained in

disciplines including natural sciences, humanities, social studies, finance, medicine and

health, engineering or physics, law, law enforcement, education, business and industry.

(b) No person employed on a full time basis by ei ther the city or the county shall be a

member of the Board. (c) City-appointed memb ers shall be residents of the city and

county-appointed members shall be residents of the county.” And at:

COA 9-5-1-3(E):

“Any member of the Board who has a conflict of interest regarding a matter before the

Board shall disqualify himself or herself from the discussion and shall abstain from the

vote on such matter. A conflict of interest means any intere st which may yi eld, directly

or indirectly any monetary or other material benefit to the Board member or the

member’s spouse or minor child.”

These ordinances were incorporated into the SIP by EPA on 6/ 1/1999, to address CAA

Section 128 requirements on representing the pu blic and conflicts of interest. These

ordinances are still in effect a nd have not been revised since 1999.

and at:

Air Board Rule, 20.11.81.12.B.(3) NMAC:

“(3) Board member and hearing officer disqualification-re cusal-withdrawal:

(a) A board member or a heari ng officer shall not perform any

function authorized by 20.11.81 NMAC regardin g any matter in which a board member

or a hearing officer:

(i) has a personal bias or prej udice concerning a party or the

outcome of a proceeding;

# 19 (ii) has personal knowledge of disputed facts concerning the

proceeding;

(iii) is related to a party within the third degree of

relationship;

(iv) is an officer, director or trustee of a party or interested

participant in the proceeding;

(v) has a financial interest in th e proceeding or facility that is

the subject of the proceeding or has any other conflict of interest; or

(vi) has performed prosecutorial or investigativ e functions in

connection with a permitting acti on at issue in the proceeding.

(b) In making its decision regarding whether a board member or

hearing officer should be disqualified or recuse himself or herself, the board and hearing

officer may rely on appl icable legal authority

(c) Disqualification, re cusal and withdrawal:

(i) Any party, for a cause included in Subparagraph (a) of

Paragraph (3) of Subsection B of 20.11.81.12 NM AC, may file a motion requesting the

disqualification of a board member at any time before the final order is filed, or

requesting the disqualification of a hearing officer at any tim e prior to the completion of

the evidentiary hearing.

(ii) If a motion is filed pu rsuant to Paragraph (3) of

Subsection B of 20.11.81.12 NMAC, and the mo tion asks that a board member be

disqualified, then, within five days after the hearing officer and the challenged board

member receive the motion, the challenged boa rd member may respond to the motion in

writing. Within 10 days after the hearing officer and the challenged board member

receive the motion regarding the challenged boa rd member, the hearing officer shall file a

recommended decision. The board shall vote on the motion. However, the vote of the

board shall not include the vote of the chal lenged board member. If the vote of the

majority of a quorum of the board, not including the vote of the challenged board

member, determines that the challenged board member is disqualif ied, the disqualified

board member will not participat e in the proceeding thereafter.

(iii) If a motion is filed pu rsuant to Paragraph (3) of

Subsection B of 20.11.81.12 NMAC, and the moti on asks that a hearing officer be

disqualified, then, within 10 days after the hearing officer receives the motion, the

hearing officer may respond to the motion in writing. The board shall vote on the

motion. If the vote of the majo rity vote of a quorum of th e board members determines

that the challenged hearing officer is disquali fied, the disqualified hearing officer will not

participate in the proceeding thereafter, a nd the board may appoint , or authorize the

hearing clerk to secure a replacement hearing officer.

(iv) A board member may recuse himself or herself from a

hearing, and a hearing officer may withdraw as hearing officer, by filing written notice

with the hearing clerk or by making a statemen t on the record at a hearing or meeting of

the board. In making a decision regarding wh ether to recuse or withdraw, a board

# 20 member or a hearing officer may re ly on applicable legal authority.”

and at:

20.11.82.14 NMAC:

“GENERAL PROVISIONS - RECUSAL:

A. No board member shall participat e in any action in which his or her

impartiality or fairness may reasonably be questioned, and the member shall recuse

himself or herself in any su ch action by giving notice to th e board and the general public

by announcing the recusal on the record. In maki ng a decision to recuse him or herself,

the board member may rely upon any relevant authority.

B. A board member or a hearing o fficer shall not perform any function

authorized by 20.11.82 NMAC regarding any matter in which a board member or a

hearing officer:

(1) has a personal bias or pr ejudice concerning a party;

(2) is related to a party within the third degree of relationship;

(3) is an officer, director or trustee of a party or interested participant in

the proceeding; or

(4) has a financial interest in the pr oceeding or has any other conflict of

interest.”

(iii) The State has responsibility for en suring adequate implementation of plan

provisions to be carried out by local districts.

The Air Quality Division will maintain programs for the enforcement of control measures

included in the approved SIP and measures required by the CAA.

EPA analysis :

The Albuquerque/Bernalillo County AQCB is the federally delegated ai r quality authority

for Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, New Mexi co. The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act

(AQCA, section 74-2-4) author izes Albuquerque/Bernalillo County to locally administer and

implement the State Air Quality Control Act by pr oviding for a local air quality control program.

Thus, state law views Albuquerque/Bernalillo C ounty and the remainder of the State of New

Mexico as distinct air quality control entities. The AQCA also pr ovides for the establishment of

the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County AQCB as a joint local authority, acting on behalf of both the

County of Bernalillo and the City of Albuquerque . Within the boundary of Bernalillo County, the

AQCB is authorized to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend and repeal regulations consistent with

the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act, and to maintain national ambient air quality standards

and prevent or abate ai r pollution, including regulations pres cribing air standards, within

Bernalillo County (with the ex ception of trib al lands).

Through the City of Albuquerque’s Depart ment of Environmental Health, the

Albuquerque Air Quality Division (AQD) serves as the administrative agency for the AQCB.

The AQD is authorized to administer and enforce the provisions of the New Mexico Air Quality

Control Act within the boundary of Bernalillo County.

The City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo Count y Ordinances approved into the SIP on

June 1, 1999 provide assurances that Albuquerque/Bernalillo Count y has the adequate personnel

# 21 and funding to carry out their SIP. 8 

# The August 16, 2010 Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP

submittal from the Governor includes a discu ssion of funding and personnel resources for

carrying out the programs of the SIP for de monstrating attainment of 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# and

1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. The submittals state that budgets are approved annually by the

Albuquerque City Council, and that the annual budgeting process prov ides a periodic update that

enables the AQD to adjust funding and personnel needs to carry out air programs to meet the

CAA. The Bernalillo County Joint Air Quality Or dinance authorizes the AQCB to adopt rules,

pursuant to AQCA section 74-2-7, fo r establishing fees, to review and act on permit applications;

amend and review permits; conduct inspections of facilities; and enforce th e rules and orders of

permits. Fees collected pursuant to this ordi nance are then deposited into a fund created by

section 74-2-16 of the AQCA, which must be us ed by the municipality or county only for the

purpose of paying the reasonable costs of, among other things, reviewing and acting on permit

applications, implementing and enforcing rule s of the permit, air monitoring, air modeling,

preparing guidance, and prep aring emission inventories.

Additionally, there are federal sources of funding for th e implementation of the 1997 and

2008 8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS through, for example, the CAA sections

103 and 105 grant funds. The AQD receives federal funds on an annual basis, under sections 103

and 105 of the Act, to support its air quality prog rams. The AQD has authority to collect fees for

Title V and non-Title V permit applications, revisions, renewals and inspections pursuant to New

Mexico AQCA, New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) 1978 Sections 74-2-4, 74-2-5 and 74-

2-7, the Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5 Secti ons 3, 4 and 7, and the revised ordinances of

Albuquerque 1994, Section 9-5-1-3, Section 9-5-1-4 and Section 9-5-1-7. For example, New

Mexico AQCA Section 74-2-7(B)(7) requires by regulation a schedule of emission fees

consistent with the provisions of Section 502( b)(3) of the 1990 Amendm ents to the Federal

Clean Air Act. The SIP-approved regulation that addresses permit fees, AQCB Air Quality

Control Regulation Section 21 – Permit Fees (A pril 10, 1980 at 45 FR 24460) was repealed and

replaced by the Albuquerque/Berna lillo County AQCB rule effective July 1, 2001 and recodified

as 20.11.2 NMAC. It was submitted as a SIP revision on May 24, 2011. We have proposed to

approve the revisions that repeal and replace the existing SIP ru le but have not finalized our

action (November 4, 2011, 76 FR 6 8385). For more detailed information, please see the TSD for

Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2007-0154 of th e proposed action on November 4, 2011 (To

access the TSD please visit the Federal eRul emaking Portal: http ://www.regulations.gov . Follow

the on-line inst ructions).

Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requi res that the state comply with section 128. Section 128

requires: 1) that the majority of members of the state body which approves permits or

enforcement orders do not derive any significant portion of their income from entities subject to

permitting or enforcement orders under the CAA; and 2) any potential conflicts of interest by

such body be adequately disclosed. On June 1,1999, the EPA approved into the SIP the BC

Ordinances and provisions of th e ACQA that pertain to financia l disclosures, conflicts of

interest, code of conduct and et hical conduct for the Executive Dire ctor and classified employees

of the agency (64 FR 29235). The EPA acti on, effective August 2, 1999, approved the SIP

revisions for Board composition and conflict of interest disclosure requirements submitted by

both the State of New Mexico and by BC. Th ese include public interest requirements and

safeguards against conflict of in terest and are codified in the City of Albuquerque Ordinances, 2-

6-1-3(A)(4), 9-5-1-3(B)(4), 9-5-1-3(E) and County Ordinanc e 94-5, Section (3)(E) Joint Air

8 

# See 64 FR 29235.

# 22 Quality Control Board Ordinance. For example, County Ordinance 94-5 S ection (3)(E) states:

“any member of the Board who has a conflict of interest regarding a matter before the Board

shall disqualify himself or herself from the discussion and shall abstain from the vote on such

matter. A conflict of interest means any interest which may yield, direct ly or indirectly any

monetary or other material benef it to the Board member or the memb er’s spouse or minor child.”

EPA approved Bernalillo County Ordinance 88-45 into the Al buquerque/Bernalillo

County SIP in a June 1, 1999 rulemaking (64 FR 29235). Albuquerque/Bernalillo County has

since amended the ordinance and re-codified it as Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5. EPA will

act on this amended ordinance in a future rule making. For purposes of the I-SIP discussion, we

will cite to the current ordinance. The Joint Air Quality Control Board Ordinance 94-5 is also

cited as legal authority in General Pr ovisions 20.11.1.3 NMAC, which is SIP-approved.

EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP m eets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)

of the Act for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

6. Stationary source emissions monitoring and reporting : Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires, as

may be prescribed by the Administrator, (i) th e installation, maintenance and replacement of

equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or ope rators of stationary

sources to monitor emissions from such source s, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts

of emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports

by the State agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this Act,

which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.

The BC's response :

States are to require the installation, main tenance, and replacement of equipment to

monitor stationary sources of emissions by th e owners or operators of these sources and

the provision of periodic reports on these emissions.

40 CFR 51.214 requires every SIP to include requirements for the monitoring of

emissions from major stationary sources as specified in 40 CFR 51 Appendix P. The Air

Board has adopted regulations to im plement the requirements of 40 CFR 51.214.

Regulatory requirements have b een codified at 20.11.41 NMAC, Authority to Construct;

20.11.42 NMAC, Operating Permits ; and 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment

Areas ; (pertaining to sampling and testing). Requirements in 20.11.47 NMAC,

Emissions Inventory Requirements , provide for the reporting of emissions inventories in a

format established by the Air Quality Division, on a schedule set forth in the regulation.

Bernalillo County’s enforceable emission limitations and other control measures are

covered in The New Mexico State Air Qual ity Control Act and those provisions of

Chapter 11 of New Mexico's Administrativ e Code. Elements of the program for

enforcement are found in the monitoring, reco rdkeeping and reporting requirements for

sources in the aforementioned control measures, as well as under 20.11.42 NMAC,

Operating Permits . All applicable regulations have been submitted to EPA to be

incorporated into New Mexico’s SIP.

20.11.42 NMAC, Operating Permits , encompasses the Title V operating permit program

for facilities within Bernal illo County. The Title V progr am is a delegated program,

approved in the Federal Regist er, and does not reside in th e SIP. The Title V program

was last approved by EPA on 11/26/96, eff ective 1/27/97 [FR Vol. 61, No. 229, 60032-

# 23 60034]. A minor revision to correct the defi nition of “Major Source”, was approved by

EPA on 9/8/04 [FR Vol. 69, No. 173, 54244- 54247], effective 11/8/04. Proposed

revisions to the Title V program in the form of amendments to 20.11.42 NMAC, were

submitted to EPA on 7/22/09, and are pending approval under Title V of the CAA.

The Air Quality Division maintains a database with emissions data for all permitted

stationary source facilities in Bern alillo County.

The Air Quality Division commits to conti nue its oversight of stationary source

monitoring requirements and to the reporting of data collected by such monitoring

activities. (i.e. AFS/ EI Exchange)

EPA analysis :

The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act provides BC with authority to require

monitoring and recordkeeping and to require th e submittal of emissions data to develop an

emissions inventory. In addition to the regulatory references cited by BC, EPA has found the

following from NMAC as relevant in demonstra ting that the BC SIP meet s the requirements of

section 110(a)(2)(F):

Regulation 20.11.1 NMAC General Provisions

Regulation 20.11.41 NMAC Authority to Construct

Regulation 20.11.42 NMAC Operating Permits

Regulation 20.11.47 NMAC Emissions Inventory Requirements

Regulation 20.11.60 NMAC Permitting in Nonattainment Areas

Regulation 20.11.61 NMAC Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

Regulation 20.11.63 NMAC New S ource Performance Standards

EPA has found the following sections of NMAC as relevant in showing the BC SIP

satisfies the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F):

Regulation 20.11.5 NMAC Visible Air Contaminants

Regulation 20.11.20 NMAC Fugitive Dust Control

Regulation 20.11.21 NMAC Open Burning

Regulation 20.11.22 NMAC Wood Burning

Regulation 20.11.23 NMAC Strato spheric Ozone Protection

Regulation 20.11.40 NMAC Source Registration

Regulation 20.11.43 NMAC St ack Height Requirements

Regulation 20.11.46 NMAC Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Inventory Requirements

Regulation 20.11.48 NMAC Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting

Regulation 20.11.49 NMAC Excess Emissions

Regulation 20.11.62 NMAC Acid Rain

Regulation 20.11.65 NMAC Vola tile Organic Compounds

Regulation 20.11.66 NMAC Process Equipment

Regulation 20.11.67 NMAC Equipment, Emissions, Limitations

Regulation 20.11.68 NMAC Incine rators and Crematories

Regulation 20.11.69 NMAC Pathological Waste Destructors

# 24 Regulation 20.11.71 NMAC Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

The EPA promulgated monitoring regulations , codified at 40 CFR 51.210 (Subpart K)

and Minimum Emission Monitoring Requirements in Appendix P to Part 51. Under section 193

of the Act, the existing regulations remain effectiv e to the extent they are not inconsistent with

the current law, until EPA elects to amend them. U nder Subpart K, each SIP must: a) provide for

monitoring the status of compliance with any rule s and regulations that set forth any portion of

the control strategy; b) provide for legally enforceable procedures fo r requiring owners or

operators of stationary sources to maintain records of and pe riodically report to the State; c)

contain procedures for obtaining and maintainin g data on actual emissions reductions achieved

as a result of implementing transportation contro l measures (TCMs); and d) require stationary

sources subject to emission standard s as part of an applicable plan to install, calibrate, maintain,

and operate equipment for continuously monitoring and recording emissions.

Rules that require stationary sources to m onitor for compliance, provide recordkeeping

and reporting, and provide for enforcement of ozone, PM 2.5 

# , and precursors to these pollutants

(SO 2 

# , ammonia, VOCs and NO X 

# ), consistent with the requirem ents of 40 CFR part 51, subpart K

have been approved into the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County SIP and codified at 20.11.1 NMAC

(General Provisions, 70 FR 41963), 20.11.5 NMAC (Visible Air Contaminants, 69 FR 78314),

20.11.40 NMAC (Source Registration, 69 FR 7 8314), 20.11.49 NMAC (Excess Emissions, 75

FR 5698), 20.11.66 NMAC (Process Equipment, 69 FR 78314), 20.11.67 NMAC (Equipment,

Emissions, Limitations, 69 FR 78314), and 20.1 1.90 NMAC (Source Surveillance, 75 FR 5698).

Requirements in 20.11.47 NMAC (Emission Inventor y Requirements) provide for the reporting

of emission inventories on a schedule consistent with EPA regulations at 40 CFR 51.211, subpart

K – Source Surveillance. 20.11.42 NMAC, Operating Permits, encompasses the title V operating

permit program for facilities wi thin Bernalillo County. The title V program is a delegated

program and does not reside in the SIP. 9



# Under the BC SIP rules, the AQD is required to analyze the emissions data from point,

area, mobile, and biogenic (natural) sources. The AQD uses this data to track progress towards

maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and ma intenance strategies, identify sources and

general emission levels, and determine complia nce with Albuquerque/Bernalillo County and

EPA requirements. Additionally, the AQD air quality inspectors compare source emissions to

emission limitations and standards pursuant to 20.11.90.6 NMAC. Emissions data are available

electronically: http://www.epa.gov /ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. These rules are in the federally

approved SIP.

EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP m eets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F)

for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

Table 5: BC rules relevant to meeting sect ion 110(a)(2)(F), as determined by EPA:

Relevant Section of BC’s SIP EPA Approval/Federal Register Citation

Part 1 (20.11.1 NMAC) General Provisions

Part 5 (20.11.5 NMAC) Visible Air

Contaminants July 21, 2005 at 70 FR 41963

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

9 

# EPA approved the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County T itle V program (20.11.42 NMAC, Operating Permits) on

November 26, 1996 (effective January 27, 1997). See 61 FR 60032.

# 25 Part 6 (20.11.6 NMAC) Emergency Action Plan

Part 20 (20.11.20 NMAC) Fugitive Dust Control

Part 21 (20.11.21 NMAC) Open Burning

Part 22 (20.11.22 NMAC) Woodburning

Part 40 (20.11.40 NMAC) Source Registration

Part 41 (20.11.41 NMAC) Authority to

Construct

Part 43 (20.11.43 NMAC) Stack Height Req’s

Part 49 (20.11.49 NMAC) Excess Emissions

Part 60 (20.11.60 NMAC) Permitting in NA

Areas

Part 61 (20.11.61 NMAC) PSD

Part 63 (20.11.63 NMAC) NSPS

Part 64 (20.11.64 NMAC) Emission Standards

for HAPs

Part 65 (20.11.65 NMAC) Volatile Organic

Compounds

Part 66 (20.11.66 NMAC) Process Equipment

Part 67 (20.11.67 NMAC) Equipment,

Emissions, Limitations

Part 68 (20.11.68 NMAC) Incinerators and

Crematories

Part 90 (20.11.90 NMAC) Source Surveillance May 31, 2006 at 71 FR 30805

April 1, 2009 at 74 FR 14731

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728

April 26, 2007 at 72 FR 20728

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

December 30, 2004 at 69 FR 78314

February 4, 2010 at 75 FR 5698

7. Emergency power : Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide for authority to address

activities causing imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, including

contingency plans to implement the emerge ncy episode provisions in their SIPs.

The BC's response :

States are to provide for au thority comparable to that in Section 303, which provides

legal authority to the EPA to halt the emissi on of air pollutants causing or contributing to

injury to public health or welfare. EPA is au thorized to either bring a lawsuit in federal

court or, if such civil action cannot assure prompt protection of public health or welfare,

to issue such orders as may be necessary to protect public health or welfare or the

environment. In addition, st ates are to provide for ade quate contingency plans to

implement such authority.

The authority granted to the EPA Administrato r is vested in the Air Board and the Air

Quality Division.

The requirement for states to provide for ad equate contingency plans to implement such

authority is intended to establish emergenc y episode plans for responding to elevated

pollutant levels in urban areas. Emergency epis ode plans are required in areas that record

pollutant concentrations in excess of th reshold levels specified in 40 CFR 51.150. On

January 26, 1989, the Air Board adopted an Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan for

Bernalillo County (8/12/91, 56 FR 38074), that covers air pollution episodes and the

# 26 occurrence of an emergency due to the effects of the pollutant s on the health of persons.

EPA is proposing to amend this regulation to address new ozone and PM 2.5 

# standards.

Until the Agency finalizes changes to the emer gency episode regulations to establish for

PM 2.5 

# specific levels for classifying areas as Priority I, lA, and II for PM 2.5 

# , and to

establish a significant harm level (SHL), EPA recommends that states through their

public processes set Priority levels and emergency action levels for PM 2.5 

# necessary to

develop emergency episode plans consiste nt with the requirements in 40 CFR 51.150

through 51.153. EPA further recommends that stat es consider the levels discussed in the

February 12, 2007 EPA issue paper entitled “ Revising the Air Quality Index and Setting a

Significant Harm Level for PM 2.5 

# .” and to Attachment B of the 9/25/09 guidance memo

[ http://ct.gov/dep/lib/dep/air /particulate_matter/pm25pla nning/110(a)_guidance_for_24-

hour_pm2_5_naaqs.pdf ] in establishing Priority leve ls and emergency action levels,

including a SHL. Using the recommendations in Attachment B, for the purposes of

satisfying the requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(G), states would develop emergency

episode plans for any area that has monitored and recorded 24-hour PM 2.5 

# levels greater

than 140.4 μ g/m 3 

# since 2006. If this level was never exceeded in any area of the state,

the state can certify that it has appropri ate general emergency powers to address PM 2.5 

# - related episodes, and that no specific emergenc y episode plans are necessary at this time,

given the existing monitored levels. States should develop submi ssions to meet this

requirement through appropriate public proces ses. The Air Quality Division has not

monitored any 24-hour levels of PM 2.5 

# greater than 140.4 μ g/m 3 

# since 2006, therefore no

update to the contingency plan for Bernal illo County is required at this time.

The Air Quality Division commits to submit any necessary revisions to the Air Pollution

Episode Contingency Plan, upon adoption of amended guidance by EPA.

EPA analysis :

EPA compared the State rules to 40 CFR 51 Subpart H – Prevention of Air Pollution

Emergency Episodes and Appendix L to Part 51 - Example Regulations for Prevention of Air

Pollution Emergency Episodes. Subpart H provides a classification system for episode plans.

Each region in a state is classifi ed separately with respect to each of the following pollutants:

Sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide , and ozone (40 CFR

51.150). An area classified as a Priority I region for ozone has ambient concentrations greater

than 195 micrograms per cubic meter (denoted μg/m3) or 0.10 ppm for a 1-hour maximum. The

regulations do not establish Priority II regions for ozone. For partic ulate matter a Priority I region

has ambient concentrations gr eater than 95 μg/m3 annual geometric mean or 325 μg/m3 for a

24-hour maximum. A Priority II region is any ar ea which is not a Priority I region and has

ambient concentrations between 60–95 μg/m3 annual geometric mean or 150–325 μg/m3 for a

24-hour maximum. A Priority IA Region is any area which is Prio rity I primarily because of

emissions from a single point source. Areas that do not meet the criteria fo r Priority I or II are

classified Priority III. Table 6 below su mmarizes the classification for ozone and PM.

Table 6: Classification of Regions for Ep isode Plans for Ozone and Particulate Matter

(40 CFR 51.150)

Parameter Priority I Priority II Priority III

# 27 Ozone Ambient concentrations

> 195 μg/m3 (0.10 ppm)

1-hour maximum Not defined Areas which do not

meet the criteria for

Priority I

Particulate

matter Ambient concentrations

> 95 μg/m3 annual

geometric mean; 325 μg/m3

24-hour maximum Ambient concentrations

between 60-95 μg/m3

annual geometric mean;

150-325 μg/m3

24-hour maximum. Areas which do not

meet the criteria for

Priority I or II

The significant harm level (SHL) for the 8- hour ozone NAAQS will remain unchanged as

0.6 parts per million ozone, 2-hour average, as indicated in 40 CFR 51.151. EPA believes that

the existing ozone-related provisi ons of 40 CFR Subpart H remain appropriate. Therefore, EPA

expects that for purposes of the 1997 8-hour ozon e NAAQS, states need only to confirm that

they have existing emergency epis ode plan provisions consistent with EPA’s existing regulatory

requirements.

Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provi de for authority to address activities causing

imminent and substantial endangerment to pub lic health, including c ontingency plans to

implement the emergency episode provisions in their SIPs. The Air Board and AQD are

empowered by the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act to respond to air pollution episodes and

other air quality emergencies, and the AQD has contingency plans to implement emergency

episode provisions in the SIP. The Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan for Bernalillo County

was approved into the SIP on August 12, 1991 ( 56 FR 38073, effective October 11, 1991). The

BC Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan (Plan) addresses all the necessary requirements for a

Priority 1 region (defined in 40 CFR 51.150).

First, the Plan includes significant harm leve ls for sulfur dioxide, particulate matter,

carbon monoxide, ozone, and nitrogen dioxi de as per 40 CFR 51.151. Second, the Plan

adequately addresses all requirements for con tingency plans outlined in 40 CFR 51.152. Three

stages of episode criteria as per 40 CFR 51.152( a)(1) and 40 CFR 51, appendix L, are set forth:

air pollution alert, air pollution warning, and air pollution emer gency. Prior to reaching the first

episode stage, an air Stagnation Advisory will be in effect. This is initiated when the AQD is

notified by the National Weather Se rvice (NWS) that air stagnation conditions will persist for a

period of 36 hours or more within the Middle Rio Grande portion of New Mexico (includes

Bernalillo County). The Episode Criteria Table on page 3 of the Plan shows alert, warning,

emergency, and significant harm levels for each of the pollutants. The Plan also provides for

public announcement of, and specifies adequate emission control actions to be taken at, each

episode stage (40 CFRR 51.152 (a)(2) and 40 CFR 51.152 (a )(3)). Finally, the Plan sufficiently

addresses the requirements of 51.152 (b)(1-3) con cerning prompt acquisition of forecasts of

atmospheric stagnation conditi ons including updates, source compliance inspections, and

communication procedures.

The criteria for ozone are based on a 1-hour average ozone level. These episode criteria

and contingency measures are adequate to addr ess ozone emergency episodes and are in the

federally approved SIP. The BC Plan provides for the polluta nts specified under 40 CFR 51.150,

including particulate matter, and is consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 51.151 and 152, and

Appendix L to Part 51.

# 28 The 2009 Infrastructure SIP Guidance for PM 2.5 

# recommends that a state with at least one

monitored 24-hour PM 2.5 

# value exceeding 140.4 μg/m 3 

# since 2006 establish an emergency

episode plan and contingency measures to be im plemented should such level be exceeded again.

The 2006-2010 ambient air quality monitoring data for Albuquerque/Bernalillo County do not

exceed 140.4 μg/m 3 

# . The PM 2.5 

# levels have consistently re mained below this level (140.4

μg/m 3 

# ), and furthermore, the BC has appropriate general emergency powers to address PM 2.5 

# related episodes to protect the environment a nd public health. Given the BC’s monitored PM 2.5 

# levels, EPA is proposing that Albuquerque/Berna lillo County is not required to submit an

emergency episode plan and contingency meas ures at this time, for the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5



# standards.

We found that BC’s Plan is consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 51.151 and 152,

and Appendix L to Part 51. EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP meets the requirements of

section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 an d 2008 8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

8. Future SIP revisions : Section 110(a)(2 )(H) requires states to have the authority to revise

their SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved methods for attaining

NAAQS, or in response to an EPA finding th at the SIP is substantially inadequate.

The BC’s response :

States are to provide for revi sion of their SIP when air qual ity standards are revised or

new attainment methods become available or when EPA informs states that current SIPs

are inadequate to attain standards or to comply with additional requirements under the

CAA.

Therefore, the Air Quality Division is submittin g a proposed SIP revision that responds to

revised, reconsidered or new air quality standards promulgated for the 1997 and 2008 8-

hour ozone NAAQS as well as the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. As part of this SIP

revision, two Air Board rules are pr oposed to be amended; 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting

in Nonattainment Areas (Nonattainment NSR) and 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of

Significant Deterioration (PSD), shown as Attachment C and D respectively.

The Air Quality Division commits to submit SIP revisions whenever revised air quality

standards are promulgated by EPA. As suc h, an additional SIP revision is necessary

because EPA finalized its proposed changes to the General Conformity rule, on 4/5/10

[75 FR 17254] to address ozone and PM 2.5



# .

EPA analysis :

The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (S ection 74-2-5) directs the AQD to prepare

and develop the SIP and provides ADQ with the n ecessary authority to carry out other duties,

requirements and responsibilities necessary for the implementation of and fulfilling the

requirements of the federal Clean Air Act. Thus, BC has the authority to re vise its SIP from time

to time as may be necessary to take into accoun t revisions of primary or secondary NAAQS, or

the availability of improved or more expedi tious methods of attain ing such standards.

Furthermore, BC also has the authority under these New Mexico Air Quality Control Act

provisions to revise its SIP in the event the EPA, pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, finds the

SIP to be substantially inadequate to attain th e NAAQS. Thus, BC has the authority to revise its

# 29 SIP as necessary to account for revisions of the NAAQS, adopt more effective methods of

attaining the NAAQS, and respond to EPA SIP calls.

We are proposing that the BC SIP meets the re quirements of secti on 110(a)(2)(H) for the

1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

9. Consultation, public notice, a nd PSD and visibility protection : Section 110(a)(2)(J)

requires states to provide a pr ocess for consultation with local governments and Federal Land

Managers (FMLs) carrying out NAAQS implemen tation requirements pursuant to section 121

relating to consultation. Section 110(a)(2)(J) further requires st ates to notify the public if

NAAQS are exceeded in an area and to enhance pub lic awareness of measures that can be taken

to prevent exceedances. Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires States to meet applicable requirements

of Part C related to prevention of signifi cant deteriorati on and visibility protection.

The BC's response :

States are to meet the ap plicable requirements of CAA Section 121 (relating to

consultation), Section 127 (relating to public notification), and Part C (relating to

prevention of significant deteri oration (PSD) of air quality and visibility protection).

Section 121 requires that states provide a satisfactory process of consultation with general

purpose local governments, designated organi zations of elected officials of local

governments, and any affected federal land manager in carrying out CAA requirements.

The Air Quality Division commits to maintain ing a process of consultation with parties

designated under Section 121.

Public notice is governed by the New Me xico Air Quality Control Act and 20.11.82

NMAC.

Section 127 requires the states to provide meas ures which will be effective to notify the

public on a regular basis of in stances or areas in which a ny air quality standard is

exceeded during the preceding calendar year, to advise the public of the health hazards

associated with such pollution, and to enhan ce public awareness of measures that can be

taken to prevent such standards from being exceeded.

The Air Quality Division maintains air quality data and other information required by

Section 127 on its website, which is c ontinuously available to the public.

The Air Quality Division commits to maintaining a public information and education

program that satisfies the requirements of Section 127.

The Air Board has adopted 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration

, following the requirements outlined in 40 CFR 52 under Section 161 of the CAA (42

U.S.C.A. § 7471) for prevention of signifi cant deterioration. Th ese provisions were

approved by EPA as part of the SIP (effective 5/29/07).

The Air Quality Division commits to ensuring that PSD regulations are implemented in

Bernalillo County to satisfy the requirement s of Part C. In addition, the Air Quality

Division is committed to protecting the visi bility in the region as evidenced by the

Regional Haze SIP for Bernalillo County, first submitted to EPA on 12/1/03. A revised

Regional Haze SIP was submitted to EPA on 9/8/08.

EPA analysis :

# 30 Consultation with government of ficials, secti on 110(a)(2)(J):

The New Mexico AQCA (section 74-2-5 – Duti es and Powers of the Local Board) and

Air Quality Control Board Ordina nces gives the AQD the authority to advise, consult, contract

and cooperate with municipalities, counties, other states, the federal government and other

interested persons or groups in regards to matters of common interest in the field of air quality

control. The County Ordinance 94 -5 “establishes powers and du ties of the Board for providing

for the adoption, administration and enforcement of the regulations; providing for variances;

providing for permits; providing for special regu lations consistent with Federal and State

requirements for prevention of significant dete rioration, new source performance standards,

national emissions standards for hazardous air po llutants and providing for operating permits and

fees as required by the 1990 Amendments to the Federal CAA..” Additionally, 20.11.82 NMAC

- Rulemaking Procedures standardizes the procedur es used in rulemaking proceedings before the

AQCB, including public notice. These rules and re gulations comply with the requirements of

section 121 of the CAA that requi res that states provide a satis factory process of consultation

with general purpose local governments.

EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP m eets this portion of th e section 110(a)(2)(J)

requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. 10



# Public notification if NAAQS are exceed ed, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(J) :

Public notification begins w ith the air quality forecasts, which advise the public of

conditions capable of exceed ing the 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. The air quality forecasts

for BC can be found on the City of Albuque rque website at www.cabq.gov/airquality and are

updated hourly. Ozone forecasts are made daily during the ozone season for the Bernalillo

County. The ozone forecasts are made, in most cas es, a day in advance local time and are valid

for the next day. Ozone readings/warnings and the daily air quality index for the area are

generated automatically, and sent to the all persons that have signed up on the City of

Albuquerque website ( www.cabq.gov/airquality/envi roflash.html) to receive email updates,

which includes the public, vari ous stakeholders and government officials. This Air Quality

Notification System is a servic e through airnow.gov and is called EnviroFlash. EnviroFlash is a

system that sends e-mails about daily air quality forecasts. The me ssage is the same air quality

information that the local radio or television stations provide, plus suggested safety measures

when air quality levels are unhealthy. Additi onally, the air quality index is available via

telephone by calling the AQD. Public notice is governed by the New Mexico AQCA (section 74-

2-6) and 20.11.82 NMAC – Rulemaking Pro cedures Air Quality Control Board.

EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP m eets this portion of th e section 110(a)(2)(J)

requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

PSD and visibility protec tion, section 110(a)(2)(J) : This portion of section 110(a)(2)(J)

in part requires that a state’s SIP meet the ap plicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) as

relating to PSD programs. As disc ussed previously in this rule making with regards to section

110(a)(2)(C) and in this TSD, th e BC’s PSD program is in the SIP (12/21/93 at 58 FR 67330 and

4/26/07 at 72 FR 20728). In addition to the approv ed program and to meet the requirements of

110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for 1997 ozone st andard, EPA believes BC must have updated

its PSD rules to treat NOx as a precursor for ozone. Thus, we are proposing to approve the SIP

10 

# Section 110(a)(2)(J) is divided into three segments: consultation with government officials; public notification;

and PSD and visibility protection.

# 31 revisions (submitted August 16, 2010) to implement NOx as a precursor to ozone. To implement

section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 PM 2.5 

# standard, states must pr ovide revision due May 16, 2011

under EPA’s Implementation of the New Source Re view (NSR) Program for particulate matter

less Than 2.5 Micrometers (73 FR 28321). On August 30 2010, AQCB adopted revisions to the

BC SIP to amend their PSD and nonattainment NSR programs to implement PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

The most recent New Mexico SIP revision of it’s Regional Haze program, which

addresses the visibility transport prong and includes BC, was submitted to EPA on July 28, 2011.

We are evaluating this submittal and expect to propose action on the Regional Haze submittal on

a future date. With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility protection, EPA

recognizes that states are subjec t to visibility and regional haze program requirements under part

C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B). In the event of the establishment of a

new NAAQS, however, the visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do

not change. Thus, we find that there is no new visibility oblig ation “triggered” under section

110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. This would be the case even in the event a

secondary PM 2.5 

# NAAQS for visibility is established, because this NAAQS would not affect

visibility requirements under part C.

Based on this analysis, we propose that the BC SIP satisfies the re quirements of section

110(a)(2)(J) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

10. Air quality modeling and submission of data : Section 110(a)(2)(K ) requires that SIPs

provide for performing air quality modeling for predicting effect s on air quality of emissions

from any NAAQS pollutant and submissi on of such data to EPA upon request.

The BC’s response :

States are to provide for the us e of air quality modeling to pr edict the effect of emissions

on ambient air quality and to submit data re lated to such modeling when requested by

EPA.

The Air Quality Division’s air quality modeling work complies with EPA’s final

guidance on the use of models in attainme nt demonstrations for the 8-hour ozone

standard and uses EPA’s latest draft final guidance for modeling PM 2.5 

# . This is a rapidly

evolving field in which the Air Quality Divi sion endeavors to use the latest methodology

and techniques, and documents information th at its staff uses when conducting modeling

or when evaluating the performance of air quality models used for this purpose.

The Air Quality Division commits to continue to use air quality models in accordance

with EPA’s currently approved modeling gu idance and protocols and the continued

submittal of data and modeling results to EPA.

EPA analysis :

The New Mexico Air Quality Control Act charges the ACQB and the AQD with

preparing and implementing the SIP, which in cludes modeling to inform decisions on

nonattainment area boundaries and demonstrate effectiveness of SIP control strategies.

The AQD’s air quality modeling work comp lies with EPA’s guidance on the use of

models in attainment demonstrations for the 8-h our ozone standard and uses EPA’s latest draft

final guidance for modeling PM 2.5 

# consistent with the air quality modeling requirements in 40

# 32 CFR 52.21(l) and (m). EPA Region 6 and AQD mode ling staff have communicated on numerous

occasions regarding modeling for non-PSD specifi c sources in Bernalillo County. Additionally,

20.11.61 NMAC Prevention of Significant Deteriorat ion requires approval of source permits

consistent with the modeling requirements of 40 CFR 51.21(l) and (m). The AQD commits to

continue to use air quality models in acco rdance with EPA’s currently approved modeling

guidance and protocols and the continued submittal of data and modeling results to EPA.

EPA is proposing to find that the Alb uquerque/Bernalillo County SIP meets the

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006

PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

11. Permitting fees : Section 110(a)(2)(L) requ ires SIPs to require each major stationary source

to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of re viewing, approving, implementing and enforcing a

permit.

The BC's response :

States are required to assess th e owner or operator of each major stationary source with

fees sufficient to cover the reasonable cost s of reviewing and acting upon any application

for such a permit, and if a permit is gran ted, the reasonable costs of implementing and

enforcing the terms and conditions of the perm it. Owners or operators are also required to

comply with the fee provisions of Title V Sections 501 – 507 of the CAA. Such fees are

required to be payable to the permitting authority.

As noted above, the responsibility to issue permits for statio nary sources of air pollution

is vested with the Air Quality Division. In order to meet majo r stationary source

permitting fee requirements, the Air Board adopted 20.11.2 NMAC, Fees , which requires

a fee for facilities subject to Title V requirements. Section 21, Permit Fees , was

approved by EPA on 4/10/80 [45 FR 24468, codi fied at 40 CFR 52.1620(c)(11)] effective

04/10/80. Proposed SIP amendments to 20.11.2 NMAC, Fees, were submitted to EPA on

9/7/04, and 2/5/07, and ar e pending approval.

The Air Quality Division commits to conti nued implementation of the Air Board-adopted

major stationary source permit fee regulation.

EPA analysis : The AQD has authority to collect fees for Title V 11 

# and non-Title V

permit applications, revisions, renewals and in spections pursuant to New Mexico AQCA, New

Mexico Statutes Annotated (N MSA) 1978 Sections 74-2-4, 74-2-5 and 74-2-7, the Bernalillo

County Ordinance 94-5 - Joint Ai r Quality Control Board Secti ons 3, 4 and 7, and the revised

ordinances of Albuquerque 1994, Section 9-5-1-3, Section 9-5-1-4 and Section 9-5-1-7. For

example, New Mexico AQCA Section 74-2-7(B )(7) requires by regulation a schedule of

emission fees consistent with the Title V provisions of Sectio n 502(b)(3) of the CAA. The SIPapproved regulation that addresses permit fees, AQCB Air Quality Control Regulation Section

21 – Permit Fees (April 10, 1980 at 45 FR 24460) was repealed and replaced by the more

stringent and broader in scope Albuquerque/Bernalillo County AQCB rule effective July 1, 2001

11 

# Albuquerque/Bernalillo County has an federally-approved Title V fee program in place. EPA approved

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County’s Title V fee program as part of its Title V Operating Permit Program on November

26, 1996. See 61 FR 60032. EPA approved revisions to the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Title V fee program on

September 8, 2004. See 69 FR 54244.

# 33 and recodified as 20.11.2 NMAC. It was subm itted as a SIP revision on May 24, 2011. We have

proposed to approve the revisions that repeal and replace the existing SIP rule but have not

finalized our action (November 4, 2011, 76 FR 68385). For more detailed information, please

see the TSD for Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2007-0154 for the proposed action on November

4, 2011 (To access the TSD please visit the Federal eRulemaking Portal:

http://www.regulations.gov and follow the on-line instructions).

The May 24, 2011 submitted revision that we have proposed to appr ove addresses fees

for reviewing and acting on specific permit applica tions received by the AQCD; fees to partially

offset the administrative costs of permit-rela ted administrative hearings; funding for small

business stationary sources; and fees to cove r administrative expenses. The comment period on

the proposal closed on December 5, 2011. No comments were received.

Based on the above, EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP meets the requirements of

section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

12

. Consultation/participation by affected local entities : Section 110(a)(2)(M) requires states

to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions

affected by the SIP.

The BC’s response :

States are to provide for c onsultation and participation by local political subdivisions

affected by the plan. New Mexico is sub-divided into two air au thorities, Bernalillo County and

the remaining counties, outside Be rnalillo County. Each authority is responsible for controlling

air pollution emitted by stationary sources within its respective jurisdiction.

The Air Quality Division consults with and provides liaison to the New Mexico

Environment Department’s Air Quality Bu reau and provides frequent and regular

communication and consultation with their management and staff.

The Air Quality Division commits to maintaining a consultation process with the Air

Quality Bureau when revisions to Bern alillo County’s SIP might affect them.

The Air Quality Division is required to conduct public hearings and to solicit testimony

from the public when nonattainment plans or rules are adopted by the Air Board for

inclusion into the SIP.

Consultation and public involvement are also required by 20.11.3 NMAC,

Transportation Conformity . Since Bernalillo County is under a Limited Maintenance

Plan for Carbon Monoxide, the Metropolit an Transportation Plan (MTP) and

Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) must conform to the State Implementation Plan

(SIP). This is certified by a “conform ity finding” developed through interagency

consultation and approved by the Federal Highway Administration. The interagency

group is called the “Transportation Confor mity Technical Committee (TCTC) and is

comprised of representatives from: the C ity of Albuquerque’s Environmental Health

Department, Transit Department, and Pla nning Department; the EPA; the Federal

Highway Administration; the Federal Transit Administration; the Mid Region Council of

Governments; and the New Mexico Depart ment of Transportation. The TCTC also

evaluates regionally significant projects as well as mobile source models and modeling

assumptions. 20.11.3 NMAC also requires that: “Affected agencies making conformity

determinations on transportati on plans, programs and projects shall establish a proactive

# 34 public involvement process that provides opportunity for public review and comment by,

at a minimum, providing reasonable public access to technical and policy information

considered by the agency at the beginning of the public comment period and prior to

taking formal action on a conformity determinat ion for the MTP and TIP, consistent with

these requirements and those of 23 CFR 450.316(b)”[20.11.3.202.F NMAC].

EPA analysis : New Mexico is divided in two air au thorities, Albuquerque/Bernalillo County and

State of New Mexico covering the remaining c ounties. Each authority is responsible for

controlling air pollution emitted by stationary so urces within its respective jurisdiction. The

AQD, consistent with regulations adopted by the AQCB, consults with and provides liaison to

the New Mexico Environment Department’s Air Quality Bureau and provides frequent and

regular communication and consulta tion with their management and staff. Section 5(B)(4) of the

AQCA authorizes the AQD to advise, consult, contract and cooperate with municipalities,

counties, other states, the federal government and ot her interested persons or groups in regards to

matters of common interest in the field of air quality control. The AQCB is required to conduct

public hearings and to solicit testimony from the pub lic when plans or rules are proposed to be

adopted by the AQCB for inclusion into the SIP. Consultation a nd public involvement are also

required by 20.11.3 NMAC, Transportation Conf ormity (April 22, 2010 at 75 FR 20922). For

example, Subsection (F) P ublic Consultation Procedur es of 20.11.3.105 NMAC, requires

“affected agencies making conformity determin ations on transportation plans, programs and

projects shall establish a pro active public involvement proce ss that provides opportunity for

public review and comments...”

EPA is proposing to find that the BC SIP m eets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M)

for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

III. EPA’s Recommendation

We reviewed the BC submittals, SIP, and air quality data for ozone and PM 2.5 

# for

compliance with the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act for the 1997 and 2008

8-hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# standards. We recommend that EPA propose to

approve the submittals provided by BC to demonstr ate that the BC SIP meets the requirements of

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act with respect to the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone and the

1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# standards. These submittals address the infrastructure elements specified in

the CAA section 110(a)(2), necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 and 2008 8-

hour ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS.

We recommend approval of the Albuquerque/B ernalillo County SIP for the following

elements :

Emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A)

Ambient air quality monitoring/dat a system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)

Program for enforcement of contro l measures: Section 110(a)(2)(C)

Interstate transport: Section 110(a) (2)(D)(ii)

Adequate resources: Section 110(a)(2)(E)

Stationary source monitoring system: Section 110(a)(2)(F)

Emergency power: Section 110(a)(2)(G)

Future SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H)

# 35 Consultation with government of ficials: Section 110(a)(2)(J)

Public notification: Section 110(a)(2)(J)

PSD and visibility protectio n: Section 110(a)(2)(J)

Air quality and modeling/da ta: Section 110(a)(2)(K)

Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L)

Consultation/particip ation by affected local enti ties: Secti on 110(a)(2)(M)

IV. References

1. Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under S ections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour

Ozone and PM 2.5 

# NAAQS, Memorandum from William T. Ha rnett, Director, Air Quality Policy

Division, OAQPS, to Air Division Directors; dated October 2, 2007.

2. Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under S ection 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour

Fine Particle (PM 2.5 

# ) NAAQS, Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality

Policy Division, OAQPS, to Regional Air Divi sion Directors, da ted September 29, 2009.

# 36 APPENDIX A

(Title 20, Chapter 11, Part 8 Ambien t Air Quality Standards (20.11.8 NMAC))

TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT

Clean Air Act Approval of Revisions to New Mexico Regulations

on Ambient Air Quality Standards Applicable to Albuquerque/ Bernalil lo County (Docket EPAR06-OAR-2009-0648)

This portion of the Technical Support Document (TSD) concerns our evaluation of a revision to

the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) as submitted to us with a letter from the

Governor of New Mexico dated November 6, 20 09, on behalf of the Albuquerque Environmental

Health Department (AEHD), for review and appr oval into the SIP. This submittal specifically

concerns a revision to Title 20, Chapter 11, Part 8 Ambient Air Qualit y Standards (20.11.8) New

Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC), or Part 8 submittal).

No material in this submittal package was de signated as Confidential Business Information.

A. NMAC 20.11.8 Ambient Ai r Quality Standards

This portion of the Technical Support Document (TSD) is written in supp ort of our evaluation

of the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMA C), Title 20 Environmental Protection, Chapter

11 Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Air Quality C ontrol Board, Part 8 Ambient Air Quality

Standards also known as 20.11.8 NMAC. The 20.11.8 NMAC was submitted to us for

review/approval by the Governor of New Mexic o, in a letter dated N ovember 6, 2009, on behalf

of the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Air Quality Division. EPA Region VI received this State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request on November 18, 2009.

The local Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS ) are designed to protect the health and

welfare of the public. The local AAQS serve as indicators of air qua lity, and have been

established as a maximum concentration above which adverse effects on human health may

occur. The EPA-adopted National AAQS or N AAQS can be found at 40 CFR Part 50 and are

incorporated by reference in NMAC 20.11 8. Th e NAAQS are those adopted by the EPA as

through July 18, 1997.

The EPA initially approved Title 20, Chapter 2, Air Quality (Statewide), Part 8 Ambient

Air Quality Standards on 09/26/97 (62 FR 5051 8) at 52.1620(c)(66) and became effective

1L/25/1991for the State of New Mexico except for the Albuquer que/Bernalillo County area. The

September 1, 2004 SIP revision conc erning Part 8 specifically inco rporates/adopts the Statewide

AAQS and the NAAQS into the SIP for the Al buquerque/Bemalillo County, New Mexico area.

See section 20.11.8.12. EPA approved the 2004 SI P revision on May 31, 2006 (see 71 FR

30805).

The current Ambient Air Quality Standards are as follows:

# 37 Table 1

SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS:

Pollutant Standards

Reference Federal Primary Fed eral Secondary New Mexico State

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

8-hour average 40 CFR 50.8 9 ppm none 8.7 ppm

1-hour average 40 CFR 50.8 35 ppm none 13.1 ppm

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 

# )

24-hour average 20.2.3.111 NMAC none none 0.10 ppm

Annual arithmetic mean 40 CFR 50.11 0.053 ppm 0.053 ppm 0.05 ppm

Ozone (O 3 

# )

8-hour average 40 CFR 50.10 0.08 ppm 0.08 ppm none

(The 1997 standard - and the implementation rules for that standard - will remain in place for implementation

purposes as EPA undertakes rulemaking to address the transition from the 1997 ozone standard to the 2008 ozone

standard).

8-hour average 40 CFR 50.15 0.075 ppm 0.075 ppm none

(Effective May 27, 2008)

Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 

# )

24-hour average 40 CFR 50.4 0.14 ppm none 0.10 ppm

3-hour average 40 CFR 50.5 none 0.5 ppm none

Annual (arithmetic

mean) 40 CFR 50.4 0.030 ppm none 0.02 ppm

Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 

# )

24-hour average 40 CFR 50.13 35 μg/m 3 

# 35 μg/m 3 

# none

(Effective December 18, 2006)

Annual (arithmetic

mean) 40 CFR 50.7 &

40 CFR 50.13 15.0 μg/m 3 

# 15.0 μg/m 3 

# none

Particulate Matter (PM 10 

# )

24-hour average 40 CFR 50.6 150 μg/m 3 

# 150 μg/m 3 

# none

Lead (Pb)

Rolling 3-month

average 40 CFR 50.16 0.15μg/m 3 

# 0.15μg/m 3 

# none

(Effective 1 year after date of area attainment designation)

Hydrogen Sulfide

1-hr average 20.2.3.110 NMAC none none 0.010 ppm

Total Reduced Sulfur

1/2-hour average 20.2.3.110 NMAC none none 0.003 ppm

Particulate Matter (TSP)

24-hour average 20.2.3.109 NMAC none none 150 μg/m 3



# 7-day average 20.2.3.109 NMAC none none 110 μg/m 3



# 30-day average 20.2.3.109 NMAC none none 90 μg/m 3



# Annual geometric mean 20.2.3.109 NMAC none none 60 μg/m 3

# 38 SIP Revisions submitted to EPA by the Governor on November 6, 2009 are as follows:

TITLE 20 ENVIRONMEN TAL PROTECTION

CHAPTER 11 ALBUQUERQUE - BERNALILLO COUNTY AIR QUALITY

CONTROL BOARD

PART 8 AMBIENT AI R QUALITY STANDARDS

20.11.8.1 ISSUING AGENCY: Albuquerque - Bernalillo County Air Quality Control

Board. P.O. Box 1293, Albuquerque, NM 87103. Telephone: (505) [768

- 2600 ] 768-2601

. [20.11.8.1 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.2 SCOPE:

A. 20.11.8 NMAC is applicable [to the city of Albuquerque and ] within Bernalillo

county.

B. Exempt: 20.11.8 NMAC does not apply to sources within Bernalillo county,

which are located on Indian land s over which the Albuquerque - Bernalillo county air quality

control board lacks jurisdiction.

[20.11.8.2 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.3 STATUTORY AUTHORITY: 20.11.8 NMAC is adopted pursuant to the

authority provided in the New Mexico Air Qu ality Control Act, NMSA 1978 Sections 74-2-4,

74-2-5C; the Joint Air Quality Control Board Or dinance, Bernalillo County Ordinance 94-5

Sections 3 & 4; the Joint Ai r Quality Control Board Ordina nce, Revised Ordinances of

Albuquerque 1994 Sections 9-5-1-3 & 9-5-1-4.

[20.11.8.3 NMAC - N, 7/1/04]

20.11.8.4 DURATION: Permanent.

[20.11.8.4 NMAC - N, 7/1/04]

20.11.8.5 EFFECTIVE DATE: [The eff ective date of Part 8 is, ] July 1

, 2004, unless a

later date is cited at th e end of a section. The effective date of a specific section is located at the

end of each section within the historical bracket s. As required by the New Mexico Air Quality

Control Act, Chapter 74, Article 2, Section 6 NMSA 1978, no regulation or emission control

requirement or amendment thereto, or repeal ther eof, shall become effective until 30 days after

its filing under the State Rules Ac t, Chapter 14, Article 4 NMSA 1978.

[20.11.8.5 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.6 OBJECTIVE: [The objective of 20.11.8 NMAC is ] To adopt local ambient air

quality standards that are identical to the federal National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air

Quality Standards codified at 40 CFR Pa rt 50, and to adopt applicable state Ambient Air Quality

Standards codified at 20.2.3 NMAC.

[20.11.8.6 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.7 DEFINITIONS: The definitions in 20.11.1 NMAC apply to 20.11.8 NMAC.

[20.11.8.7 NMAC - N, 7/1/04]

# 39 20.11.8.8 SAVINGS CLAUSE: Any amendment to Ambient Air Quality Standards

, 20.11.8 NMAC, [that ] which is filed with the state records center, shall not affect actions

pending for violation of a city or county ordinance, the air quality regulations for Albuquerque

and Bernalillo county or a permit issued by the department. Prosecution for a violation under a

prior statute, ordinance, regulat ion or permit shall be governed and prosecuted under the statute,

ordinance or regulation in effect at the time the violation was committed.

[20.11.8.8 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.9 SEVERABILITY: If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or word of 20.11.8

NMAC or any federal standards incorporated herein is for any reason held to be unconstitutional

or otherwise invalid by any cour t, the decision shall not affect the validity of remaining

provisions of 20.11.8 NMAC.

[20.11.8.9 NMAC - N, 7/1/04]

20.11.8.10 DOCUMENTS: Documents incorporated a nd cited in 20.11.8 NMAC may be

viewed at the Albuquerque envi ronmental health department , 400 Marquette NW, Albuquerque,

NM.

[20.11.8.10 NMAC - N, 7/1/04]

20.11.8.11 INCORPORATION OF FEDE RAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY

STANDARDS: Except as otherwise provided, the Na tional Primary and Secondary Ambient

Air Quality Standards of the United States environmental pr otection agency including the

General Provisions theret o, codified at 40 CFR Part 50 (including appendices) , as amended

through [July 18, 1997 ] January 12, 2009 , are hereby incorporated into 20.11.8 NMAC. Section

20.11.8.13 NMAC is a summary of the federal a nd state standards in corporated in 20.11.8

NMAC.

[20.11.8.11 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.12 INCORPORATION OF STATE AM BIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS:

Except as otherwise provided, the state Ambient Air Quality Standards of the environmental

improvement board codified at 20.2.3 NMAC [, effective October 31, 2002, ] are hereby

incorporated into 20.11.8 NMAC. Section 20.11.8.13 NMAC is a summary of the federal and

state standards incorporated in 20.11.8 NMAC.

[20.11.8.12 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.13 SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY

STANDARDS:

Pollutant Standards

Reference Federal

Primary Federal

Secondary New Mexico

State

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

8-hour average 40 CFR 50.8 9[.0 ] ppm none 8.7 ppm

1-hour average 40 CFR 50.8 35 ppm none 13.1 ppm

# 40 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO 2 

# )

24-hour average 20.2.3.111

NMAC none none 0.10 ppm

Annual arithmetic

mean 40 CFR 50.11 0.053 ppm 0.053 ppm 0.05 ppm

Ozone (O 3 

# )

[1

- hour average 0.120 ppm 0.120 ppm none ]

8-hour average 40 CFR 50.10 0.08 ppm 0.08 ppm none

(The 1997 standard - and the implementation rules for that standard - will remain in place for

implementation purposes as EPA undertakes rule making to address the transition from the

1997 ozone standard to the 2008 ozone standard).

8-hour average 40 CFR 50.15 0.075 ppm 0.075 ppm none

(Effective May 27, 2008)

Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 

# )

24-hour average 40 CFR 50.4 0.14 ppm none 0.10 ppm

3-hour average 40 CFR 50.5 none 0.5 ppm none

Annual (arithmetic

mean) 40 CFR 50.4 0.030 ppm none 0.02 ppm

Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 

# )

[24

- hour average 65 μg/m 3 

# 65 μg/m 3 

# none ]

24-hour average 40 CFR 50.13 35 μg/m 3 

# 35 μg/m 3 

# none

(Effective December 18, 2006)

Annual (arithmetic

mean) 40 CFR 50.7 &

40 CFR 50.13 15.0 μg/m 3 

# 15.0 μg/m 3 

# none

Particulate Matter (PM 10 

# )

24-hour average 40 CFR 50.6 150 μg/m 3 

# 150 μg/m 3 

# none

[Annual arithmetic

mean 50 μg/m 3 

# 50 μg/m 3 

# none ]

Lead (Pb)

[Quarterly arithmetic

mean 1.5 μg/m 3 

# 1.5 μg/m 3 

# none ]

Rolling 3-month

average 40 CFR

50.16 0.15μg/m 3 

# 0.15μg/m 3 

# none

(Effective 1 year af ter date of area attainment designation)

Hydrogen Sulfide

1-hr average 20.2.3.110

NMAC none none 0.010 ppm

Total Reduced Sulfur

# 41 1/2-hour average 20.2.3.110

NMAC none none 0.003 ppm

Particulate Matter (TSP)

24-hour average 20.2.3.109

NMAC none none 150 μg/m 3



# 7-day average 20.2.3.109

NMAC none none 110 μg/m 3



# 30-day average 20.2.3.109

NMAC none none 90 μg/m 3



# Annual geometric

mean 20.2.3.109

NMAC None none 60 μg/m 3



# [20.11.8.13 NMAC - N, 7/1/04; A, 9/14/09]

20.11.8.14 INTERPRETATION: Except as expressly provided to the contrary in these

regulations, whenever two or more parts of th ese regulations limit, control or regulate the

emissions of a particular air contaminant, th e more restrictive or stringent shall govern.

[20.11.8.14 NMAC - N, 7/1/04]

HISTORY OF 20.11.8 NMAC:

None

The proposed SIP revisions may be found at:

http://www.nmcpr.state.nm .us/nmac/parts/title20/20.11.8

EPA Analysis:

Substantive changes to 20.11.8 NMAC Ambient Air Quality Standards include the following

revisions to 20.11.8.13 Summary of Fe deral and State Ambient Air Quality Standards as shown

in the table above:

CO – the CO standard has been revised from 9.0 ppm to 9 ppm. This is consistent with 40 CFR

50.8 and is approvable.

Ozone – the 1 hour average of 0.120 ppm has been deleted and the new 8-hour average of 0.08

ppm has been added. This is consiste nt with 40 CFR 50.10 and is approvable.

Sulfur Dioxide : the federal primary standard of 0.30 ppm has been revised to 0.3 ppm. This is

consistent with 40 CFR 50.4 and is approvable.

Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 

# ) – the 24 hour average of 65 ug/m 3 

# has been revised to 35 ug/m 3 

# for

both federal primary and secondary standards. This is consistent with 40 CFR 50.13 and is

approvable.

# 42 Particulate Matter (PM 10 

# ) – the annual arithmetic mean of 50 ug/m 3 

# has been deleted for both

federal primary and secondary standards. This is consistent with 40 CFR 50.6 and is approvable.

Lead (Pb) – the quarterly arithmetic mean of 1.5 ug/m 3 

# has been deleted for both federal primary

and secondary standards. A new standa rd rolling 3-month average of 0.15 ug/m 3 

# has been added

for both the federal primary and secondary standa rds. This is consistent with 40 CFR 50.16 and

is approvable.

As shown in the table above, nonsubstantive cha nges include minor editing of rule provisions

20.11.8.1 Issuing Agency, 20.11.8.2 Scope, 20.11.8.5 Effective Date, 20.11.8.6 Objective,

20.11.8 Savings Clause, 20.11.8.11 Incorporation of Fede ral Ambient Air Quality Standards, and

20.11.8.12 Incorporation of State Ambient Air Quality Standards which offer additional

clarification and update . Als o, nonsubstantive changes include the addition of a “Reference”

column to the Table “Summary of Federal a nd State Ambient Air Quality Standards” in

20.11.8.13 that reference to CFR citati on for the applicable standard.

The above changes to the SIP result in the following:

A) The proposed SIP revision will promote consistency between the NMAC 20.2.3

(NMED's Part 3) and the NMAC 20.11.8 (AQD's Part 8) SIP regulations. Thus a source

wanting to locate, operate, or obtain appropriate air pe rmit anywhere within the

geographical boundaries of the State will be required to adhere to the same AAQS,

B) The proposed SIP revision will enhance comp liance with the State air quality standards,

C) The proposed SIP revision will make the SIP more stringent by adding local AAQS that

cover Pollutants without a NAAQS, or are more stringent than a NAAQS.

D) The proposed SIP revision will enhance the area's air quality.

E) The proposed SIP revision will ensure that th e SIP is consistent with the latest Federallypromulgated NAAQS.

Conclusion: Therefore, for the reasons (A through E) outlined above, the NMAC Title 20,

Chapter 11, Part 8 as received by EPA on Nove mber 9, 2009 is an improvement to the New

Mexico SIP for the Albuquerque/Ber nalillo County area, and ensure s consistency with the latest

Federally-promulgated NAAQS as shown in Ta ble 1 above. EPA proposes approval of these

SIP revisions.

# 43 APPENDIX B

(Title 20, Chapter 11, Part 60 and Part 61 NNSR and PSD (20.11.60 and 20.11.61 NMAC))

TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT

March 26, 2012

Clean Air Act Approval of Revisions to New Mexico Regulations

For Prevention of Significant Deterioration A pplicable to Albuquer que/ Bernalillo County

(Docket EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0648)

This portion of the Technical Support Document (TSD) concerns our evaluation of revisions to

the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) as submitted to us with a letter from the

Governor of New Mexico dated May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010, on behalf of the

Albuquerque Environmental Health Department (AE HD), for review and appr oval into the SIP.

This portion of the TSD specifically concer ns revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC – Prevention of

Significant Deterioration (Part 61) subm itted in the May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010

submittals.

No material in this submittal package was de signated as Confidential Business Information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Adina Wiley United States Environmental Prot ection Agency Region 6, Air Permits Section

(6PD-R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-2115.

# 44 Subject: Review of Proposed Revisions to th e New Mexico State Implementation Plan

(SIP) for air quality through the incorporation of an amended 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention

of Significant Deterioration

Contents:

I. Executive Summary

II. Background

III. Summary of State Submittal

IV. Technical Review of State Submittal

V. Conclusions

# 45 I. Executive Summary

What actions are evaluated in this Technical Support Document?

This technical support document (TSD) reviews tw o proposed revisions to the New Mexico State

Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permitting in

Albuquerque. This review will determine if th e program revisions are consistent with the

requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA’s policy and guidance.

May 24, 2006

The May 24, 2006, submittal included two separate rulemakings:

1. The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Qual ity Control Board (ABCAQCB) repealed

and replaced 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas , and 20.11.61 NMAC,

Prevention of Significant Deterioration , on December 14, 2005, after a public comment

period and corresponding public hearing he ld on December 14, 2005. The regulations

were then filed with the New Mexico Stat e Records Center (NMSRC) on December 22,

2005, and became effective locally on January 23, 2006. EPA SIP-approved these

revisions to 20.11.60 NMAC and 20.11.61 NMAC on April 26, 2007 (see 72 FR 20728).

Because these revisions are already SIP-appr oved, this TSD will only address this portion

of the May 24, 2006, SIP submittal as background information.

2. In addition, on April 12, 2006, the AQCB moved to correct typographical errors found in

the original filing of 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration . These

regulations were filed with the NMSRC on April 13, 2006, and became effective locally

on May 15, 2006. These typographical correctio ns are the subject of this TSD.

August 16, 2010

The ABCAQCB amended 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas , and 20.11.61

NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration , on July 14, 2010, after a public comment period

and corresponding public hearing held the same evening. These SIP revisions involve amending

the current versions of 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas, and 20.11.61

NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, last approved by EPA on April 26, 2007. At the

same time, the AQCB amended the Infrastructure SIP for PM 2.5 

# & Ozone. The revisions to the

Infrastructure SIP were also submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010, but are being evaluated

separately from the revisions to the PSD perm itting regulations. At this time EPA is not

evaluating the August 16, 2010, revisions to the NNSR Permitting program because these rules

are severable from the PSD Program. EPA will a ddress the NNSR program revisions at a later

date in a separate rulemaking.

What action has EPA taken on the Albuquerque PSD and NNSR Programs?

EPA SIP-approved NMAC 20.11.60 Permitting in Nonattainment Areas and NMAC 20.11.61

Prevention of Significant Deterioration on April 26, 2007, as adopted by Albuquerque on

December 2005 and submitted to EPA on May 24, 2006. See 72 FR 20728. EPA has taken no

action on the portion of the May 24, 2006 submittal that was adopted on April 13, 2006, and the

August 16, 2010 submittal. Accordingly, this Tec hnical Support Document (TSD) will evaluate

the May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 revisions to the Albuquerque PSD Program for inclusion

# 46 in New Mexico SIP to determine if the revisions comply with the Clean Air Act and EPA

regulations, and are consiste nt with EPA’s policies.

II. Background of the State Submittal

The ABCAQCB repealed and replaced 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas

, and 20.11.61 NMAC Prevention of Significant Deterioration , on December 14, 2005 after a

public comment period and corresponding public hearing held on December 14, 2005. The

regulation was then filed with the New Mexico State Records Center on December 22, 2005, and

became effective locally on Janua ry 13, 2006. Governor Bill Richardson submitted these rules as

revisions to the New Mexico SIP on May 24, 2006. EPA SIP-approved these revisions to

20.11.60 and 20.11.61 NMAC on April 26, 2007. See 72 FR 20728.

On April 12, 2006, the AQCB moved to correct typogr aphical errors found in the original filing

of 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration . These typographical errors were

also submitted by Governor Bill Richardson as revisions to the Ne w Mexico SIP on May 24,

2006.

The Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board ( AQCB) adopted an amended

20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in Nonattainment Areas, 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of

Significant Deterioration and Infrastructure SIP for PM 2.5 

# and Ozone, on July 14, 2010, after a

public comment period and corresponding public hear ing held the same evening. The amended

regulations were then filed with the New Mexi co State Records Center on July 28, 2010, and

became effective locally on August 30, 2010. This request was then submitted to EPA by

Governor Bill Richardson on August 16, 2010.

III. Summary of the State Submittal

May 2006

Bernalillo County, New Mexico is currently desi gnated as an attainment area for CO under a

Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP). This design ation was published in th e Federal Register on

July 21, 2005 [FR Vol. 70, No. 139 in Att achment L]. The objective of 20.11.61 NMAC,

Prevention of Significant Deterioration is to minimize air pollutant emissions from new major

stationary sources or major modi fications in areas classified as in attainment of the national

ambient air quality standards or de termined to be unclassifiable pur suant to Section 107(d) of the

Act. Revisions were typographica l corrections that were approved subsequent to the previous

rulemaking.

August 2010

Bernalillo County, New Mexico is currently desi gnated as an attainment area for CO under a

Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP). This designat ion was published in the Federal Register on

July 21, 2005 [FR Vol. 70, No. 139] . The objective of 20.11.60 NMAC, Permitting in

Nonattainment Areas is to implement a pre-construction permit program for new or modified

major stationary sources that wish to locate in an area where federal ambient air quality

standards are being exceeded. Since Bernalillo Count y is in attainment fo r all criteria pollutants

there are no affected sources for this regulation (see 70 FR. 41963, July 21, 2005).

# 47 The objective of 20.11.61 NMAC, Prevention of Significant Deterioration is to minimize air

pollutant emissions from new major stationary sources or major modifications in areas classified

as in attainment of the national ambient air quality sta ndards or determined to be unclassifiable

pursuant to Section 107(d) of the Act. Therefore, the sources affected by this regulation will

include any new major stationary sources or major modifications pursuant to the EPA

regulations.

IV. Technical Review of State Submittal

This technical review of the May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC

Prevention of Significant Deterioration consists of a comparison betw een the relevant Clean Air

Act requirements and the corresponding sections in the SIP submittal. Each SIP submittal is

separately reviewed for completeness as a SIP submittal under Part 51, Appendix V. Next, a

section-by-section review of the submittal in comparison to 40 CFR Part 51 is presented to

determine whether the submittal satisfies the requirements for preparation, adoption, and

submittal of a SIP revision.

IV.A. Evaluation of the August 16, 2010 and May 24, 2006 SIP Submittals

1. Evaluation of the August 16, 2010 and May 24, 2006, SIP Submittals with respect to

section 110(l) of the CAA

Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act states:

Each revision to an implementation plan submitte d by a State under this Act shall be adopted by

such State after reasonable notice and public he aring. The Administrator shall not approve a

revision of a plan if the revision would interfer e with any applicable requirement concerning

attainment and reasonable further progress (as de fined in section 171), or any other applicable

requirement of this Act.

Thus, under section 110(l), these two SIP revisions must not in terfere with attainment or

reasonable further progress or any other appli cable requirement of the Act. The May 24, 2006,

SIP submittal corrects typographical errors in the Albuquerque PSD permitting program, adopted

in 2005 by the Albuquerque AQCB to implement New Source Review Reform permitting

requirements. These corrections to typographical errors are thus required to adequately

implement the Albuquerque PSD program consistent with EPA regulations and the CAA. The

August 16, 2010 revisions to the Albuquerque PSD and NNSR permit programs, were adopted

by the Albuquerque AQCB to implement the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS and provisions for

NO X 

# as a precursor to ozone, consistent wi th the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus,

the August 16, 2010, revisions are required to adequately implement the Albuquerque PSD and

NNSR permitting programs consistent with EPA regulations and the CAA. Therefore, because

the May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010, SIP submittals are required under the CAA to implement

statutorily mandated air permitting programs, these revisions by extension w ill not interfere with

any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other

applicable requirement of the CAA.

# 48 IV.B. Evaluation of the August 16, 2010 and May 24, 2006 SIP Submittals

1. Evaluation of the August 16, 2010 and M ay 24, 2006, SIP submittals with respect to

the Part 51, Appendix V Completeness Checklist

Part 51, Appendix V Completeness Checklists

The criteria for completeness determination is Appendix V to Part 51 - Criteria for determining

the completeness of plan submissions and is outlined below:

1.0 Purpose: This appendix V sets forth th e minimum criteria for determining whether a

State implementation plan submitted for consideration by EPA is an official submission

for purposes of review under § 51.103.

1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or revision thereof which fails to

meet the criteria set forth in this appendi x V, and request corre ctive action, identifying

the component(s) absent or insufficient to perform a review of the submitted plan.

1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a plan submission meets the

requirements of this appendix V within 60 days of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no

later than 6 months after the date which the State was required to submit the plan or

revision. If a completeness de termination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a

submittal, the submittal shall be deemed complete by operation of law on the date 6

months from receipt. A determination of co mpleteness under this paragraph means that

the submission is an official submission for purposes of §51.103.

The attached checklist outlines the basic criter ia included under 2.1 and 2.2 of Appendix V.

Section 2.3 of Appendix V describe s the "parallel process procedur e" which EPA had previously

adopted to expedite the review of plans. This feature, however , is being deleted from the next

revised CFR on completeness. Therefore, it is not included in the checklist.

# 49 SIP Completeness Checklist for the August 16, 2010 and May 24, 2006 SIP Submittal

1. The package is sent with a formal submitta l letter from the Governor or his or her

designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision.

The revision to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) for typographical

corrections in air quality regul ations was received from Governor Bill Richardson with a

May 24, 2010 letter.

The New Mexico Infrastructure SIP revision which included PM 2.5 

# and Ozone was

submitted by a letter from New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, with an August 16,

2010 date.

2. Evidence is included that the State has adopt ed the revision in the State code or body of

regulations, or that the State has issued th e permit, order, consen t agreement (hereafter

document) in final form. This evidence would include the date of adoption or final

issuance and the effective date of revision, if different from adoption/issuance date.

The revisions with the May 24 2006 subm ittal were adopted by the AlbuquerqueBernalillo County Air Quality Control B oard on April 13, 2006, and became effective

May 15, 2006.

The revisions with the August 16, 2010 submittal were adopted by the AlbuquerqueBernalillo County Air Quality Control B oard on July 14, 2010, and became effective

August 30, 2010.

3. Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt

and implement the revision, e.g., a citati on of the appropriate State authority.

The New Mexico Air Quality Act provides for regulation at 74-2-5.1 NMSA 1978. Duties

and powers of the department and the local agency; and for plan revisions at 74-2-5.2

NMSA 1978. State air pollution control age ncy; specific duties and powers of the

department.

4. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and

incorporation by reference into the SIP includin g an indication of the changes made to the

existing approved plan where applicable. Th e submittal shall be a copy of the official

State regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropria te State official

indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation

document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

The May 24, 2006 submittal included a copy of the official State regulation document,

signed, stamped, and dated by Ms. Sue Umshler, Board Chair, of the AlbuquerqueBernalillo County Air Quality Control Board.

# 50 The August 16, 2010, submittal included a copy of the official State regulation document,

signed, stamped, and dated by Dr. Margaret Menache, Vice Chair, of the AlbuquerqueBernalillo County Air Quality Control Board.

5. Evidence is included that the State followed all the procedural requirements of its laws

and/or its constitution in the conducting a nd completing the adoption/issuance of the

plan.

The May 24, 2006 SIP submittal package included a letter signed by Alfredo Santistevan,

Director of the Albuquerque Environmental He alth Department, that demonstrated the

SIP submittal was developed pursuant to 40 CFR 51.104.

The August 16, 2010 SIP submittal package included a letter signed by Mary Lou

Leonard, Director of the Albuquerque-Ber nalillo County Environmental Health

Department, that demonstrated the SIP submittal was developed pursuant to 40 CFR

51.104.

6. Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed changes consistent

with the procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice,

(e.g., notarized or certified copi es of any public notices publis hed in newspapers). (The

notice should be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s).

Notices of public hearings were published in the following newspape rs on the date listed:

The Albuquerque Journal on October 29, 2005 and the New Mexico Register, Volume

XVI, Number 20, October 31, 2005, for the May 24, 2006 submittal.

New Mexico Register, Volume XXI, Number 10, May 28, 2010, for the August 16, 2010

submittal.

7. A certification is included indi cating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance

with the information provided in the pub lic notice(s) and the State's laws and

constitution, if applicable.

A public hearing was held in Albuquerque on December 14, 2005 on the May 24, 2006

submittal.

A public hearing was held in Albuquerque on July 24, 2010 on the August 16, 2010

submittal.

8. A compilation of public comments and the State's response is included.

The May 24, 2006 SIP submittal package included a compilation of comments.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board received written comments

during the comment period, including EPA Region 6.

# 51 The August 16, 2010 SIP submittal package included a compilation of comments.

Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board received written comments

during the comment period, including EPA Region 6.

The State should include the followi ng technical information in its SIP revision request package.

1. Identification of all regu lated pollutants affected by the revision is included.

The May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 submittals revise the Albuquerque PSD and

NNSR permitting regulations. Therefore, th e regulated pollutants are all criteria

pollutants that the City of Albuquerque is designated as attainment or nonattainment.

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA

attainment/nonattainment design ation of the locations and th e status of the attainment

plan for the affected area(s) is included.

The May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010, revise 20.11.60 and 20.11.61 NMAC. These

regulations apply specifically to the C ity of Albuquerque’s PSD and NNSR permit

programs. The City of Albuquerque is current ly designated attainment for all criteria

pollutants. The revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC will apply to major sources of criteria

pollutants for which the City of Albuquerque is designated as attainment or maintenance.

In the event that Albuquerque is designated as nonattain ment for a pollutant(s) the

revisions to 20.11.60 NMAC would apply.

3. Quantification of the changes in SIP allowa ble emissions from the affected sources is

included. (Examples include estimates of changes in current actual emissions from

affected sources and/or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions

from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline

levels and allowable emissions anticipat ed if the revisions were approved.)

Not required for the May 24, 2006 and Augus t 16, 2010 revisions to the Albuquerque

PSD and NNSR permit program. Allowable emi ssions consistent with the PSD and NNSR

permitting requirements will be addressed on a permit-by-permit basis.

4. Demonstration is included that the NAAQ S/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and

visibility as applicable would be prot ected if the revision were approved and

implemented.

The May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 revisi ons to the Albuquerque PSD and NNSR

permit programs are necessary to implement statutorily required programs. Adoption of

these programs will protect the NAAQS/ PSD increments/RFP demonstration and

visibility.

# 52 5. FOR REDESIGNATIONS:

a. Is there a fully approved maintenance plan for the primary ambient air quality

standards for at least 10 years as requ ired by §175A of the Clean Air Act?

Not applicable.

b. Are contingency measures included?

Not applicable.

6. Modeling information, if app licable, is required to s upport the proposed revision.

Modeling information is not necessary to support this SIP revision. Modeling will be

provided on a permit-by-permit basis in accordance with the PSD regulations.

7. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous

emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on controls, industria l/process equipment

designs, reformulated materials, etc.).

This SIP submittal does not establish emi ssion limitations. Emission limitations will be

established on a permit-by-permit basis a ccording to the app licable PSD and NNSR

requirements.

8. Evidence is included indicating that a SIP re vision contains emission limitations, work

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporti ng requirements to ensure stated emission

levels.

This SIP submittal does not establish emi ssion limitations, work practice standards, and

recordkeeping/reporting requirements to en sure stated emission levels. Each PSD and

NNSR permit will include these items as necessary to implement the CAA and the

PSD/NNSR permit programs.

9. Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will be determined in

practice (including at what frequency).

This SIP submittal does not establish compli ance/enforcement strategies. Each PSD and

NNSR permit will separately address compliance/enforcement.

10. As appropriate, special economic and tec hnological jus tifications are included per

applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justificati ons are not necessary

should be included. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such

justification.

These justifications are not n ecessary for this SIP revision.

The May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 SIP submi ttal meets the comp leteness criteria

established in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V.

# 53 IV.B. Evaluation of the May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 SIP Submittals

2. Evaluation of the May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 SIP submittals with respect to

the SIP-approved regulations and 40 CFR Part 51 PSD Requirements

The following tables will evaluate the Ma y 24, 2006 changes to 20.11.61 NMAC and the August

16, 2010 revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC with respec t to the SIP-approved provisions and the

applicable federal requirements at 40 CFR Part 51.54Table IV-B1. Analysis of the May 24,2006 Revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC with respect to SIP-approved regulations and the 40CFR Part 51 requirementsSIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State RegulationsRevisions adopted by the Albuquerque AQCB onApril 13, 2006 and submitted to EPA on May 24,2006.Analysis of the May 24, 2006 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC20.11.61.7 Definitions20.11.61.7 Definitions (Note only changes madewere to subsections HH and LL – those will be theonly subsections included in the table below)HH."Major modification" means any physicalchange in or change in the method of operation of amajor stationary source that would result in asignificant emissions increase of a regulated newsource review pollutant, and a significant netemissions increase of thatpollutant from the majorstationary source. Any significant emissionsincrease from any emissions units or net emissionsincrease at a major stationary source that issignificant for volatile organic compounds oxidesof nitrogen shall be considered significant forozone.HH. "Major modification"means any physicalchange in or change in the method of operation of amajor stationary source that would result in asignificant emissions increase of a regulated newsource review pollutant, and a significant netemissions increase of thatpollutant from the majorstationary source. Any significant emissionsincrease from any emissions units or net emissionsincrease at a major stationary source that issignificant for volatile organic compoundsoroxides of nitrogen shall be considered significantfor ozone.This revision to 20.11.61.7.HH. changes the phrase“volatile organic compounds oxides of nitrogen” to“volatile organic compounds or oxides ofnitrogen”.This change is necessary to appropriately identifyNOXas a precursor to ozone, pursuant to 40 CFR51.166(b)(49).This revision is approvable.LL."Minor source baseline date"means theearliest date after the trigger date on which a majorstationary source or major modification subject to40 CFR 52.21, or 20.1 1.61 NMAC, submits acomplete application.(1) The trigger dates are:(a) August 7, 1977, for particulate matterand sulfur dioxide, and(b) February 8, 1988 for nitrogen dioxide.(2) The baseline date is established for eachpollutant for which increments or other equivalentmeasures have been established if:(a) the area in which the proposed majorstationary source or major modificationwould construct is designated asLL."Minor source baseline date"means theearliest date after the trigger date on which a majorstationary source or major modification subject to40 CFR 52.21, or 20.1 1.61 NMAC, submits acomplete application.(1) The trigger dates are:(a) August 7, 1977, for particulate matterand sulfur dioxide, and(b) February 8, 1988 for nitrogen dioxide.(2) The baseline date is established for eachpollutant for which increments or other equivalentmeasures have been established if:(a) the area in which the proposed majorstationary source or major modificationwould construct is designated asThis revision to 20.11.61.7.LL corrects a citationand revises the numberingin the subsection. Thesechanges are administrative.This revision is approvable.55SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State RegulationsRevisions adopted by the Albuquerque AQCB onApril 13, 2006 and submitted to EPA on May 24,2006.Analysis of the May 24, 2006 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACattainment or unclassifiable under section107(d)(l)(D) or (E) of the federal Act forthe pollutant on the date the application isdetermined to be complete, consistent with40 CFR 5 1.21 or 20.1 1.61 NMAC, and(b) in the case of a major stationarysource, the pollutant would be emitted insignificant amounts, or in the case of amajor modification, there would be asignificant net emissions increase of thepollutant.(4) Any minor source baseline date establishedoriginally for the TSP increment shall remain ineffect and shall apply for purposes of determiningthe amount of available PMl0 increments. Thedepartment may rescind any TSP minor sourcebaseline date if it can be shown, to the director'ssatisfaction that, either the emissions increase fromthe major stationary source, or the net emissionsincrease from the major modification responsiblefor triggering the minor source baseline date didnot result in a significant amount of PMloemissions.attainment or unclassifiable under section107(d)(l)(D) or (E) of the federal Act forthe pollutant on the date the application isdetermined to be complete, consistent with40 CFR 5 1.2140 CFR 52.21or 20.1 1.61NMAC, and(b) in the case of a major stationarysource, the pollutant would be emitted insignificant amounts, or in the case of amajor modification, there would be asignificant net emissions increase of thepollutant.(4)(3)Any minor source baseline date establishedoriginally for the TSP increment shall remain ineffect and shall apply for purposes of determiningthe amount of available PMl0 increments. Thedepartment may rescind any TSP minor sourcebaseline date if it can be shown, to the director'ssatisfaction that, either the emissions increase fromthe major stationary source, or the net emissionsincrease from the major modification responsiblefor triggering the minor source baseline date didnot result in a significant amount of PMloemissions.20.11.61.28Table 3 – Significant Monitoring ConcentrationsPollutant Air QualityConcentrationMicrogramper cubicmeter(μg/m3)AveragingTimeCarbonmonoxide575 8 hoursFluorides 0.25 24 hoursLead 0.1 3 months20.11.61.28Table 3 – Significant Monitoring ConcentrationsPollutant Air QualityConcentrationMicrogramper cubicmeter(μg/m3)AveragingTimeCarbonmonoxide575 8 hoursFluorides 0.25 24 hoursLead 0.1 3 monthsThe revisions to 20.11.61.28 add new footnote B toTable 3. This footnote is moved from Table 4 asdetailed below.This revision is necessary to make the Albregulations consistent with the federal requirementsfor VOC as a precursor to ozone at 40 CF51.166(b)(49)(i).56SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State RegulationsRevisions adopted by the Albuquerque AQCB onApril 13, 2006 and submitted to EPA on May 24,2006.Analysis of the May 24, 2006 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACNitrogendioxide14 AnnualOzone BParticulateMatter(M10)10 24 hoursSulfurcompoundsHydrogensulfide (H2S)Reducedsulfurcompounds(incl. H2S)SulfurdioxideSulfuric acidmistTotal reducedsulfur (incl.H2S)0.201013A101 hour1 hour24 hours1 hourA – No acceptable monitoring techniquesavailable at this time.Therefore, monitoring isnot required until acceptable techniques areavailable.Nitrogendioxide14 AnnualOzone BParticulateMatter(PM10)10 24 hoursSulfurcompoundsHydrogensulfide (H2S)Reducedsulfurcompounds(incl. H2S)SulfurdioxideSulfuric acidmistTotal reducedsulfur (incl.H2S)0.201013A101 hour1 hour24 hours1 hourA – No acceptable monitoring techniquesavailable at this time.Therefore, monitoring isnot required until acceptable techniques areavailable.B – No de minimis air quality level isprovided for ozone. However, any netincrease of 100 tons per year or more ofvolatile organic compounds subject to PSDwould be required to perform an ambientimpact analysis, including the gathering ofambient air quality data.This revision is approvable for VOC. NOTE: Thatthis revision does not identify NOXas a precursorto ozone. Therefore, this revision by itself is notapprovable as implementing NOXas a precursor forozone. This revision to 20.11.61.28 can only beapproved if the subsequent revision submittedAugust 16, 2010 is also approved.20.11.61.29Table 4 – Allowable PSD Increments:Micrograms per cubic meter(μg/m3)Class I Class II ClassIII20.11.61.29Table 4 – Allowable PSD Increments:Micrograms per cubic meter(μg/m3)Class I Class II ClassIIIThis revision to 20.11.61.29 removes the footnoteB from Table 4. As discussed previously, thisfootnote was moved to Table 3 at 20.11.61.28NMAC.57SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State RegulationsRevisions adopted by the Albuquerque AQCB onApril 13, 2006 and submitted to EPA on May 24,2006.Analysis of the May 24, 2006 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACNitroenDioxide annualarithmeticmean2.5 25 50ParticulateMatterPM10, annualarithmeticmeanPM10, 24-hourmaximum48a1730a3460aSulfur DioxideAnnualarithmeticmean24-hourmaximum3-hourmaximum25a25a2091a512a40182a700aa – Not to be exceededmore than once per year.b – No de minimis air quality level is providedfor ozone. However, any net increase of 100 tonsper year or more of volatile organic compoundssubject to PSD would be required to perform anambient impact analysis, including the gatheringof ambient air quality data.NitrogenDioxide annualarithmeticmean2.5 25 50ParticulateMatterPM10, annualarithmeticmeanPM10, 24-hourmaximum48a1730a3460aSulfur DioxideAnnualarithmeticmean24-hourmaximum3-hourmaximum25a25a2091a512a40182a700aa – Not to be exceededmore than once per year.b–No de minimis air quality level is providedfor ozone. However, any net increase of 100 tonsper year or more of volatile organic compoundssubject to PSD would be required to perform anambient impact analysis, including the gatheringof ambient air quality data.This revision is administrative.This revision is approvable.The analysis presented above in TableIV-B1 demonstrates that the revisionsto 20.11.61 NMAC adopted on April 13, 2006, andsubmitted on May 24, 2006 are consistent with EPA regulations, policy and guidance for the PSD Permitting Program. Theserevisions to the Albuquerque SIP are approvable.58Table IV-B2. Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC with respect to SIP-approved regulations and the40 CFR Part 51 requirementsNote that there are pending revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC that weresubmitted to EPA on May 24,2006 (discussed previously inTable IV-B1).SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC20.11.61.1ISSUING AGENCY:Albuquerque –Bernalillo County Air Quality Board. P.O. Box1293 Albuquerque, NM 87103. Telephone: (505)768-2600.20.11.61.1 ISSUING AGENCY:Albuquerque –Bernalillo County Air Quality Board. P.O. Box1293 Albuquerque, NM 87103. Telephone: (505)[768-2600] 768-2601.This is an administrative change to update theABCAQB phone number.This revision is approvable.20.11.61.2 SCOPE:A. Exempt:(2) each regulated new source reviewpollutant emitted in a nonattainment area for thatpollutant;(3) after a public hearing, consistentwith the public notice and participation provisionsof 20.11.41 NMAC,Authority-to-Construct, theboard may exempt major stationary sources ormajor modifications that are part ofnonprofit health or nonprofit educationalinstitutions; or(4) a portable stationary source whichhas previously received a permit pursuant to20.11.61 NMAC ;and;(a) the owner or operator proposesto relocate the source, and emissions from thesource at the new location will be temporary; and(b) the emissions from the sourcewould not exceed its allowable emissions rate; and(c) the emissions from the sourcewould not impact any federal class I area nor anyarea where an applicable increment is known to be20.11.61.2 SCOPE:A. Exempt:(2) each regulated new source reviewpollutant emitted by a source or modificationlocatedin a nonattainment area for that pollutant;(3) after a public hearing, consistentwith the public notice and participation provisionsof 20.11.41 NMAC,Authority-to-Construct, theboard may exempt major stationary sources ormajor modifications [that are part of] if:(a) the major stationary sourcewould be anonprofit health or nonprofiteducational [institutions] institution, or a majormodification that would occur at such aninstitution; or[(4)(b) the source or modification isaportable stationary source which has previouslyreceived a permit pursuant to 20.11.61 NMAC [;and] if:[(a)] (i)the owner or operatorproposes to relocate the source, and emissions fromthe source at the new location [will] wouldbetemporary; andThe revisions to the Albuquerque PSD PermitProgram Scope are made to improve readabilityand non-substantive in nature. These revisionsrestructure the SIP-approved scope. Additionally,the revisions to the scope continue to support therequirements at 40 CFR 51.166(a).This revision is approvable59SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACviolated; and(d) reasonable notice is given to thedepartment prior to the relocation identifying theproposed new location and the probable duration ofoperation at the new location; such notice shall begiven to the department not less than 10 days inadvance of the proposed relocation unless adifferent time interval is previously approved bythe department;(5) sources or modifications that would bemajor only if quantifiable fugitive emissions areconsidered in calculating the potential to emit ornot emissions increase, and the source does notbelong to:(a) any category in Table 1 of20.11.61.26 NMAC; or(b) any other stationary sourcecategory which on or after August 7, 1980, isbeing regulated under Section 111 or 112 of the act.[(b)] (ii)the emissions from thesource would not exceed its allowable emissionsrate; and[(c)] (iii)the emissions from thesource would not impact any federal class I areanor any area where an applicable increment isknown to be violated; and[(d)] (iv)reasonable notice is givento the department prior to the relocation identifyingthe proposed new location and theprobableduration of operation at the new location; suchnotice shall be given to the department not less than10 days in advance of the proposed relocationunless a different time [interval] durationispreviously approved by the department;[(5)] (4)sources or modifications thatwould be major only if quantifiable fugitiveemissions are considered in calculating thepotential to emit [or not emissions increase], andthe source does not belong to:(a) any category in Table 1 of20.11.61.26 NMAC; or(b) any other stationary sourcecategory which [on or after] as ofAugust 7, 1980,is being regulated under Section 111 or 112 of theact.20.11.61.7 DEFINITIONS:To assist in the review, each definition at20.11.61.7 NMAC that has been revised will bepresented as a separate row in this table.20.11.61.7 DEFINITIONS:To assist in the review, each definition at20.11.61.7 NMAC that has been revised will bepresented as a separate row in this table.The analysis of each revised PSD definition will bepresented below.I. “Baseline actual emissions”means the rate ofemissions, in tons per year, of a regulated newsource review pollutant, as determined inaccordance withthe following.I. “Baseline actual emissions”means the rate ofemissions, in tons per year, of a regulated newsource review pollutant, as determined inaccordance with [the following] Paragraphs (1)-(4)of Subsection I of 20.11.61.7 NMAC.The definition of “baseline actual emissions” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(47). The August2010 revisions to the SIP-approved definition of“baseline actual emissions” non-substantivelyimprove readability of the definition without60SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACchanging the underlying SIP-approvedrequirements. These revisions are approvable.20.11.61.7DEFINITIONS [CONT.]J. “Baseline area”Means all lands designated as attainment orunclassifiable in which the major source or majormodification would construct or would have an airquality impact equal to or greater than onemicrogram per cubic meter (1 ug/m3) (annualaverage) of the pollutant for which the minorsource baseline date is established. The majorsource or major modification establishes the minorsource baseline date. Lands are designated asattainment or unclassifiable under Section107(d)(1)(D)or (E) of the Act within each federalair quality control region in the state of NewMexico. Any baseline area established originallyfor total suspended particulates (TSP) incrementsshall remain in effect and shall apply for purposesof determining the amount of available PM10increments, A TSP baseline area shall not remain ineffect if the department rescinds the correspondingminor source baseline date.20.11.61.7DEFINITIONS [CONT.]J. “Baseline area”(1)Means [all lands] any intrastate area (andevery part thereof)designated as attainment orunclassifiable under Section 107(d)(1) (D) or (E) ofthe actin which the major source or majormodification establishing the minor source baselinedatewould construct or would have an air qualityimpact equal to or greater than one microgram percubic meter (1 ug/m3) (annual average) of thepollutant for which the minor source baseline dateis established. [The major source or majormodification establishes the minor source baselinedate. Lands are designated as attainment orunclassifiable under Section 107(d)(1)(D) or (E) ofthe Act within each federal air quality controlregionin the state of New Mexico.](2) Area redesignations under Section 107(d)(1)(D) or (E) of the act cannot intersect or be smallerthan the area of impact of any major stationarysource or major modification which:(a) establishes a minor source baselinedate; or(b) is subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or underregulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR51.166, and would be constructed in thesame state as the state proposing theredesignation;(3)Any baseline area established originally fortotal suspended particulates (TSP) increments shallremain in effect and shall apply for purposes ofdetermining the amount of available PM10increments, [A TSP] except that suchbaseline areaThe substantive revisions to “baseline area” arerequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15).These revisions are approvable.61SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACshall not remain in effect if the department rescindsthe corresponding minor source baseline date inaccordance with Paragraph (3) of Subsection LL of20.11.61.7 NMAC.K. “Baseline concentration”means that ambientconcentration level that exists in the baseline areaat the time of the applicable minor source baselinedate.(1) A baseline concentration is determined for eachpollutant for which a minor source baseline date isestablished and shall include:(a) The actual emissions shall berepresentative of sources in existence on theapplicable minor source baseline date, exceptas provided in Paragraph (2) of Subsection Kof 20.11.61.7 NMAC;Remainder of definition unchangedK. “Baseline concentration”means that ambientconcentration level that exists in the baseline areaat the time of the applicable minor source baselinedate.(1) A baseline concentration is determined for eachpollutant for which a minor source baseline date isestablished and shall include:(a) The actual emissions [shall be]representative of sources in existence onthe applicable minor source baseline date,except as provided in Paragraph (2) ofSubsection K of 20.11.61.7 NMAC;Remainder of definition unchangedThe definition of “baseline concentration” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(13).This revision is a non-substantive change to theSIP-approved definition and is approvable asconsistent with the federal requirements.M. “Best available control technology (BACT)”means an emissions limitation (including a visibleemission standard) based on the maximum degreeof reduction for each regulated new source reviewpollutant determines is achievable on a case-bycase basis, This determination will take intoaccount energy, environmental, and economicimpacts and other costs, The determination must beachievable for such source or modification throughapplication of production processes or availablemethods, systems, and techniques, including fuelcleaning or treatment orinnovative fuel combustiontechniques for control of such pollutants.M. “Best available control technology (BACT)”means an emissions limitation (including a visibleemission standard) based on the maximum degreeof reduction for each regulated new source reviewpollutant which would be emitted from anyproposed major stationary source or majormodification, which the director[determines isachievable] on a case-by-case basis, [Thisdetermination will take] takinginto account energy,environmental, and economic impacts and othercosts, [The determination must be] determines isachievable for such source or modification throughapplication of production processes or availablemethods, systems, and techniques, including fuelcleaning or treatment orinnovative fuel combustiontechniques for control of such [pollutants]pollutant. [Remainder of SIP-approved definition isunchanged.]The definition of “best available control technology(BACT)” is required at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(12). Therevisions to the SIP-approved definition of BACTare non-substantive and continue to be consistentwith the federal requirements.This revision is approvable62SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACN. “Building, structure, facility, orinstallation”means all of the pollutant emittingactivities which belong to the same industrialgrouping, are located on one or more contiguous oradjacent properties, and are under the control of thesame person (or persons under common control).Pollutant-emitting activities shall be considered aspart of the same industrial grouping if they belongto the same “major group” (i.e., which have thesame first two-digit code) as described in thestandard industrial classification (SIC) manual,1972, as amended by the 1977 supplement (U.S.government printing office stock numbers 4101-0066 and 03-005-00176-0, respectively) or anysuperseding SIC manual.N. “Building, structure, facility, orinstallation”means all of the pollutant emittingactivities which belong to the same industrialgrouping, are located on one or more contiguous oradjacent properties, and are under the control of thesame person (or persons under common control)except the activities of any vessel. Pollutantemitting activities shall be considered as part of thesame industrial grouping if they belong to the same“major group” (i.e., which have the same first twodigit code) as described in the standard industrialclassification (SIC) manual,1972, as amended bythe 1977 supplement (U.S> government printingoffice stock numbers 4101-0066 and 03-005-00176-0, respectively) or any superseding SICmanual.The substantive revisions to “building, structure,facility or installation” are consistent with therequirements at 40CFR 51.166(b)(6).This revision is approvable.P. “Commence”means, as applied to constructionof a major stationary source or major modification,that the owner or operator has all necessarypreconstruction approvals or permits and has:(1) begun, or caused to begin, a continuousprogram of actual on-site construction of thesource, to be completed within a reasonable time;or(2) entered into binding agreements or contractualobligations, which cannot be cancelled or modifiedwithout substantial loss to the owner or operator, toundertake and complete, within a reasonable time, aprogram of actual construction.P. “Commence” [means,] as applied toconstruction of a major stationary source or majormodification, meansthat the owner or operator hasall necessary preconstruction approvals or permitsand eitherhas:(1) begun, or caused to begin, a continuousprogram of actual on-site construction of thesource, to be completed within a reasonable time;or(2) entered into binding agreements or contractualobligations, which cannot be cancelled or modifiedwithout substantial loss to the owner or operator, toundertake [and complete, within a reasonable time,]a program of actual construction of the source to becompleted within a reasonable time.The definition of “commence” is required at 40CFR 51.166(b)(9). The August 2010 revisions tothe SIP-approved definition are non-substantiveand continue to be consistent with the federalrequirements.This revision is approvableQ. “Complete”means, in reference to anapplication for a permit,that the department hasdetermined the application contains all of theinformation necessary for processing theQ. “Complete”means, in reference to anapplication for a permit,that the department hasdetermined the application contains all of theinformation necessary for processing theThe definition of “complete” is required at40 CFR 51.166(b)(22). The August 2010 revision isnon-substantive and continues to be consistent withthe federal requirements.63SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACapplication. Designating an application completefor purposes of permit processing does not precludethe reviewing authority from requesting oraccepting any additional informationapplication. Designating an application completefor purposes of permit processing does not precludethe [reviewing authority] departmentfromrequesting or accepting any additional informationThis revision is approvableY. “Emissions unit”means any part of astationary source that emits or would have thepotential to emit any regulated new source reviewpollutant and includes an electric utility steamgenerating unit as defined in 20.11.61.7 NMAC.For purposes of Subsection Y of 20.11.61.7NMAC, there are two types of emissions units asdescribed;Y. “Emissions unit”means any part of astationary source that emits or would have thepotential to emit any regulated new source reviewpollutant and includes an electric utility steamgenerating unit as defined in 20.11.61.7 NMAC.For purposes of [Subsection Y of 20.11.61.7NMAC] 20.11.61 NMAC, there are two types ofemissions units as [described.] follows:[Remainder of definition is unchanged.]The definition of “emissions unit” is required at 40CFR 51.166(b)(7).The August 2010 revisions broaden theapplicability of the “emissions unit” definition tothe entirety of the Albuquerque PSD programrather than just the Albuquerque PSD programdefinitions.This revision is approvable and is consistent withfederal requirements.AA. “Federally enforceable”means alllimitations and conditions which are enforceable bythe administrator, including:(1)those requirements developed pursuant to 40CFR Parts 60 and 61(2)Requirements within any applicable stateimplementation plan (SIP);(3)Any permit requirements established pursuantto 40 CFR 52.21; or(4)Under regulations approved pursuant to 40CFR Part 51, Subpart I, including 40 CFR51.165 and 40 CFR 51.166 .AA. “Federally enforceable”means alllimitations and conditions which are enforceable bythe administrator, including:(1)those requirements developed pursuant to 40CFR Parts 60 and 61(2)Requirements within any applicable stateimplementation plan (SIP);(3)Any permit requirements established pursuantto 40 CFR 52.21; or(4)Under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFRPart 51, Subpart I, including [40 CFR 51.165and 40 CFR 51.166] operating permits issuedunder an EPA-approved program that expresslyrequires adherence to any permit issued undersuch program.The definition of “federally enforceable” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(17). The August2010 substantive revisions are necessary for theAlbuquerque PSD program to maintain consistencywith the federal requirements.This revision is approvableEE. “Innovative control technology”means anysystem of air pollution control that has not beenadequately demonstratedin practice, but suchsystem would have a substantial likelihood ofachieving greater continuous emissions reductionEE. “Innovative control technology”means anysystem of air pollution control that has not beenadequately demonstrated in practice, but [suchsystem] would have a substantial likelihood ofachieving greater continuous emissions reductionThe definition of “innovative control technology”is required at40 CFR 51.166(b)(19). The August2010 revisions non-substantively revise the SIPapproved definition to improve readability.64SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACthan any control system in current practice orachieving at least comparable reductions at lowercost in terms of energy, economics, or non-airquality environmental impacts.than any control system in current practice orachieving at least comparable reductions at lowercost in terms of energy, economics, or non-airquality environmental impacts.This revision is approvableHH. “Major modification"Major modification" means any physical change inor change in the method of operation of a majorstationary source that would result in a significantemissions increase of a regulated new sourcereview pollutant, and a significant net emissionsincrease of that pollutant from the major stationarysource. Any significant emissions increase fromany emissions units or net emissions increase at amajor stationary source that is significant forvolatile organic compounds oxides of nitrogen shallbe considered significant for ozone.(1) A physical change or change in the method ofoperation shall not include:(a) routine maintenance, repair, andreplacement;(b) use of an alternative fuel or rawmaterial by reason of an order underSection 2(a) and (b) of the Energy Supplyand Environmental Coordination Act of1974 (or any superseding legislation) or byreason of a natural gas curtailment planpursuant to the Federal Power Act;(c) use of an alternative fuel by reason ofan order or rule under Section 125 of theAct;(d) use of an alternative fuel at a steamgenerating unit to the extent that the fuel isgenerated from municipal solid waste;(e) use of an alternative fuel or rawHH. “Major modification(1)Means any physical change in or change in themethod of operations of a major source thatwould result in: a significant emissions increaseof a regulated new source review pollutant; anda significant net emissions increase of thatpollutant from the major stationary source.(2)Any significant emissions increase from anyemissions units or net emissions increase at amajor stationary source that is significant forvolatile organic compounds or oxides ofnitrogen shall be considered significant forozone.[(1)](3)A physical change or change in the methodof operation shall not include:(a) routine maintenance, repair, andreplacement;(b) use of an alternative fuel or rawmaterial by reason of an order underSection 2(a) and (b) of the Energy Supplyand Environmental Coordination Act of1974 (or any superseding legislation) or byreason of a natural gas curtailment planpursuant to the Federal Power Act;(c) use of an alternative fuel by reason ofan order or rule under Section 125 of theAct;(d) use of an alternative fuel at a steamgenerating unit to the extent that the fuel isgenerated from municipal solid waste;Note that there is a substantive change to thedefinition of “major modification” evaluated in the2006 table IV.B1 above. As demonstratedpreviously, the 2006 revision is approvable andnecessary to identify NOXas a precursor to ozoneand implement the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozoneNAAQS.The definition of “major modification” is requiredat 40 CFR 51.166(b)(2).The August 2010 revisionsnon-substantively revise the definition of “majormodification” to improve readability. Theserevisions are consistent with federal requirements.The August 2010 and May 2006 revisions areapprovable.65SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACmaterial by a stationary source which thesource was capable of accommodatingbefore January 6, 1975, unless suchchange would be prohibited under anyfederally enforceable permit conditionwhich was established after January 6,1975 pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or underregulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR5 1.165 or 40 CFR 5 1.166; or the sourceis approved to use under any permit issuedunder 40 CFR 52.21or under regulationsapproved pursuant to 40 CFR 5 1.166;(f)an increase in the hours of operation orin the production rate, unless such changewould be prohibited under any federallyenforceable permit which was establishedafter January 6, 1975, pursuant to 40 CFR52.2 1 or under regulations approvedpursuant to 40 CFR 5 1.165 or 40 CFR 51.166;(g) any change in ownership at astationary source;(h) the installation, operation, cessation, orremoval of a temporary clean coaltechnology demonstration project,provided that the project complies with thestate implementation plan for the state inwhich the project is located; and otherrequirements necessary to attain andmaintain the national ambient air qualitystandards during the project and after it isterminated.(i) the installation or operation of apermanent clean coal technologydemonstration project that constitutes(e) use of an alternative fuel or rawmaterial by a stationary source which:(i)the source was capable ofaccommodating before January 6,1975, unless such change wouldbe prohibited under any federallyenforceable permit conditionwhich was established afterJanuary 6, 1975 pursuant to 40CFR 52.21 or under regulationsapproved pursuant to [40 CFR51.165] 40 CFR Subpart Ior 40CFR 51.166; or(ii)the source is approved to useunder any permit issued under 40CFR 52.21 or under regulationsapproved pursuant to 40 CFR51.166;(f) an increase in hours of operation or inthe production rate, unless such changewould be prohibited under any federallyenforceable permit conditionwhich wasestablished after January 6, 1975, pursuantto 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulationsapproved pursuant to [40 CFR 51.165] 40CFR Subpart Ior 40 CFR 51.166;(g) any change in ownership at astationary source;(h) the installation, operation, cessation,or removal of a temporary clean coaltechnology demonstration project,provided that the project complies with;(i)the state implementation planfor the state in which the project islocated; and66SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACrepowering, provided that the project doesnot result in an increase in the potential toemit of any regulated new source reviewpollutant emitted by the unit. Thisexemption shall apply on a pollutant-bypollutant basis.(j)the reactivation of a very clean coalfired electric utility steam generating unit.(2) This definition shall not apply with respect to aparticular regulated new source review pollutantwhen the major stationary source is complying withthe requirements under 20.11.61.20 NMAC for aPAL for that pollutant. Instead, the definition atParagraph (8) of SubsectionBof 20.11.61.20NMAC shall apply. 20.11.61.20 NMAC for a PALfor that pollutant. Instead, the definition atParagraph (8) of Subsection B of 20.11.61.20NMAC shall apply.(ii)other requirements necessary toattain and maintain the nationalambient air quality standards duringthe project and after it isterminated;(i)The installation or operation of apermanent clean coal technologydemonstration project that constitutesrepowering, provided that the project doesnot result in an increase in the potential toemit of any regulated new source reviewpollutant emitted by the unit; thisexemption shall apply on a pollutant-bypollutant basis; or(j) the reactivation of a very clean coalfired electric utility steam generating unit.[(2)](4)This definition shall not apply with respectto a particular regulated new source reviewpollutant when the major stationary source iscomplying with the requirements under 20.11.61.20NMAC for a PAL for that pollutant. Instead, thedefinition at Paragraph (8) of Subsection B of20.11.61.20 NMAC shall apply.JJ. “Major stationary source”means:(1) any stationary source listed in Table 1 of20.11.61.26 NMAC which emits, or has thepotential to emit, emissions equal to or greater than100 tons per year of any regulated new sourcereview pollutant; or(2),any stationary source not listed in Table 1 of20.11.61.26 NMAC and which emits, or has thepotential to emit, 250 tons per year or more of anyregulated new source review pollutant; or(3) any physical change that would occur at aJJ. “Major stationary source”(1)means:[(1)](a) any stationary source listed in Table 1of 20.11.61.26 NMAC which emits, or has thepotential to emit, [emissions equal to or greaterthan] 100 tons per year or moreof any regulatednew source review pollutant; [or][(2)](b)notwithstanding the stationary sourcecategories specified in Subparagraph (a) ofParagraph (1) of Subsection JJ of 20.11.61.7NMAC,any stationary source [not listed inTable 1 of 20.11.61.26 NMAC and] whichThe definition of “major stationary source” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1). The August 2010revisions renumber the section for readability andprovide clarifying internal citations. Theserevisions are consistent with federal requirements.The language at 20.11.61.7.JJ(3) NMAC waspreviously SIP-approved in our April 26, 2007 finalaction on the Albuquerque NSR Reform submittal.The August 16, 2010 submittal makes nosubstantive change to this SIP-approved language,and only makes ministerial revisions to renumber67SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACstationary source not otherwise qualifying underParagraphs (1) or (2) of Subsection JJ of 20.11.61/7NMAC, if the change would constitute a majorsource by itself.(4) A major source that is major for volatileorganic compounds or oxides of nitrogen shall beconsidered major for ozone.(5) The fugitive emissions of a stationary sourceshall not be included in determining whether it is amajor stationary source, unless the source belongsto one of the stationary source categories found inTable 1 of 20.11.61.26 NMAC or any otherstationary source category which, as of August 7,1980, is being regulated under Section 111 or 112of the act.emits, or has the potential to emit, 250 tons peryear or more of any regulated new sourcereview pollutant; or[(3)](c)any physical change that would occurat a stationary source not otherwise qualifyingunder [Paragraphs (1) or (2) of] Subsection JJ of20.11.61.7 NMAC, as a major stationary sourceif the change would constitute a major sourceby itself.[(4)](2)A major source that is major for volatileorganic compounds or oxides of nitrogen shall beconsidered major for ozone.[(5)](3)The fugitive emissions of a stationarysource shall not be included in determining whetherit is a major stationary source, unless the sourcebelongs to one of the stationary source categoriesfound in Table 1 of 20.11.61.26 NMAC or anyother stationary source category which, as ofAugust 7, 1980, is being regulated under Section111 or 112 of the act.the provision. We are proposing approval of thisrenumbering as a non-substantive revision to theSIP. However, it is important to note that theprovisions at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(v), whichcorrespond to 20.11.61.7.JJ(3) NMAC, theunderlying substantive provision that is the subjectof these ministerial revisions, have been stayedindefinitely through an interim final rule publishedMarch 30, 2011, see 76 FR 17548. The ministerialrevisions we are approving today do not contravenethis interim final rule as they are not substantiverevisions. EPA and/or NMED may find it necessaryto take future substantive action on this provisionpending the resolution of the indefinite stay.This revision is approvableLL. “Minor source baseline date”means theearliest date after the trigger date on which a majorstationary source or major modification subject to40 CFR 52.21 or 20.11.61 NMAC, submits acomplete application.(1)The trigger dates are:(a)August 7, 1977, for particulate matter andsulfur dioxide; and(b)February 8, 1988 for nitrogen dioxide.(2)The baseline date is established for eachpollutant for which increments or otherequivalent measures have been established if:(a)The area in which the proposed majorstationary source orMajor modification would construct isLL. “Minor source baseline date”means theearliest date after the trigger date on which a majorstationary source or major modification subject to40 CFR 52.21 or 20.11.61 NMAC, submits acomplete application.(1)The trigger dates are:(a)August 7, 1977, for particulate matter andsulfur dioxide; and(b)February 8, 1988 for nitrogen dioxide.(2)The baseline date is established for eachpollutant for which increments or otherequivalent measures have been established if:(a)The area in which the proposed majorstationary source or Major modificationwould construct is designated as attainmentThe definition of “minor source baseline date” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15). The August2010 revisions do not substantively change the SIPapproved definition. The August 2010 revisionsimprove readability of the section and maintainconsistency with the federal definition.These revisions are approvable.68SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACdesignated as attainment or unclassifiableunder section 107(d)(1)(D) or (E) of thefederal act for the pollutant on the date theapplication is determined to be complete,consistent with 40 CFR 52.21 or 20.11.61NMAC; and(b)In the case of a major stationary source,the pollutantwould be emitted in significant amounts,or in the case of a major modification,there would be a significant net emissionsincrease of the pollutant.(3)Any minor source baseline date establishedoriginally for the TSP increment shall remainin effect and shall apply for purposes ofdetermining the amount of available PM10increments, the department may rescind anyTSP minor source baseline date if it can beshown, to the director’s satisfaction that, eitherthe emissions increase from the majorstationary source, or the net emission increasefrom the major modification, responsible fortriggering the minor source baseline date didnot result in a significant amount of PM10emissions.or unclassifiableunder [section107(d)(1)(D) or (E)] Section 107(d)(i)(D)or (E)of the federal act for the pollutant onthe date [the application is determined to becomplete, consistent with]of its completeapplication under40 CFR 52.21 or20.11.61 NMAC; and(b)In the case of a major stationary source, thepollutant would be emitted in significantamounts, or in the case of a majormodification, there would be a significantnet emissions increase of the pollutant.(3)Any minor source baseline date establishedoriginally for the TSP [increment]incrementsshall remain in effect and shall apply forpurposes of determining the amount of availablePM10increments, except thatthe departmentmay rescind any [TSP]suchminor sourcebaseline date [if] whereit can be shown,to thedirector’s satisfaction that, either the emissionsincrease from the major stationary source, or thenet emission increase from the majormodification, responsible for triggering [theminor source baseline] thatdate did not result ina significant amount of PM10emissions.OO. “Net emissions increase”Means, with respect to any regulated new sourcereview pollutant emitted by a major stationarysource, the following:(1)the amount by which the sum of the followingexceeds zero:OO. “Net emissions increase”(1)Means, thatwith respect to any regulated newsource review pollutant emitted by a majorstationary source, [the following:the amount bywhich the sum of the following exceeds zero:(a)the increase in emissions from a particularThe definition of “net emissions increase” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(3). The August 2010revisions to the SIP-approved definition areconsistent with the federal requirements.These revisions are approvable.69SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC(a)the increase in emissions from a particularphysical change or change in the methodof operation at a stationary source ascalculated pursuant to Subsection D of20.11.61.11 NMAC; and(b)any other increases and decreases in actualemissions at the major stationary sourcethat are contemporaneous with theparticular change and are otherwisecreditable; baseline actual emissions forcalculating increases and decreases shallbe determined as provided in Subsection Iof 20.11.61.7 NMAC, except thatSubparagraph (c ) of Paragraph (1) andSubparagraph (d) of Paragraph (2) ofSubsection I of 20.11.61.7 NMAC shallnot apply.(2)An increase or decrease in actual emissions iscontemporaneous with the increase from theparticular change only if it occurs within the timeperiod five years prior to the commencement ofconstruction on the particular change and the datethat the increase from the particular change occurs(3)An increase or decrease in actual emissions iscreditable only if:(a)It occurs within the time period five yearsprior to the commencement of constructionon the particular change and the date thatthe increase from the particular changeoccurs; and(b)the department has not relied on it inissuing a permit for the source underregulations approved pursuant to 20.11.61NMAC, and is in effect when the increasein actual emissions from the particularphysical change or change in the method ofoperation at a stationary source ascalculated pursuant to Subsection D of20.11.61.11 NMAC; and(b)any other increases and decreases in actualemissions at the major stationary sourcethat are contemporaneous with theparticular change and are otherwisecreditable; baseline actual emissions forcalculating increases and decreases shall bedetermined as provided in Subsection I of20.11.61.7 NMAC, except thatSubparagraph (c ) of Paragraph (1) andSubparagraph (d) of Paragraph (2) ofSubsection I of 20.11.61.7 NMAC shall notapply.(2)An increase or decrease in actual emissions iscontemporaneous with the increase from theparticular change only if it occurs [within the timeperiod] between:(a)the datefive years prior to thecommencement of construction on theparticular change; and(b)the date that the increase from theparticular change occurs(3)An increase or decrease in actual emissions iscreditable only if:(a)It occurs [within the time period] between:(i)the datefive years prior to thecommencement of construction on theparticular change; and(ii)the date that the increase from theparticular change occurs; and(b)the department has not relied on it inissuing a permit for the source under70SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACchange occurs.(4)An increase or decrease in actual emissions ofsulfur dioxide, particulate matter, or oxides ofnitrogen that occursbefore the applicableminor source baseline date is creditable only ifit is required to be considered in calculating theamount of maximum allowable increasesremaining available.(5)An increase in actual emissions is creditableonly to the extent that the new level of actualemissions exceeds the old level.(6)A decrease in actual emissions is creditableonly on the extent that:(a)the old level of actual emissions or the oldlevel ofallowable emissions, whichever is lower,exceeds the new level of actual emissions:(b)it is enforceable as a practical matter atand after thetime that actual construction on theparticular change begins; and(c)it has approximately the same qualitativesignificance for public health and welfareas that attributed to the increase from theparticular change.(7)An increase that results from a physical changeat a source occurs when the emissions unit onwhich construction occurred becomesoperational and begins to emit a particularpollutant. Any replacement unit that requiresshakedown becomes operational only after areasonable shakedown period, not to exceed180 days.(8)Paragraph (2) of Subsection B of20.11.61.7NMAC shall not apply for determining creditableregulations approved pursuant to 20.11.61NMAC, [and] which permitis in effectwhen the increase in actual emissionsfrom the particular change occurs.(4)No change(5)No change(6)A decrease in actual emissions is creditableonly on the extent that:(a)the old level of actual emissions or the oldlevel of allowable emissions, whichever islower, exceeds the new level of actualemissions(b)it is enforceable as a practical matter at andafter the time that actual construction onthe particular change begins; and(c)it has approximately the same qualitativesignificance for public health and welfareas that attributed to the increase from theparticular change; and(7)No change(8)No change71SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACincreases and decreases.UU. “Projectedactual emissions”Means the maximum annual rate, in tons per year,at which an existing emissions unit is projected toemit a regulated new sourcereview pollutant in anyone of the five years (12-month period) followingthe date the unit resumes regular operation after theproject, or in any one of the 10 years following thatdate, if the project involves increasing theemissions unit’s design capacity or its potential toemit that regulated new source review pollutant,and full utilization of the unit would result in asignificant emissions increase, or a significant netemission increase at the major stationary source.In determining the projected actual emissions(before beginning actual construction), the owneror operator of the major stationary source:(1) shall consider all relevant information,including but not limited to, historical operationaldata, the company’s own representations, thecompany’s expected business activity and thecompany’s highest projections of business activity,the company’s filings withthe state or federalregulatory authorities, and compliance plans underan approved SIP; and(2) shall include fugitive emissions to the extentquantifiable and emissions associated with startups,shutdowns, and malfunctions; and(3) shall exclude, in calculating any increase inemissions that results from the particular project,that portion of the unit’s emissions following theproject that an existing unit could haveaccommodated during the consecutive 24-monthperiod used to establish the baseline actualemissions under Subsection I of 20.11.61.7 NMACUU. “Projectedactual emissions”(1)Means the maximum annual rate, in tons peryear, at which an existing emissions unit isprojected to emit a regulated new source reviewpollutant in any one of the five years (12-monthperiod) following the date the unit resumesregular operation after the project, or in any oneof the 10 years following that date, if the projectinvolves increasing the emissions unit’s designcapacity or its potential to emit that regulatednew source review pollutant, and full utilizationof the unit would result in a significantemissions increase, or a significant net emissionincrease at the major stationary source.(2)In determining the projected actual emissions(before beginning actual construction), theowner or operator of the major stationarysource:[(1)](a)shall consider all relevantinformation, including but not limited to,historical operational data, the company’sown representations, the company’sexpected business activity and thecompany’s highest projections of businessactivity, the company’s filings with thestate or federal regulatory authorities, andcompliance plans under an approved SIP;and[(2)](b)shall include fugitive emissions tothe extent quantifiable and emissionsassociated with startups, shutdowns, andmalfunctions; and[(3)](c)shall exclude, in calculating anyincrease in emissions that results from theThe definition of “projected actual emissions” isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(40). The August2010 revisions renumber the SIP-approveddefinition and make non-substantive revisionsconsistent with federal requirements.This revision is approvable.72SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACand that are also unrelated to the particular project,including any increased utilization due to productdemand growth; or(4) in lieu of using the method set out inParagraphs (1) through (3) of Subsection UU of20.11.61.7 NMAC may elect to use the emissionsunit’s potential to emit in tons per year.particular project, that portion of the unit’semissions following the project that anexisting unit could have accommodatedduring the consecutive 24-month periodused to establish the baseline actualemissions under Subsection I of 20.11.61.7NMAC and that are also unrelated to theparticular project, including any increasedutilization due to product demand growth;or[(4)](3)may check to use the emissions unit’spotential to emit in tons per yearin lieu of using themethod set out in [Paragraphs (1) through (3) ofSubsection UU of 20.11.61.7 NMAC may elect touse the emissions unit’s potential to emit in tons peryear] Subparagraphs (a)-(c) of Paragraph (2) ofSubsection UU of 20.11.61.7 NMAC.VV. “Regulated new source review pollutant”means the following:(1)any pollutant for which a national ambient airquality standard has been promulgated and anyconstituents or precursors for such pollutantsidentified by the administrator (e.g. volatileorganic compounds and oxides of nitrogen areprecursors for ozone);(2)any pollutant that is subject to any standardpromulgated under Section 111 of the act;(3)any class I or II substance subject to a standardpromulgated under or established by Title VIof the act; or(4)any pollutant that otherwise is subject toregulation under the act; except that any or allhazardous air pollutants either listed in Section112 of the act or added to the list pursuant toSection 112(b)(2) of the act, which have notVV. “Regulated new source review pollutant”means the following:(1)any pollutant for which a national ambient airquality standard has been promulgated and any[constituents or precursors for such pollutantsidentified by the administrator (e.g. volatileorganic compounds and oxides of nitrogen areprecursors for ozone] pollutant identified underParagraph (1) of Subsection VV of 20.11.61NMAC as a constituent or precursor to suchpollutant; precursors identified by theadministrator for purposes of new source revieware the following:(a)volatile organic compounds and nitrogenoxides are precursors to ozone in allattainment and unclassifiable areas:(b)sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM2.5in allattainment and unclassifiable areas;The definition of “regulated new source reviewpollutant” is required at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49).The current SIP-approved definition of “regulatedNSR pollutant” already identifies NOXas aprecursor for ozone and therefore implements the1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thesubsequent August 2010 revisions to “regulatednew source review pollutant” maintain consistencywith federal requirements to identify NOXas aprecursor for ozone and implement the 2006 PM2.5NAAQS.The new revisions to the definition of “regulatedNSR pollutant” submitted August 2010 areconsistent with federal requirements to identify theprecursors of PM2.5for PM2.5PSD permitting.73SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACbeen delisted pursuant to Section 112(b)(3) ofthe act, are not regulated new source reviewpollutants unless the listed hazardous airpollutant is also regulated as a constituent orprecursor of a general pollutant listed underSection 108 of the act.(c)nitrogen oxides are presumed to beprecursors to PM2.5in all attainment andunclassifiable areas, unless the statedemonstrates to the administrator’ssatisfaction or EPA demonstrates thatemissions of nitrogen oxides from sourcesin a specific area are not a significantcontributor to that area’s ambient PM2.5concentrations;(d)volatile organic compounds are presumednot to be precursors to PM2.5in anyattainment or unclassifiable area, unless thestate demonstrates to the administrator’ssatisfaction or EPA demonstrates thatemissions of volatile organic compoundsfrom sources in a specific area are asignificant contributor to that area’sambient PM2.5concentrations;(2)any pollutant that is subject to any standardpromulgated under Section 111 of the act;(3)any class I or II substance subject to a standardpromulgated under or established by Title VI ofthe act; [or](4)any pollutant that otherwise is subject toregulation under the act ; except that any or allhazardous air pollutants either listed in Section112 of the act or added to the list pursuant toSection 112(b)(2) of the act, which have notbeen delisted pursuant to Section 112(b)(3) ofthe act, are not regulated new source reviewpollutants unless the listed hazardous airpollutant is also regulated as a constituent orprecursor of a general pollutant listed underSection 108 of the act.(5) Reserved;Note that when EPA finalizes our proposedapproval of the August 2010 revisions to “regulatedNSR pollutant” at 20.11.61.7 NMAC, theamendatory language table at 52.1620(c) willcontinue to show that the January 10, 2011submittal is the SIP-approved version.Note that EPA proposed revisions to 40 CFR51.166(b)(49)(i)(a) on March 16, 2012 at 77 FR15656. The proposed revisions delete the inclusionof PM in the condensables provisions of RegulatedNSR Pollutant. EPA acknowledges in our proposedMarch 16, 2012 FRN that inclusion of PM was inerror and makes the PSD program more stringentthan intended. However, we can proceed with ourproposed approval of the August 16, 2010Albuquerque submittal because as adopted, theAlbuquerque PSD program is equal to or morestringent than the federal PSD program, regardlessof whether we finalize the condensable provisionsproposed on March 16, 2012.To provide context, thefollowing paragraphs arethe excerpts of the proposed condensablesregulatory text at 77 FR 15663 with strikethroughsto indicate proposed changes:Proposed 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a):Particulate matter (PM),PM2.5emissions,and PM10emissions shall include gaseousemissions from a source or activity whichcondense to form particulate matter atambient temperatures. On or after January1, 2011, such condensable particulatematter shall be accounted for in74SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC(6) particulate matter (PM) emissions, PM2.5emissions, and PM10emissions shall includegaseous emissions from a source or activitywhich condense to form particulate matter atambient temperatures; on or after January 1,2011 (or any earlier date established in theupcoming rulemaking codifying test methods),such condensable particulate matter shall beaccounted for in applicability determinationsand in establishing emissions limitations forPM, PM2.5and PM10in PSD permits;compliance with emissions limitations for PM,PM2.5and PM10issued prior to this date shallnot be based on condensable particulate matterunless required by the terms and conditions ofthe permit or the applicable implementationplan; applicability determinations made prior tothis date without accounting for condensableparticulate matter shall not be considered inviolation of 20.11.61 NMAC unless theapplicable implementation plan requiredcondensable particulate matter to be included.applicability determinations and inestablishing emissions limitations for PM,PM2.5and PM10in PSD permits.Compliance with emissions limitations forPM,PM2.5and PM10issued prior to thisdate shall not be based on condensableparticulate matter unless required by theterms and conditions of the permit or theapplicable implementation plan.Applicability determinations made prior tothis date without accounting forcondensable particulate matter shall not beconsidered in violation of this sectionunless the applicable implementation planrequired condensable particulate matter tobe included.XX. “Secondary emissions”means emissionswhich occur as a result of the construction oroperation of a major stationary source or majormodification, but do not come from the majorstationary source or major modification itself. Forthe purpose of Subsection XX of 20.11.61.7NMAC, secondary emissions must be specific, welldefined, quantifiable, and impact the same generalareas as the stationary source or modification whichcauses the secondary emissions. Secondaryemissions include emissions from any offsitesupport facility which would not be constructed orincrease its emissions except as a result of theXX. “Secondary emissions”means emissionswhich occur as a result of the construction oroperation of a major stationary source or majormodification, but do not come from the majorstationary source or major modification itself. Forthe purpose of [Subsection XX of 20.11.61.7NMAC] 20.11.61 NMAC, secondary emissionsmust be specific, well defined, quantifiable, andimpact the same general areas as the stationarysource or modification which causes the secondaryemissions. Secondary emissions include emissionsfrom any offsite support facility which would notbe constructed or increase its emissions except as aThe definition of “secondary emissions” is requiredat 40 CFR 51.166(b)(18). The August 2010revisions to the SIP-approved definition are nonsubstantive corrections to an internal citation. Thisdefinition continues to satisfy federal requirements.This revision is approvable.75SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACconstruction or operation of the major stationarysource or major modification. Secondary emissionsdo not include any emissions which come directlyfrom a mobile source, suchas emissions from thetailpipe of a motor vehicle, from a train, or from avessel.result of the construction or operation of the majorstationary source or major modification. Secondaryemissions do not include any emissions whichcome directly from a mobile source, such asemissions from the tailpipe of a motor vehicle,from a train, or from a vesselYY. “Significant”means in reference to a netemissions increase or the potential of a source toemit air pollutants, a rate of emission that wouldequal or exceed any of the rates listed in Table 2 of20.11.61.27 NMAC;YY. “Significant”means:(1)in reference to a net emissions increase or thepotential of a source to emit [air pollutants]any of the pollutants listed in Table 2 of20.11.61.27 NMAC, a rate of [emission]emissionsthat would equal or exceed any ofthe corresponding emissionrates listed inTable 2 of 20.11.61.27 NMAC;(2)in reference to a net emissions increase or thepotential of a source to emit a regulated newsource review pollutantthat Paragraph (1) ofSubsection YY of 20.11.61.7 NMAC, does notlist any emissions rate; and(3)notwithstanding Paragraph (1) of SubsectionYY of 20.11.61.7 NMAC, any emissions rate orany net emissions increase associated with amajor stationary source or major modification,which would construct within 10 kilometers ofa class I area, and have an impact on such areaequal to or greater than 1 ug/m3(24-houraverage).The definition of “significant” is required at 40CFR 51.166(b)(23). The August 2010 revisionssubstantively revise the SIP-approved definition tobe consistent with federal requirements. Further,the definition of significant is necessary toimplement the significant emission rate of NOXas aprecursor for ozone consistent with the 1997 and2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.This revision is approvableDDD. “Volatile organic compound (VOC)”means any organic compoundwhich participates inatmospheric photochemical reactions; that is, any,organic compound other than those which theadministrator designates as having negligiblephotochemical reactivity.DDD. “Volatile organic compound (VOC)”means any [organic] compound of carbon,excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or carbonates, andammonium carbonate,which participates inatmospheric photochemical reactions; [that is, any,]this includes any suchorganic compound other thanthose which the administrator designates as havingThe definition of “VOC” is required at 40 CFR51.166(b)(16). The August 2010 revisionssubstantively revise the SIP-approved definition ofVOC to be consistent with federal requirements.Further, the appropriate definition of “VOC” isnecessary to adequately implement the 1997 and2008 8-hour ozone standard, where VOC and NOXare both precursors.76SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACnegligible photochemical reactivity under 40 CFR51.100(s).This revision is approvable20.11.61.11 APPLICABILITY:A. The requirements of 20.11.61 NMAC apply tothe construction of any new major stationary sourceor any project at an existing major stationary sourcein an area designated as attainment orunclassifiable.B. The requirements of Sections 20.1 1.61.12NMAC through 20.11.61.18 NMAC, 20.11.61.21NMAC and 20.1 1.6 1.24 NMAC apply to theconstruction of any new major stationary source orthe major modification of any existing majorstationary source, except as 20.11.61 NMACotherwise provides.C. No new major stationary source or majormodification to which the requirements ofSubsections A,B, C and D of20.11.61.12NMAC,Sections20.11.61.13NMAC through20.11.61.18NMAC, 20.11.61.21 NMAC and 20.1 1.6 1.24NMAC apply shall begin actual constructionwithout a permit that states that the majorstationary source or major modification will meetthose requirements.D. Applicability procedures.(1) Except as otherwise provided inSubsectionsEand F of 20.11.61.1 1 NMAC,and consistent withthe definition of major modification, aproject is a major modification for a20.11.61.11 APPLICABILITY:A. No ChangeB. No ChangeC. No ChangeD.Applicability procedures.(1) Except as otherwise provided inSubsectionsEand F of 20.11.61.1 1 NMAC,and consistent withthe definition of major modification, aproject is a major modification for aregulated new source review pollutant if itcauses a significant emissions increase and asignificant net emissions increase. Theproject is not a major modification if it doesnot cause a significant emissions increase. Ifthe project causes a significant emissionsincrease, then the project is a majormodification only if it also results in asignificant net emissions increase.(2) The procedure for calculating (beforebeginning actual construction) whether asignificant emissions increase (i.e., the firststep of the process) will occur depends uponthe type of emissions units being modified,according to Paragraphs (3) through (4) ofSubsection D of 20.1 1.61.11 NMAC. Theprocedure for calculating (before beginningactual construction) whether a significant netIn a separate rulemaking action taken on December29, 2011, EPA approved the Albuquerque PSD SIPrevisions to adopt and implement the GHGTailoring Rule provisions, including revisions at20.11.61.11 NMAC to correct internal crossreferences in the PSD program as a result of thenew definitions added for the GHG Tailoring Rule.This action had the unintended effect of giving tacitapproval to the August 2010 revisions of theApplicability section at 20.11.61.11(D)(3),(4), and(5). In this TSD we are evaluating the August 2010revisions to 20.11.61.11(D)(3), (4), and (5) and findthese revisions to the PSD Applicability to beconsistent with the requirements for “hybrid test forprojects that involve multiple types of emissionsunits” at 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7)(iv)(f).The substantive August 2010 revisions to addapplicability provisions for hybrid test for projectsthat involve multiple types of emissions units areapprovable.Note that when EPA finalizes our proposedapproval of the August 2010 revisions to20.11.61.11 NMAC, the amendatory language tableat 52.1620(c) will continue to identify that20.11.61.11 NMAC is approved through theJanuary 10, 2011 submittal.77SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACregulated new source review pollutant if itcauses a significant emissions increase and asignificant net emissions increase. Theproject is not a major modification if it doesnot cause a significant emissions increase. Ifthe project causes a significant emissionsincrease, then the project is a majormodification only if it also results in asignificant net emissions increase.(2) The procedure for calculating (beforebeginning actual construction) whether asignificant emissions increase (i.e., the firststep of the process) will occur depends uponthe type of emissions units being modified,according to Paragraphs (3) through (4) ofSubsection D of 20.1 1.61.11 NMAC. Theprocedure for calculating (before beginningactual construction) whether a significant netemissions increase will occur at the majorstationary source (i.e., the second step of theprocess) is contained in the definition inSubsection00of 20.11.61.7 NMAC.Regardless of any such preconstructionprojections, a major modification results ifthe project causes a significant emissionsincrease and a significant net emissionsincrease.(3) Actual-to-projected-actual applicabilitytest for projects that involve existingemissions units. A significant emissionsincrease of a regulated new source reviewpollutant is projected to occur if the sum ofthe difference between the projected actualemissions and the baseline actual emissionsfor each existing emissions unit equals oremissions increase will occur at the majorstationary source (i.e., the second step of theprocess) is contained in the definition inSubsection00of 20.11.61.7 NMAC.Regardless of any such preconstructionprojections, a major modification results ifthe project causes a significant emissionsincrease and a significant net emissionsincrease.(3)Actual-to-projected-actualapplicability test for projects that onlyinvolve existing emissions units.Asignificant emissions increase of a regulatednew source review pollutant is projected tooccur if the sum of the difference betweenthe projected actual emissions and thebaseline actual emissions for each existingemissions unit equals or exceeds thesignificant amount for that pollutant.(4)Actual-to-potential test for projectsthat onlyinvolve construction of a newemissions unit(s).A significant emissionsincrease of a regulated new source reviewpollutant is projected to occur if the sum ofthe difference between the potential to emitfrom each new emissions unit followingcompletion of the project and the baselineactual emissions of these units before theproject equals or exceeds the significantamount for that pollutant.(5)Hybrid test for projects that involvemultiple types of emissions units.Asignificant emissions increase of a regulatednew source review pollutant is projected tooccur if the sum of the emissions increases78SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACexceeds the significant amount for thatpollutant.(4) Actual-to-potential test for projects thatinvolve construction of a new emissionsunit(s). A significant emissions increase of aregulated new source review pollutant isprojected to occur if the sum of thedifference between the potential to emit fromeach new emissions unit followingcompletion of the project and the baselineactual emissions of these units before theproject equals or exceeds the significantamount for that pollutant.E. For any major stationary source for a PAL for aregulated new source review pollutant, the majorstationary source shall comply with requirementsunder 20.1 1.61.20 NMAC.for each emissions unit, using the methodspecified in Paragraphs (3) and (4) ofSubsection D of 20.11.61.11 NMAC asapplicable with respect to each emissionsunit, for each type of emissions unit equalsor exceeds the significant amount for thatpollutant.E. No Change20.11.61.12 OBLIGATIONS OF OWNERS OROPERATORS OF SOURCES:A.Any owner or operator who begins actualconstruction or operatesa source or modificationwithout, or not in accordance with, a permit issuedunder the requirements of 20.1 1.61 NMAC shallbe subject to enforcement action.B.The issuance of a permit does not relieve anyperson from the responsibility of complying withthe provisions of the Air Quality Control Act,Sections 74-2-1 to 74-2-17, NMSA 1978; anyapplicable regulations of the board; and any otherrequirements under local, state, or federal law.C.Approval to construct shall become invalid if(1) construction is not commenced within18 months after receipt of such approval,(2) if construction is discontinued for aperiod of 18 months or more, or20.11.61.12 OBLIGATIONS OF OWNERSOR OPERATORS OF SOURCES:A.No changeB.[The issuance of a permit does] Approval toconstruct shallnot relieve any person from theresponsibility [of complying] to comply fullywiththe provisions of the Air Quality Control Act,Sections 74-2-1 to 74-2-17, NMSA 1978; anyapplicable regulations of the board; and any otherrequirements under local, state, or federal law.C.Approval to construct shall become invalid if[(1)] construction is not commenced within 18months after receipt of such approval,[(2)] if construction is discontinued for a period of18 months or more, or[(3)] if construction is not completed with areasonable time; [For a phased construction project,each phase must commenceconstruction within 18In a separate rulemaking action taken on December29, 2011, EPA approved the Albuquerque PSD SIPrevisions to adopt and implement the GHGTailoring Rule provisions, including revisions at20.11.61.12 NMAC to correct internal crossreferences in the PSD program as a result of thenew definitions added for the GHG Tailoring Rule.This action had the unintended effect of giving tacitapproval to the August 2010 revisions of theApplicability section at 20.11.61.12(B), (C), (D)and (E). In this TSD we are evaluating the August2010 revisions to 20.11.61.12(B), (C), (D), and (E)and find these revisions to be consistent with the“reasonable possibility” federal requirements forowners or operators of PSD sources at 40 CFR51.166(r)(6)(vi).The substantive August 2010 revisions to revise the79SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC(3) if construction is not completed with areasonable time; For a phased constructionproject, each phase must commenceconstruction within 18 months of theprojected and approved commencementdate. The director may extend the 18-month period upon a satisfactory showingthat an extension is justified.D.If a source or modification becomes a majorstationary source or major modification solely dueto a relaxation in any enforceable limitation whichlimitation was established after August 7, 1980, onthe capacity of the source or modification otherwiseto emit a pollutant, such as a restriction on hours ofoperation, then 20.11.61 NMAC shall apply to thesource or modification as though construction hadnot yet commenced.E.The following specific provisions apply toprojects at existing emissions units at a majorstationary source (other than projects at a sourcewith a PAL) in circumstances where the owner oroperator elects to sue the method specified inParagraphs (1) through (3) of Subsection UU of20.11.61.7 NMAC for calculating projected actualemissions.(1) Before beginning actual constructionof the project, the owner or operator shalldocument and maintain a record of thefollowing information:(a)a description of the project;(b)identification of the emissionsunit(s) whose emissions of aregulated new source reviewpollutant could be affected by theproject; andmonths of the projected and approvedcommencement date.] the [director] administratormay extend the 18-month period upon asatisfactory showing that an extension is justified;this provision does not apply to the time periodbetween construction of the approved phases of aphased construction project; each phase mustcommence construction within 18 months of theprojected and approved commencement date.D.[If a] At such time that a particularsource ormodification becomes a major stationary source ormajor modification solely [due to] by virtue ofarelaxation in any enforceable limitation which[limitation] was established after August 7, 1980,on the capacity of the source or modificationotherwise to emit a pollutant, such as a restrictionon hours of operation, then 20.11.61 NMAC shallapply to the source or modification as thoughconstruction had not yet commenced on the sourceor modification.E.Except as otherwise provided in Subparagraph(b) of Paragraph (6) of Subsection E of 20.11.61.12NMACthe followingspecific provisions apply [to]with respect to any regulated new source reviewpollutant emitted fromprojects at existingemissions units at a major stationary source (otherthan projects at a source with a PAL) incircumstances where there is a reasonablepossibility within the meaning of Paragraph (6) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC that a projectthat is not a part of a major modification may resultin a significant emissionsincrease of such pollutantandthe owner or operator elects to use the methodspecified in Paragraphs (1) through (3) ofSubsection UU of 20.11.61.7 NMAC forobligations of owners and operators of PSD sourcesare approvable.Note that when EPA finalizes our proposedapproval of the August 2010 revisions to20.11.61.12 NMAC, the amendatory language tableat 52.1620(c) will continue to identify that20.11.61.12 NMAC is approved through theJanuary 10, 2011 submittal.80SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC(c)a description of the applicabilitytest used to determine that theproject is not a majormodification for any regulatednew source review pollutant,including the baseline actualemissions, the projected actualemissions, the amount ofemissions excluded underParagraph (3) of SubsectionWof20.1 1.61.7 NMAC and anexplanation for why such amountwas excluded, and any nettingcalculations, if applicable.(2) If the emissions unit an existingelectric utility steam generating unit,before beginning actual construction, theowner or operator shall provide a copy ofthe information set out in Paragraph (1) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC to thedepartment. Nothing in this Paragraph (2)of Subsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMACshall be construed to require the owner oroperator of such a unit to obtain anydetermination from the department;however, necessary preconstructionapprovals and/or permits must be obtainedbefore beginning actual construction.(3) The owner or operator shall monitorthe emissions of any regulated new sourcereview pollutant that could increase as aresult of the project and that is emitted byany emissions unit identified inSubparagraph (b) of Paragraph (1) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC; andcalculating projected actual emissions.(1) Before beginning actual constructionof the project, the owner or operator shalldocument and maintain a record of thefollowing information:(a)a description of the project;(b)identification of theemissions unit(s) whoseemissions of a regulated newsource review pollutantcould be affected by theproject; and(c)a description of theapplicability test used todetermine that the project isnot a major modification forany regulated new sourcereview pollutant, includingthe baseline actualemissions, the projectedactual emissions, the amountof emissions excluded underParagraph (3) of SubsectionWof 20.1 1.61.7 NMAC andan explanation for why suchamount was excluded, andany netting calculations, ifapplicable.(2) If the emissions unit an existingelectric utility steam generating unit,before beginning actual construction, theowner or operator shall provide a copy ofthe information set out in Paragraph (1) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC to thedepartment. Nothing in [this] Paragraph81SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACcalculate and maintain a record of theannual emissions, in tons per year on acalendar year basis, for a period of fiveyears following resumption of regularoperations after the change, or for a periodof 10 years following resumption ofregular operations after the change if theproject increases the design capacity orpotential to emit of that regulated newsource review pollutant at such emissionsunit.(4) If the unit is an existing electric utilitysteam generating unit, the owner oroperator shall submit a report to thedepartment within 60 days after the end ofeach year during which records must begenerated under Subparagraph (c) ofParagraph (1) of SubsectionEof20.11.61.12 NMAC setting out the unit'sannual emissions during the calendar yearthat preceded submission of the report.(5) If the unit is an existing unit other thanan electric utility steam generating unit,the owner or operatorshall submit a reportto the department if the annual emissions,in tons per year, from the project identifiedin Paragraph (1) of Subsection E of 20.11.6 1.12 NMAC, exceed the baselineactual emissions (as documented andmaintained pursuant to Subparagraph (c)of Paragraph (1) of SubsectionEof 20.11.61.12 NMAC) by a significant amountfor that regulated new source reviewpollutant, and if such emissions differfrom the preconstruction projection as(2) of Subsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMACshall be construed to require the owner oroperator of such a unit to obtain anydetermination from the department beforebeginning actual construction; however,necessary preconstruction approvalsand/or permits must be obtained beforebeginning actual construction.(3) The owner or operator shall monitorthe emissions of any regulated new sourcereview pollutant that could increase as aresult of the project and that is emitted byany emissions unit identified inSubparagraph (b) of Paragraph (1) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC; andcalculate and maintain a record of theannual emissions, in tons per year on acalendar year basis, for a period of fiveyears following resumption of regularoperations after the change, or for a periodof 10 years following resumption ofregular operations after the change if theproject increases the design capacity orpotential to emit of that regulated newsource review pollutant at such emissionsunit. For purposes of Paragraph (3) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC,fugitive emissions (to the extentquantifiable) shall be monitored if theemissions unit is part of one of the sourcecategories listed in Table 1 of 20.11.61.26NMAC or is the emissions unit is locatedat a major stationary source that belongs toone of the listed source categories.(4) No Change82SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACdocumented and maintained pursuant toSubparagraph (c) of Paragraph (1) ofSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC. Suchreport shall be submitted to the departmentwithin 60 days after the end of such year.The report shall contain the following:(a)the name, address and telephonenumber of the major stationarysource;(b)the annual emissions as calculatedpursuant to Paragraph (3) ofSubsectionEof 20.1 1.6 1.12 NMAC;(c)and any other information that theowner or operator wishes to include inthe report (e.g., an explanation as towhy the emissions differ from thepreconstruction projection).(F) The owner or operator of the source shall makethe information required to be documented andmaintained pursuant to Subsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMAC available for review upon requestfor inspection by the department or the generalpublic pursuant to the requirements contained in 40CFR 70.4(b)(3)(viii).(5) No Change(6) A “reasonable possibility” underSubsection E of 20.11.61.12 NMACoccurs when the owner or operatorcalculates the project to result in either:(a) a projected actual emissionsincrease of at least 50 percent ofthe amount that is a “significantemissions increase,” as definedunder Subsection ZZ of20.11.61.7 NMAC (withoutreference to the amount that is asignificant net emissionsincrease), for the regulated newsource review pollutant; or(b) a projected actual emissionsincrease that, added to theamount of emissions excludedunder Paragraph (3) ofSubsection UU of 20.11.61.7NMAC, sums to at least 50percent of the amount that is a“significant emissions increase,”as defined under Subsection ZZof 20.11.61.7 NMAC (withoutreference to the amount that is asignificant net emissionsincrease), for the regulated newsource review pollutant; for aproject for which a reasonablepossibility occurs only within themeaning of Subparagraph (b) ofParagraph (6) of Subsection E of20.11.61.12 NMAC, and not alsowithin the meaning of83SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACSubparagraph (a) of Paragraph(6) of Subsection E of20.11.61.12 NMAC, thenprovisions of Paragraphs (2)through (5) of Subsection E of20.11.61.12 NMAC do not applyto the project.(F) No Change20.11.61.14 CONTROL TECHNOLOGYREQUIREMENTS:A.A new major stationary source shall apply bestavailable control technology for each regulatednew source review pollutant that it would have thepotential to emit in amounts equal to or greater thanthe significance levels as listed in Table 2 of 20.11.6 1.27 NMAC. This requirement applies to eachproposed emissions unit or operation that will emitsuch pollutant.B.A major modification shall apply best availablecontrol technology for each regulated new sourcereview pollutant at the source when a significantnet emissions increase occurs. This requirementapplies to each proposed emissions unit oroperation where a net emissions increase in thepollutant would occur as a result of a physicalchange or change in the method of operation in theunit.C.For phased construction projects, thedetermination of best available control technologyshall be reviewed and modified as appropriate atthe latest reasonable time but no later than 18months prior to commencement of construction ofeach independent phase of the project. At suchtime, the owner or operator of the applicable20.11.61.14 CONTROL TECHNOLOGY[REQUIREMENTS] REVIEW ANDINNOVATIVE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY:A.No ChangeB.No ChangeC.No ChangeD. Innovative control technology.Thedepartment may approve a system of innovativecontrol technology for the major stationary sourceor major modification if:(1) the proposed control system would notcause or contribute to an unreasonable riskto public health, welfare, or safety in itsoperation or function; and(2) the owner or operator agrees to achieve alevel of continuous emissions reductionequivalent to that which would have beenrequired under [best available controltechnology] Subsection A of 20.11.61.14NMACby a date specified by thedepartment. Such date shall not be laterthan four years from the time of startup orseven years from permit issuance; and(3) the source or modification would meet therequirements [of] equivalent to20.11.61.14 NMAC and 20.11.61.15Federal PSD requirements for Innovative ControlTechnologies are at 40 CFR 51.166(s). The August2010 revisions to 20.11.61.14(D) and (F) areconsistent with the federal requirements at 40 CFR51.166(s) and are therefore approvable.84SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACstationary source may be required to demonstratethe adequacy of any previous determination of bestavailable control technology for the source.D.The department may approve a system ofinnovative control technology for the majorstationary source or major modification if:(1) the proposed control system would notcause or contribute to an unreasonable riskto public health, welfare, or safety in itsoperation or function; and(2) the owner or operator agrees to achieve alevel of continuous emissions reductionequivalent to that which would have beenrequired under best available controltechnology by a date specified by thedepartment. Such date shall not be laterthan four years from the time of startup orseven years from permit issuance; and(3) the source or modification would meet therequirements of 20.11.61.14 NMAC and20.11.61.15 NMAC based on the emissionrate that the system of innovative controltechnology would be required to meet onthe date specified bythe department; and(4) during the interim period of achieving thepermitted emission level, the source ofmodification would not:(a) cause or contribute to a violation ofan applicable national ambient airquality standard; nor(b) impact any federal class I area; nor(c) impact any area where an applicableincrement is known to be violated;and(d) all other applicable requirementsNMAC based on the [emission] emissionsrate that the stationary source employingthesystem of innovative controltechnology would be required to meet onthe date specified bythe department; and(4) during the interim period of achieving thepermitted emission level, the source ofmodification would not:(a) cause or contribute to a violation ofan applicable national ambient airquality standard; nor(b) impact any federal class I area; nor(c) impact any area where an applicableincrement is known to be violated; and[(d)](5)all other applicable requirementsincluding those for public participationhave been met.E.No ChangeF.If a source or modification fails to meet therequired level of continuous emission reductionwithin the specified time period or the approval iswithdrawn in accordance with Subsection E of20.11.61.14 NMAC, the department may allow thesource or modification up to an additional threeyears to meet the requirement for the application ofbest available control technology [This shall beaccomplished] through use of a demonstratedsystem of control.G.No Change[H.For cases where PM10emissions cannot bequantified, the best available control technologylimitation may be defined in terms of particulatematter emissions.]85SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACincluding those for publicparticipation have been met.E.The department shall withdraw any approval toemploy a system of innovative control technologyif:(1) the proposed system fails by the specifieddate to achieve the required continuousemissions reduction rate; or(2) the proposed system fails before thespecified date so as to contribute to anunreasonable risk to public health, welfare,or safety; or(3) the department decides at any time that theproposed system is unlikely to achieve therequired level of control or to protect thepublic health, welfare, or safety.F.If a source or modification fails to meet therequired level of continuous emission reductionwithin the specified time period or the approval iswithdrawn in accordance with Subsection E of20.11.61.14 NMAC, the department may allow thesource or modification up to an additional threeyears to meet the requirement for the application ofbest available control technology. This shall beaccomplished through use of a demonstratedsystem of control.G.If the owner or operator of a major stationarysource or major modification previously issued apermit under 20.11.61 NMAC applies for anextension, and the new proposed date ofconstruction is greater than 18 months from thedate the permit would become invalid, thedetermination of best available control technologyshall be reviewed and modified as appropriatebefore such an extension is granted. At such time,86SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACthe owner or operator ofthe applicable stationarysource may be required to demonstrate theadequacy of any previous determination of bestavailable technologyfor the source.H.For cases where PM10emissions cannot bequantified, the best available control technologylimitation may be defined in terms of particulatematter emissions.20.11.61.15 AMBIENT IMPACTREQUIREMENTS:A.The requirements of 20.11.61.15 NMAC shallapply to each pollutant emitted by a new majorstationary source or major modification in amountsequal to or greater than that in Table 2 of20.11.61.27 NMAC. For particulate matter, thesource will only be required to perform ambientimpact analysis for PM10when the source has thepotential to emit significant amounts of PM10asdetermined from Table 2 of 20.11.61.27 NMAC.B.The allowable emission increases from theproposed source or modification, includingsecondary emissions, in conjunction with all otherapplicable emissions increases or reductions,(including secondary emissions), shall not cause orcontribute to air pollution in violation of:(1) any national ambient air quality standard inany location; or(2) any applicable maximum allowableincrease (as shown in Table 4 of20.11.61.29 NMAC) over the baselineconcentrations in any area.C.The owner or operator of the proposed majorstationary source or major modification shalldemonstrate that neither a violation of Paragraph(1) or Paragraph (2) of SubsectionBof 20.1 1.620.11.61.15 AMBIENT IMPACTREQUIREMENTS:A.No ChangeB.Source impact analysis. The owner oroperator of the proposed source or modificationshall demonstrate thatthe allowable emissionincreases from the proposed source or modification,[including secondary emissions], in conjunctionwith all other applicable emissions increases orreductions, (including secondary emissions), [shall]wouldnot cause or contribute to air pollution inviolation of:(1) any national ambient air quality standard inany [location] air quality control region; or(2) any applicable maximum allowableincrease (as shown in Table 4 of20.11.61.29 NMAC) over the baselineconcentrations in any area.C. No ChangeFederal ambient impact requirements for a sourceimpact analysis are at40 CFR 51.166(k). TheAugust 2010 revisions non-substantively modifythe SIP-approved source impact analysisrequirements by adding section headers to promotereadability. These revisions are consistent withfederal requirements.These revisions are approvable.87SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC1.15 NMAC will occur.20.11.61.16 ADDITIONAL IMPACTREQUIREMENTS:A.The owner or operator of the proposed majorstationary source or major modification shallprovide an analysis of the impairment to visibility,soils, and vegetation that would occur as a result ofthe source or modification and general commercial,residential, industrial, and other growth associatedwith the source or modification. The owner oroperator need not provide ananalysis of the impacton vegetation having no significant commercial orrecreational value. The analysis can use data orinformation available from the department.B.The owner or operator shall also provide ananalysis of the air quality impact projected for thearea as a result of general commercial, residential,industrial, and other growth associated with thesource or modification.20.11.61.16 ADDITIONAL IMPACT[REQUIREMENTS] ANALYSIS:A.No ChangeB.No ChangeC.The department may require monitoring ofvisibility in any federal class I area where thedepartment determines that an adverse impact onvisibility may occur due primarily to the operationsof the proposed new source or modification. Suchmonitoring shall be conducted followingprocedures approved by the department and subjectto the following:(1) visibility monitoring methods specified bythe department shall be reasonablyavailable and not require any research anddevelopment; and(2) the cost of visibility monitoring required bythe department shall not exceed 50 percentof the cost of ambient monitoring requiredby 20.11.61 NMAC; if ambientmonitoring is not required, the cost shallbe estimated as if it were required for eachpollutant to which 20.11.61 NMACapplies;(3) both preconstruction and post constructionvisibility monitoring may be required; ineach case, the duration of such monitoringshall not exceed one year.The “new” visibility monitoring requirements at20.11.61.16(C)(1)-(3) were previously SIPapproved by EPA at 20.11.61.18(E). The August2010 revision deletes the SIP-approved provisionsand moves them in their entirety to new section20.11.61.16(C).These revisions are approvable to maintain SIPconsistency with prior SIP-approvals.20.11.61.17AMBIENT AIR QUALITYMODELING:All estimates of ambientconcentrations required by 20.11.61 NMAC shallbe based on applicable air quality models, databases, and other requirements as specified inAppendix W to 40 CFR Part 51, its revisions, or20.11.61.17 AMBIENT AIR QUALITYMODELING:All estimates of ambientconcentrations required by 20.11.61 NMAC shallbe based on applicable air quality models, databases, and other requirements as specified inAppendix W to 40 CFR Part 51, its revisions, orPSD requirements for air quality modeling are at 40CFR 51.166(l). The August 2010 revisions nonsubstantively revise the SIP-approved requirementsand are consistent with the requirements at 40 CFR51.166(l).88SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACany superseding EPA document, and approved bythe department. Where an air quality impact modelis specified in the Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51,is inappropriate, the model may be modified oranother model substituted. Any substitution ormodification of a model must be approved by thedepartment. Notification shall be given by thedepartment of such a substitution or modificationand the opportunity for public comment providedfor in fulfilling the public notice requirements inSubsection B of 20.11.61.21 NMAC. Thedepartment will seek EPA approval of suchsubstitutions or modificationany superseding EPA document, and approved bythe department. Where an air quality [impact]model is specified in the Appendix W to 40 CFRPart 51,Guideline on Air Quality Models,isinappropriate, the model may be modified oranother model substituted. Any substitution ormodification of a model must be approved by thedepartment. Notification shall be given by thedepartment of such a substitution or modificationand the opportunity for public comment providedfor in fulfilling the public notice requirements inSubsection B of 20.11.61.21 NMAC. Thedepartment will seek EPA approval of suchsubstitutions or modifications.These revisions are approvable.20.11.61.18 MONITORING REQUREMENTS:A.Any application for a permit under 20.11.61NMAC shall contain an analysis of ambient airquality. Air quality data can be that measured bythe applicant or that available from a governmentagency in the area affectedby the major stationarysource or major modification. The analysis shallcontain the following:(1) for a major stationary source, eachpollutant for which the potential to emit is equal toor greater than the significant emission rates aslisted in Table 2 of 20.11.61.27 NMAC; or(2) for a major modification, eachpollutant that would result in a significant netemission increase.B.If no national ambient air quality standard for apollutant exists, and there is an acceptable methodfor monitoring that pollutant, the analysis shallcontain such air quality monitoring data as thedepartment determines is necessary to assess20.11.61.18 MONITORING REQUREMENTSAIR QUALITY ANALYSIS:A. Preapplication analysis.Any application fora permit under 20.11.61 NMAC shall contain ananalysis of ambient air quality [Air quality data canbe that measured by the applicant or that availablefrom a government agencyin the area affected bythe major stationary source or major modification.The analysis shall contain the following:] in thearea that the major stationary source or majormodification would affectfor each of the followingpollutants:(1) for a major stationary source, eachpollutant for which the potential to emit is equal toor greater than the significant emission rates aslisted in Table 2 of 20.11.61.27 NMAC; or(2) for a major modification, eachpollutant that would result in a significant netemission increase.B.If no national ambient air quality standard for aNote that previously SIP-approved section20.11.61.18(E) has been moved to new section20.11.61.16(C).Preapplication analysis, post-constructionmonitoring, and operation of monitoring stations isrequired at 40 CFR 51.166(m).The revisions to 20.11.61.18(A)(1) and (2) areconsistent with the requirements at 40 CFR51.166(m)(1)(i)(a) and (b).The revisions to 20.11.61.18(B) are consistent withthe requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(m)(1)(ii).The revisions to 20.11.61.18(C) are consistent withthe requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(m)(1)(iii).The revisions to 20.11.61.18(D) are consistent withthe requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(m)(1)(v).The revisions to 20.11.61.18(F) are consistent withthe requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(m)(2).The revisions at 20.11.61.18(G) correct internal89SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACambient air quality for that pollutant.C.Continuous air quality monitoring data shall berequired for all pollutant for which a nationalambient air quality standard exists.D.Ozone monitoring shall be performed ifmonitoring data is required for volatile organiccompounds or oxides of nitrogen. Postconstruction ozone monitoring data may besubmitted in lieu of providing preconstruction dataas required under Subsection C of 20.11.61.18NMAC is the owner or operator of the proposedmajor source or major modification satisfies all theprovisions of 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix S, SectionIV.E.The department may require monitoring ofvisibility in any federal class I area where thedepartment determines that an adverse impact onvisibility may occur due primarily to the operationsof the proposed new source or modification. Suchmonitoring shall be conducted followingprocedures approved by the department and subjectto the following:(1) visibility monitoring methodsspecified by the department shall be reasonablyavailable and not require any research anddevelopment and(2) the cost of visibility monitoringrequired by the department shall not exceed 50percent of the cost of ambient monitoring requiredby 20.11.61 NMAC. If ambient monitoring is notrequired, the cost shall be estimated as if it wererequired for each pollutant to which 20.11.61NMAC applies.(3) both preconstruction and postconstruction visibility monitoring may be required.pollutant exists, and there is an acceptable methodfor monitoring that pollutant, the analysis shallcontain such air quality monitoring data as thedepartment determines is necessary to assessambient air quality for that pollutant in any areathat the emissions of that pollutant would affect.C.[Continuous air quality monitoring data shallbe required for all pollutant for which a nationalambient air quality standard exists.] For pollutants(other than nonmethane hydrocarbons) for which astandard does exist, the analysis shall containcontinuous air quality monitoring data gathered forpurposes of determining whether emissions of thatpollutant would cause or contribute to a violation ofthe standard or any maximum allowable increase.D.Ozone monitoring shall be performed ifmonitoring data is required for volatile organiccompounds or oxides of nitrogen. [Postconstruction ozone monitoring data may besubmitted in lieu of providing preconstruction dataas required underSubsection C of 20.11.61.18NMAC is the owner or operator of the proposedmajor source or major modification satisfies all theprovisions of 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix S, SectionIV.] The owner or operator of a proposed majorstationary source or major modification of volatileorganic compounds who satisfies all conditions of40 CFR Part 51 Appendix S, Section IV mayprovide post-approval monitoring data for ozone inlieu of providing preconstruction data as requiredunder 20.11.61.18 NMAC.E.[The department may require monitoring ofvisibility in any federal class I area where thedepartment determines that an adverse impact onvisibility may occur due primarily to the operationsreferences and are consistent with the requirementsat 40 CFR 51.166(m)(3).The revisions at 20.11.61.18(H) are consistent withthe requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(m)(1).These revisions are approvable.90SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACIn each case, the duration of such monitoring shallnot exceed on year.F.The owner or operator of a major stationarysource or major modification shall, conduct postconstruction ambient monitoring as the departmentis necessary to validate attainment of ambient airquality standard and to assure that increments arenot exceededG.The owner or operator of a major stationarysource or major modification shall meet therequirements of 40 CFR 58, Appendix B during theoperation of monitoring stations for purposes ofsatisfying the requirements of this 20.11.61NMAC.H.The department has the discretion to exempt astationary source or modification from therequirements of 20.11.61.18 NMAC with respect tomonitoring for a particular pollutant if theemissions of the pollutant from the new source orthe net emissions increaseof the pollutant from themodification would cause, in any area, increases inambient concentrations less than the levels listed inTable 3 of 20.111.61.28 NMAC.I.The department shall exempt a stationary sourceor modification from the requirements of20.1 1.61.18 NMAC with respect topreconstruction monitoring for a particularpollutant if:(1)for ozone, volatile organic compoundemissions and oxides of nitrogen are lessthan 100 tons per year; or(2)the air pollutant is not a regulated newsource review pollutant; or(3)the existing ambient concentrations of thepollutant in the areaaffected by the sourceof the proposed new source or modification. Suchmonitoring shall be conducted followingprocedures approved by the department and subjectto the following:(1) visibility monitoring methodsspecified by the department shall be reasonablyavailable and not require any research anddevelopment and(2) the cost of visibility monitoringrequired by the department shall not exceed 50percent of the cost of ambient monitoring requiredby 20.11.61 NMAC. If ambient monitoring is notrequired, the cost shall be estimated as if it wererequired for each pollutant to which 20.11.61NMAC applies.(3) both preconstruction and postconstruction visibility monitoring may be required.In each case, the duration of such monitoring shallnot exceed on year] Reserved.F. Post-construction monitoring.The owner oroperator of a major stationary source or majormodification shall, after construction of thestationary source or modification,conduct [postconstruction] suchambient monitoring as thedepartment is necessary [to validate attainment ofambient air quality standard and to assure thatincrements are not exceeded.] to determine theeffect emissions from the stationary source ormodification may have, or are having, on airquality in any area, including monitoring tovalidate attainment of ambient air quality standardsand to assure that increments are not exceeded.G. Operation of monitoring stations.Theowner or operator of a major stationary source ormajor modification shall meet the requirements of91SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACor modification are less than theconcentrations listed in Table 3 of 20.11.61.28 NMAC.40 CFR 58, Appendix B during the operation ofmonitoring stations for purposes of satisfying therequirements of [this 20.11.61 NMAC] 20.11.61.18NMAC.H.The department has the discretion to exempt astationary source or modification from therequirements of 20.11.61.18 NMAC with respect tomonitoring for a particular pollutant if theemissions increaseof the pollutant from the newsource or the net emissions increase of the pollutantfrom the modification would cause, in any area,increases in ambient concentrations less than thelevels listed in Table 3 of 20.111.61.28 NMAC.I.No Change20.11.61.19 TEMPORARY SOURCEEXEMPTIONS:The requirements of20.11.61.16 NMAC and 20.11.61.18 NMAC shallnot apply to a temporary source subject to 20.11.61NMAC for a given pollutant, if the allowableemissions of such pollutant would not impact anyfederal class I area or any areas where an applicableincrements is violated; and would be temporary.20.11.61.19 TEMPORARY SOURCEEXEMPTIONS:The requirements ofSubsections B of 20.11.61.15 NMAC,20.11.61.16NMAC and 20.11.61.18 NMAC shall not apply to a[temporary] majorsource or modification[subjectto 20.11.61 NMAC for a given] with respect to aparticularpollutant, if the allowable emissions of[such] thatpollutant from the source, or the netemissions increase of that pollutant from themodification:would not impact any federal class Iarea or any areas where anapplicable increments isknown to beviolated; and would be temporary.Temporary source exemptions are provided at 40CFR 51.166(i)(3). The August 2010 revisions to theSIP-approved exemption are consistent with thefederal requirements.This revision is approvable.20.11.61.20 ACTUALS PLANTWIDEAPPLIBILITY LIMITS (PALs)A. Applicability.(1) The department may approve the use of anaccruals PAL for any existing major stationarysource if the PAL meets the requirements of20.11.61.20 NMAC. The term “PAL” shallmean “actuals PAL” throughout 20.11.61.2020.11.61.20 ACTUALS PLANTWIDEAPPLIBILITY LIMITS (PALs)A. Applicability.(1) No Change(2) Any physical change in or change in themethod of operation of a major stationary sourcethat maintains its total source-wide emissionsbelow the PAL level, meets the requirements ofIn a separate rulemaking action taken on December29, 2011, EPA approved the Albuquerque PSD SIPrevisions to adopt and implement the GHGTailoring Rule provisions, including revisions at20.11.61.20 NMAC to correct internal crossreferences in the PSD program as a result of thenew definitions added for the GHG Tailoring Rule.This action had the unintended effect of giving tacit92SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACNMAC.(2) Any physical change in or change in themethod of operation of a major stationarysource that maintains its total source-wideemissions below the PAL level, meets therequirements of 20.11.61.20 NMAC, andcomplies with the PAL permit:(a) is not a major modification for the PALpollutant:(b) does not have to be approved through therequirements of 20.11.61 NMAC; and(c ) is not subject to the provisions inSubsection D of 20.11.61.12 NMAC(restrictions on relaxing enforceableemission limitations that the majorstationary source used to avoidapplicability of the major new sourcereview program).(3) Except as provided under Subparagraph (c)of Paragraph (1) of Subsection A of20.11.61.20 NMAC, a major stationary sourceshall continue to comply with all applicablefederal or state requirements, emissionlimitations, and work practice requirementsthat were established prior to the effective dateof the PAL.20.11.61.20 NMAC, and complies with the PALpermit:(a) No Change(b) does not have to be approved throughthe [requirements of 20.11.61 NMAC]plan’s major NSR program; and(c ) No Change(3) Except as provided under Subparagraph (c) ofParagraph [(1)] (2)of Subsection A of 20.11.61.20NMAC, a major stationary source shall continue tocomply with all applicable federal or staterequirements, emission limitations, and workpractice requirements that were established prior tothe effective date of the PAL.approval to the August 2010 revisions of the PALsApplicability section at 20.11.61.20(A).The August 2010 revisions to PALs Applicabilitydo not substantively revise the 2007 SIP-approvedPAL provisions (adopted by ABCAQCB onDecember 2005). These revisions maintainconsistency with the PAL provisions at 40 CFR51.166(w)(1).These revisions are approvable.20.11.61.20 ACTUALS PLANTWIDEAPPLIBILITY LIMITS (PALs)H. PAL Effective Period and Reopening of thePAL Permit(1) PAL Effective Period.The PAL effectiveperiod shall be ten years.20.11.61.20 ACTUALS PLANTWIDEAPPLIBILITY LIMITS (PALs)H. PAL Effective Period and Reopening of thePAL Permit(1) PAL Effective Period.The PAL effectiveperiod shall be 10tenyears.In a separate rulemaking action taken on December29, 2011, EPA approved the Albuquerque PSD SIPrevisions to adopt and implement the GHGTailoring Rule provisions, including revisions at20.11.61.20 NMAC to correct internal crossreferences in the PSD program as a result of thenew definitions added for the GHG Tailoring Rule.This action had the unintended effect of giving tacitapproval to the August 2010 revisions of the PALs93SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACEffective Period section revisions at20.11.61.20(H).The August 2010 revisions to the PAL effectiveperiod are non-substantive,replacing a word with anumeral. These revisions maintain consistency withthe PAL provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(w)(2)(vii).These revisions are approvable.20.11.61.21 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ANDNOTIFICATION:A.The department shall, within 30 days afterreceipt of an application, review such applicationand determine whether it is administrativelycomplete or there is any deficiency in theapplication or information submitted. To bedeemed administratively complete, the applicationmust meet the requirements of 20.1 1.61.13NMAC in addition to the requirements of 20.1 1.41 NMAC. If the application is deemed:(1)administratively complete, a letter to thateffect shall be sent by certified mail to theapplicant;(2)administratively incomplete, a letter shallbe sent by certified mail to the applicantstating what additional information orpoints of clarification are necessary todeem the application administrativelycomplete; upon receipt of the additionalinformation or clarification, thedepartment shall promptly review suchinformation and determine whether theapplication is administratively complete;(3)adrninistratively complete but no permit isrequired, a letter shall be sent by certified20.11.61.21 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ANDNOTIFICATION:A. No ChangeB. No ChangeC.Within one year after receipt of a completeapplication,the department shall:(1) Make a preliminary determination whetherconstruction should be approved, approved withconditions, or disapproved.(2) Make available at the department districtand local office nearest to the proposed source acopy of all materials the applicant submitted, acopy of the preliminary determination, and acopy or summary of other materials, if any,considered in making the preliminarydetermination.(3) Notify the public by advertisement in anewspaper of general circulation in the area inwhich the proposed source would beconstructed(a) of the application;(b) the preliminary determination;(c) the degree of increment consumptionthat is expected from the source ormodification; and(d) of the opportunity for comment at aPublic participation and notification for PSDpermitting is required at 40 CFR 51.166(q). Therevisions to 20.11.61.21(C) make necessarysubstantive revisions to maintain consistency withfederal requirements.These revisions are approvable.94SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACmail to the applicant informing theapplicant of the determination.B. For purposes of determining minor sourcebaseline date pursuant to40CFR51:(1) an application is complete when it containsall the information necessary forprocessing the application; designating anapplication complete for purposes of 40CFR51 does not preclude the departmentfrom requesting or accepting anyadditional information; and(2) in the event that additional information issubmitted to remedy any deficiency in theapplication or information submitted, thedate of receipt of the application shall bethe date on which the department receivedall required information.C.The department shall:(1) Make a preliminary determination whetherconstruction should be approved,approved with conditions, or disapproved.(2) Make available at the department districtand local office nearest to the proposedsource a copy of all materials the applicantsubmitted, a copy of the preliminarydetermination, and a copy or summary ofother materials, if any, considered inmaking the preliminary determination.(3) Notify the public by advertisement in anewspaper of general circulation in thearea in which the proposed source wouldbe constructed(a) of the application;(b) the preliminary determination;(c) the degree of increment consumptionpublic hearing as well as written publiccomment; the public comment period shallbe for 30 days from the date of suchadvertisement.(4) Send a copy of the notice of public commentto:(a) the applicant;(b) the administrator; and(c) officials andagencies havingjurisdiction over the location where theproposed construction would occur asfollows: [to include] any other state orlocal air pollution control agencies; thechief executives of the city and countywhere the source would be located; anycomprehensive regional land use planningagency; and any state, federal landmanager, or Indian governing body whoselands may be affected by emissions fromthe source or modification.(5) Provide opportunity for a public hearing forinterested persons to appear and submit writtenor oral comments on the air quality impact ofthe source, alternatives to it, the controltechnology required,and other appropriateconsiderations.(6) Consider all written comments submittedwithin a time specified in the notice of publiccomment and all comments received at anypublic hearing(s) in making a final decision onthe approvability of the application. Thedepartment shall make all comments availablefor public inspection in the same locationswhere the department made availablepreconstruction information relating to the95SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACthat is expected from the source ormodification; and(d) of the opportunity for comment at apublic hearing as well as writtenpublic comment; the public commentperiod shall be for 30 days from thedate of such advertisement.(4) Send a copy of the notice of publiccomment to:(a) the applicant;(b) the administrator; and(c) officials and agencies havingjurisdiction over the location wherethe proposed construction wouldoccur as follows: to include anyother state or local air pollutioncontrol agencies; the chief executivesof the city and county where thesource would be located; anycomprehensive regional land useplanning agency; and any state,federal land manager, or Indiangoverning body whose lands may beaffected by emissionsfrom the sourceor modification.(5) Provide opportunity for a public hearing forinterested persons to appear and submitwritten or oral comments on the air qualityimpact of the source, and other appropriateconsiderations.(6) Consider all written comments submittedwithin a time specified in the notice ofpublic comment and all commentsreceived at any public hearing(s) inmaking a final decision on theproposedsource or modification.(7) No Change96SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACapprovability of the application. Thedepartment shall make all commentsavailable for public inspection in the samelocations where the department madeavailable preconstruction informationrelating to the source.(7) Within 180 days after an application isdeemed administratively complete, unlessthe director grants an extension not toexceed 90 days for good cause:(a) make a final determination of whetherconstruction should be approved,approved with conditions, ordisapproved; and(b) notify the applicant in writing of thefinal determination and make suchnotification available for publicinspection at the same location wherethe department made availablepreconstruction information andpublic comments relating to thesource.20.11.61.23EXCLUSIONS FROMINCREMENT CONSUMPTION:Following a public hearing, the director mayexclude the following concentrations indetermining compliance with a maximumallowable increase:A.Concentrations due to the increase in emissionsfrom stationary sources, over the emissions fromsuch sources before the effective date of an order:under Sections 2(a) and (b) of the Energy Supplyand Environmental Coordination Act of 1974 (orany superseding legislation). Sources must have20.11.61.23 EXCLUSIONS FROMINCREMENT CONSUMPTION:A.Following a public hearing, the director mayexclude the following concentrations indetermining compliance with a maximumallowable increase:[A.] (1)concentrations [due] attributableto the increase in emissions fromstationary sources which have convertedfrom the use of petroleum products,natural gas, or both by reason of an orderin effect under Section 2 (a) and (b) of theExclusions from increment consumption areprovided at 40 CFR 51.166(f).The new provisions at 20.11.61.23(A)(1) areconsistent with provisions at 40 CFR51.166(f)(1)(i).The new provisions at 20.11.61.23(A)(2) areconsistent with provisions at 40 CFR51.166(f)(1)(ii).The non-substantive revisions at 20.11.61.23(A)(3)are consistent with provisions at 40 CFR51.166(f)(1)(iii).97SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACconverted from the use of petroleum products,natural gas, or both by reason of such order. Thisexclusion shall not apply more than five years afterthe effective date of such an order; orB.Concentrations due to the increase in emissionsfrom sources, over the emissions from such sourcesbefore the effective date of a plan; in effectpursuant to the federal Power Act. Sources musthave converted from using natural gas by reason ofa natural gas curtailment plan. This exclusion shallnot apply more than five years after the effectivedate of such a plan; orC.Concentrations of particular matter due to theincrease in emissions from construction or othertemporary emission-related activities of new ormodified sources; orD.The increase in concentrations due to newsources outside the United States over theconcentrations attributedto existing sources whichare included in the baseline concentrations.Energy Supply and EnvironmentalCoordination Act of 1974 (or anysuperseding legislation), over theemissions from such sources before theeffective date of suchan order: [underSections 2(a) and (b) of the Energy Supplyand Environmental Coordination Act of1974 (or any superseding legislation).Sources must have converted from the sueof petroleum products, natural gas, orboth by reason of such order. Thisexclusion shall not apply more than fiveyears after the effective date of such anorder; or][B.] (2)concentrations [due] attributableto the increase in emissions from sourceswhich have converted from using naturalgas by reason of natural gas curtailmentplan in effect pursuant to the FederalPower Act, over the emissions from suchsources before the effective date of [a]suchplan; [in effect pursuant to the federalPower Act. Sources must have convertedfrom using natural gas by reason of anatural gas curtailment plan. Thisexclusion shall not apply more than fiveyears after the effective date of such aplan; or][C.] (3)concentrations of particular matter[due] attributableto the increase inemissions from construction or othertemporary emission-related activities ofnew or modified sources; [or][D.] (4)the increase in concentrations[due] attributableto new sources outsideThe non-substantive revisions at 20.11.61.23(A)(4)are consistent with provisions at 40 CFR51.166(f)(1)(iv).The new provisions at 20.11.61.23(A)(5) areconsistent with provisions at 40 CFR51.166(f)(1)(v).The new provisions at 20.11.61.23(B) areconsistent with provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(f)(2).The new provisions at 20.11.61.23(C) and (D) areconsistent with provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(f)(3)and (4).These revisions are necessary to maintainconsistency with the federal PSD requirements.These revisions are approvable.98SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACthe United States overthe concentrations[attributed] attributableto existing sourceswhich are included in the baseline[concentrations] concentration; and(5) concentrations attributable to thetemporary increase in emissions of sulfurdioxide, particulate matter, or nitrogenoxides from stationary sources which areaffected by plan revisions approved by theadministrator as meeting the criteriaspecified in Subsection D of 20.11.61.23NMAC.B.If the plan provides that the concentrations towhich Paragraph (1) or (2) of Subsection A of20.11.61.23 NMAC refers, shall be excluded, itshall also provide thatno exclusion of suchconcentrations shall apply more than five yearsafter the effective date of the order to whichParagraph (10 of Subsection A of 20.11.61.23NMAC refers, or the plan to which Paragraph (2)of Subsection A of 20.11.61.23 NMAC refers,whichever is applicable. If both such order andplan are applicable, no such exclusion shall applymore than five years afterthe later of such effectivedates.C. [Reserved]D.For purposes of excluding concentrationspursuant to Paragraph (5) of Subsection A of20.11.61.23 NMAC, the administrator may approvea plan revision that:(1) specifies the time over which thetemporary emissions increase of sulfurdioxide, particulate matter, or nitrogenoxides would occur such time is not toexceed 2 years in duration unless a longer99SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACtime is approved by the Administrator.(2) specifies that the time period forexcluding certain contributions inaccordance with Paragraph (1) ofSubsection D of 20.11.61.23 NMAC, isnot renewable;(3) allows no emissions increase from astationary source which would ;(a) impact a class I area or anarea where an applicableincrement is known to beviolated; or(b) cause or contribute to theviolation of a national ambient airquality standard;(4) requires limitationsto be in effect theend of the time period specified inaccordance with Paragraph (1) ofSubsection D of 20.11.61.23 NMAC,which would ensure that the emissionslevels from stationary sources affected bythe plan revision would not exceed thoselevels occurring from such sources beforethe plan revision was approved.20.11.61.24 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTSFOR SOURCES IMPACTING FEDERALCLASS I AREAS:Note that due to thevoluminous amount ofregulatory text in this section, only the relevantpieces will be listed for review and analysis.A.The department shall transmit to theadministrator and the federal land manager acopy of each permit application relating to amajor stationary source or major modification20.11.61.24 [ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTSFOR] SOURCES IMPACTING FEDERALCLASS I AREAS – ADDITIONALREQUIREMENTS:A. Notice to EPA.No changes made to the bodyof the section, only to the heading.***F. Sulfur dioxide waiver by governor withFLM concurrence:No changes made to the bodyof the text, only to the headings.The non-substantive revisions to 20.11.6.24 includesection headings to improve readability. Theserevisions maintain consistency of the SIP with thefederal PSD requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(p).These revisions are approvable.100SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACproposing to locate within 100 kilometers ofany federal class I area. ... In the case wherethe department disagrees with the federal landmanagers' analysis, the department will alsoexplain its decision or give notice to the publicby advertisement in a newspaper of generalcirculation in the area in which the proposedsource would be constructed, as to where thedecision can be obtained.***F. Sulfur dioxide waiver by governor:******20.11.61.25 RESTRICTIONS ON AREACLASSIFICATIONS:A. Mandatory federal class I areas:1. The following areas were in existence onAugust 7, 1977, and classified as mandatoryfederal class I areas and may not beredesignated:(a)international parks (all of them);(b)national wilderness areas which exceed5,000 acres in size;(c)national memorial parks which exceed5,000 acres in size; and(d)national parks which exceed 6,000 acresin size.2.Specifically for New Mexico, these areasare:(a)Bandelier wilderness, administered bynational park service (NPS);(b)Bosque del Apache wilderness,administered by national fish andwildlife service (NFWS);(c)Carlsbad caverns national park,administered by NPS;20.11.61.25 RESTRICTIONS ON AREACLASSIFICATIONS:A. Mandatory federal class I areas:(1)All ofthe following areas whichwere inexistence on August 7, 1977, [and classifiedas mandatory federal] shall beclass I areasand may not be redesignated:(a) – (d) No Change(2) No ChangeB. Areas which may be redesignated only asclass I or class II:(1)The following areasmay be redesignatedon as class I or II:(a) an area which, as of August 7, 1977,[which exceeds] exceeded10,000 acres insize and [is] wasa national monument,national primitive area, national preserve,national recreational area, national wildand scenic river, national wildlife refuge;[or] and(b) No Change(2) No ChangeRestrictions on Area Classifications for PSDpermitting are provided at 40 CFR 51.166(e). TheAugust 2010 revisions to the SIP-approvedrestrictions at 20.11.61.25 NMAC are nonsubstantive and maintain consistency with thefederal requirements.These revisions are approvable.101SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC(d)Gila wilderness, administered bynational forest service (NFS);(e)Pecos wilderness, administered by NFS;(f)Salt Creek wilderness, administered byNFWS;(g)San Pedro Parks wilderness,administered by NFS;(h)Wheeler Peak wilderness, administeredby NFS; and(i)White Mountain wilderness, administeredby NFS.B. Areas which may be redesignated only asclass I or class II:1. The following areas may be redesignated onas class I or II:(a)An area as of August 7, 1977, whichexceeds 10,000 acres in size and is anational monument, national primitivearea, national preserve, nationalrecreational area, national wild andscenic river, national wildlife refuge; or(b)a national park or national wildernessarea established after August 7, 1977which exceeds 10,000 acres in size.(2) Specifically for New Mexico, these areasinclude (but are not necessary limited to ):(a)Apache Kid wilderness, administeredby national forest service (NFS);(b)Bandelier national monument,administered b national park service(NPS);(c)Bitter Lake national wildlife refuge,administered by national fish andwildlife service (NFWS);(d)Blue Range wilderness, administered102SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACby NFS(e)Bosque del Apache national wildliferefuge, administered by NFWS;(f)Capitan mountains wilderness,administered by NFS;(g)Cebolla wilderness, administered bybureau of land management (BLM);(h)Chama River Canyon wilderness,administered by NFS;(i)Cruces Basin wilderness, administeredby NFS;(j)De-na-zin wilderness, administered byBLM;(k)El Malpais national monument,administered by NPS;(l)Latir Peak wilderness, administeredby NFS;(m)Manzano mountain wilderness,administered by NFS;(n)San Andres national wildlife refuge,administered by NFWS;(o)Sandia Mountain wilderness,administered by NFS;(p)Sevilleta national wildlife refuge,administered by NFWS;(q)West Malpais wilderness,administered by BLM;(r)White Sands national monument,administered by NPS; and(s)Withington Wilderness, administeredby NFS.20.11.61.26 TABLE I – PSD SOURCECATEGORIES:A.Carbon black plants (furnace process).B.Charcoal production plants.20.11.61.26 TABLE I – PSD SOURCECATEGORIES:A.Carbon black plants (furnace process).B.Charcoal production plants.40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(i)(a) lists the PSD majorsource categories. The revisions to 20.11.61.26Table I to exclude ethanol production facilities thatproduce ethanol by natural fermentation are103SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACC.Chemical process plants.D.Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers).E.Coke oven batteries.F.Fossil fuel boilers (or combinations thereof)totaling more than 250 million BTUIhr heatinput.G.Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of morethan 250 million BTUh heat input.H.Fuel conversion plants.I.Glass fiber processing plants.J.Hydrofluoric acid plants.K.Iron and steel mills.L.Kraft pulp mills.M.Lime plants.N.Municipal incinerators capable of chargingmore than 50 tons of refuse per day.O.Nitric acid plants.P.Petroleum refineries.Q.Petroleum storage and transfer units with atotal storage capacityexceeding 300,000barrels.R.Phosphate rock processing plants.S.Portland cement plants.T.Primary aluminum ore reduction plants.U.Primary copper smelters.V.Primary lead smelters.W.Primary zinc smelters.X.Secondary metal production plants.Y.Sintering plants.Z.Sulfur recovery plants.AA.Sulfuric acid plants.BB.Taconite ore processing plants.C.Chemical process plants (the term chemicalprocessing plant shall not include ethanolproduction facilities that produce ethanol bynatural fermentation included in NAICS Codes325193 or 312140).D.Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers).E.Coke oven batteries.F.Fossil fuel boilers (or combinations thereof)totaling more than 250 million BTU/hr heatinput.G.Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of morethan 250 million BTU/hr heat input.H.Fuel conversion plants.I.Glass fiber processing plants.J.Hydrofluoric acid plants.K.Iron and steel mills.L.Kraft pulp mills.M.Lime plants.N.Municipal incinerators capable of chargingmore than [50] 250tons of refuse per day.O.Nitric acid plants.P.Petroleum refineries.Q.Petroleum storage and transfer units with atotal storage capacityexceeding 300,000barrels.R.Phosphate rock processing plants.S.Portland cement plants.T.Primary aluminum ore reduction plants.U.Primary copper smelters.V.Primary lead smelters.W.Primary zinc smelters.X.Secondary metal production plants.Y.Sintering plants.Z.Sulfur recovery plants.AA.Sulfuric acid plants.consistent with the requirements of the listed PSDmajor source categories.These revisions are approvable.104SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACBB.Taconite ore processing plants.20.11.61.27 TABLE 2 – SIGNIGICANTEMISSION RATES:Pollutant EmissionRate(Tons/YR)Carbon Monoxide100Fluorides 3Lead 0.6Municipal waste combustor:Acid gases (measured assulfur dioxide andhydrogen chloride)Metals (measured asparticulate matterOrganics (measured astotal tetra- through octachlorinateddibenzo-p-dioxins anddibenzofurans)40 (36 megagrams/yr)15 (14 megagrams/year)0.0000035 (0.0000032megagrarn/yr)Nitrogen oxides40Ozone (as VOC)40 (VOC)Particulate MatterParticulate MatterEmissionsPM10 Emissions2515Sulfur CompoundsHydrogen sulfide (H2S)Reduced sulfurcompounds (incl. H2S)Sulfur dioxideSulfuric acid mistTotal reduced sulfur (incl.H2S)101040710Any other pollutantregulated under the Act thatis not listed in thistableAny emission rateEach regulated pollutant Emission rate or netemissions increaseassociated with a majorstationary source or majormodification that causes anair quality impact of one20.11.61.27 TABLE 2 – SIGNIGICANTEMISSION RATES:Pollutant EmissionRate(Tons/YR)Carbon Monoxide100Fluorides 3Lead 0.6Municipal waste combustor:Acid gases (measured assulfur dioxide andhydrogen chloride)Metals (measured asparticulate matterOrganics (measured astotal tetra- through octachlorinateddibenzo-p-dioxins anddibenzofurans)40 (36 megagrams/yr)15 (14 megagrams/year)0.0000035 (0.0000032megagrarn/yr)Municipal solid wastelandfill emissions (measuredas NMOC)50 (45 megagrams/vear)Nitrogen oxides40Ozone (as VOC)40 VOC or NOXParticulate MatterParticulate MatterEmissionsPM10 EmissionsPM2.5 Emissions251510 tpy of direct PM2.5emissions; 40 tpyof sulfur dioxide emissions;40 tpv of nitrogen oxideemissions unlessdemonstrated not to be a PM2.5 precursor underSubsection VV of20.11.61.7 NMACSulfur CompoundsHydrogen sulfide (H2S)Reduced sulfurcompounds (incl. H2S)Sulfur dioxideSulfuric acid mist1010407Significant emission rates for PSD permitting arerequired at 40 CFR 51.166 (b)(23)(i).The revisions to 20.11.61.27 Table 2 for theaddition of municipal solid waste landfills and NOXas a precursor for ozone are consistent with federalrequirements andare approvable.The revisions to 20.11.61.27 Table 2 for theaddition of significant emission rates for PM2.5 areconsistent with federal requirements and areapprovable.105SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACmicrogram per cubic meteror greater (24-hr average) inany Class I Federal arealocated within 10 kmof thesource.Total reduced sulfur (incl.H2S)10Any other pollutantregulated new source reviewpollutantunder the Actthatis not listed in thistableAny emission rateEach regulated pollutant Emission rate or netemissions increaseassociated with a majorstationary source or majormodification that causes anair quality impact of onemicrogram per cubic meteror greater (24-hr average) inany Class I Federal arealocated within 10 kmof thesource.20.11.61.28 TABLE 3- SIGNIFICANTMONITORING CONCENTRATIONS:Pollutant Air QualityConcentrationMicrogramper cubicmeter(μg/m3)AveragingTimeCarbonmonoxide575 8 hoursFluorides 0.25 24 hoursLead 0.1 3 monthsNitrogendioxide14 AnnualOzone BParticulateMatter(PM10)10 24 hoursSulfurcompoundsHydrogensulfide (H2S)Reducedsulfurcompounds0.201 hour20.11.61.28 TABLE 3- SIGNIFICANTMONITORING CONCENTRATIONS:Pollutant Air QualityConcentrationMicrogramper cubicmeter(μg/m3)AveragingTimeCarbonmonoxide575 8 hoursFluorides 0.25 24 hoursLead 0.1 3 monthsNitrogendioxide14 AnnualOzone BParticulateMatter(PM10)10 24 hoursSulfurcompoundsHydrogensulfide (H2S)Reducedsulfurcompounds0.201 hourNote that there are pending revisions to 20.11.61.28Table 3 adopted April 13, 2006 and submitted forEPA review May 24, 2006. Our evaluation of theMay 2006 revisions to this table is included abovein Table IV-B1. For purposes of our evaluation ofthe August 2010 revisions, the second column ofthis table includes the May 2006 revisions.Significant monitoring concentrations for PSDpermitting are required at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i).The new language added to 20.11.61.28 Table 3 isnecessary to identify NOXas a precursor to ozonefor implementation of the 1997 and 2008 8-hourozone NAAQS.This revision is approvable.106SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC(incl. H2S)SulfurdioxideSulfuric acidmistTotal reducedsulfur (incl.H2S)1013A101 hour24 hours1 hourA – No acceptable monitoring techniquesavailable at this time.Therefore, monitoring isnot required until acceptable techniques areavailable.(incl. H2S)SulfurdioxideSulfuric acidmistTotal reducedsulfur (incl.H2S)1013A101 hour24 hours1 hourA – No acceptable monitoring techniquesavailable at this time.Therefore, monitoring isnot required until acceptable techniques areavailable.B – No de minimis air quality level is providedfor ozone. However, any net emissionsincreaseof 100 tons per year or more of volatile organiccompounds or nitrogen oxidessubject to PSDwould be required to perform an ambient impactanalysis, including the gathering of ambient airquality data.20.11.61.29 TABLE 4 – ALLOWABLE PSDINCREMENTS:Micrograms per cubic meter(μg/m3)Class I Class II ClassIIINitrogenDioxide annualarithmeticmean2.5 25 50ParticulateMatterPM10, annualarithmeticmeanPM10, 24-hourmaximum4173420.11.61.29 TABLE 4 – ALLOWABLE PSDINCREMENTS:POLLUTANTMaximum AllowableIncreaseMicrograms per cubic meter(μg/m3)Class I Class II ClassIIINitrogenDioxide annualarithmeticmean2.5 25 50ParticulateMatterPM10, annualarithmeticmeanPM10, 24-hour41734Note that there are pending revisions to 20.11.61.29Table 4 adopted April 13, 2006 and submitted forEPA review May 24, 2006. Our evaluation of theMay 2006 revisions to this table is included abovein Table IV-B1. For purposes of our evaluation ofthe August 2010 revisions, the second column ofthis table includes the May 2006 revisions.Significant monitoring concentrations for PSDpermitting are required at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i).The new language added to 20.11.61.29 Table 4 isnon-substantive revisions to add table headings.This revision is approvable.107SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMAC8a 30a 60aSulfur DioxideAnnualarithmeticmean24-hourmaximum3-hourmaximum25a25a2091a512a40182a700aa – Not to be exceededmore than once per year.b – No de minimis air quality level is providedfor ozone. However, any net increase of 100 tonsper year or more of volatile organic compoundssubject to PSD would be required to perform anambient impact analysis, including the gatheringof ambient air quality data.maximum8a30a60aSulfur DioxideAnnualarithmeticmean24-hourmaximum3-hourmaximum25a25a2091a512a40182a700aa – Not to be exceededmore than once per year.20.11.61.30 TABLE 5 – MAXIMUMALLOWABLE INCREASES FOR CLASS IWAIVERS :Micrograms per cubic meter(μg/m3)Nitrogen Dioxideannual arithmetic mean25Particulate MatterPM10, annual arithmeticmeanPM10, 24-hour maximum1730Sulfur DioxideAnnual arithmetic mean24-hour maximum3-hour maximum209132520.11.61.30 TABLE 5 – MAXIMUMALLOWABLE INCREASES FOR CLASS I[WAIVERS] VARIANCES:POLLUTANTMaximumAllowableIncreaseMicrograms per cubic meter(μg/m3)Nitrogen Dioxideannual arithmetic mean25Particulate MatterPM10, annual arithmeticmeanPM10, 24-hour maximum1730Sulfur DioxideAnnual arithmetic mean24-hour maximum3-hour maximum2091325Maximum allowable increases for Class IVariances in PSD permitting are provided at 40CFR 51.166(p)(4). The new language added to20.11.61.30 Table 5 is non-substantive revisions totable headings. These revisions are consistent withfederal requirements and are approvable.20.11.61.31 TABLE 6 –MAXIMUMALLOWABLE INCREASE FOR SULFURDIOXIDE WAIVER BY GOVERNORMicrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3)Terrain Areas20.11.61.31 TABLE 6 – MAXIMUMALLOWABLE INCREASE FOR SULFURDIOXIDE WAIVER BY GOVERNORMicrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3)Terrain AreasMaximum allowable increases for SO2 waivers bythe governor are provided for at 40 CFR51.166(p)(7). The revisions to 20.11.61.31 Table 6are non-substantive to move units from the tableheading to the data entry. These revisions are108SIP Approved LanguageAs approved by EPA on April 26, 2007 (72 FR20728)As adopted by the AQCB on December 14, 2005and submitted on May 24, 2006Adopted State LanguageRevisions adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14,2010 and submitted to EPA on August 16, 2010.Analysis of the August 16, 2010 Revisions to20.11.61 NMACPeriod of Exposure LowHigh24-hr maximum36623-hr maximum130221Period of Exposure LowHigh24-hr maximum36μg/m362μg/m33-hr maximum130μg/m3221μg/m3consistent with the federal requirements and areapprovable.

# 109 IV.C Demonstration that the Albuquerque PSD Program Adequately Implements NO X 

# as

a Precursor for 8-hour Ozone

This review of the May 2006 and August 2010 re visions to the Albuquerque PSD program is

being proposed as part of EPA’s action on the Albuquerque Infrastructure SIP. To meet the

requirements of 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 and 2008 ozone standard, EPA believes the State must

have updated its PSD rules to treat NO X 

# as a precursor to ozone consistent with EPA’s

November 29, 2005, Phase 2 rule for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612).

How does a SIP satisfy NO X 

# as a precursor for ozone?

According to the November 29, 2005 FRN, th e PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 must be

amended as follows:

1. By revising paragr aph (b)(1)(ii).

2. By revising paragr aph (b)(2)(ii).

3. By revising the entry for ‘‘ozone’’ in the list in paragraph (b)(23)(i).

4. By revising paragr aph (b)(49)(i).

5. By revising footnote 1 to paragraph (i)(5)(i)( e ).

Table IV.C demonstrates how the Al buquerque PSD program satisfies the NO X 

# as an ozone

precursor criteria listed above.110IV.C – Analysis of the AlbuquerqueSIP Revisions to Implement NOXas a Precursor to OzoneFederal Requirements forImplementing NOXas a precursorfor 8-hour ozone70 FR 71612November 29, 2005Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisions40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(ii):(b) * * *(1) * * *(ii) A major source that is major forvolatile organic compounds or NOXshall be considered major for ozone.20.11.61.7.JJ."Major stationary source"As adopted by the ABCAQCB on December 22, 2005 andsubmitted to EPA as a SIP revision on May 24, 2006.“Major Stationary Source” means:***(4) a major source that is major for volatile organic compoundsor oxides of nitrogen shall be considered major for ozone;EPA SIP-approved this definition of Major StationarySource at 20.11.61.7.JJ(4) NMAC on April 26, 2007.As SIP-approved, the Albuquerque SIP identifies at20.11.61.7.JJ(4) NMAC that a major source for NOXshall also be considered major for ozone, consistent with40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(ii).40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(ii):(b) * * *(2) * * *(ii) Any significant emissionsincrease (as defined at paragraph(b)(39) of this section) from anyemissions units or net emissionsincrease (as defined inparagraph (b)(3) of this section) at amajor stationary source that issignificant for volatile organiccompounds or NOXshall beconsidered significant for ozone.20.11.61.7.HH "Major modification"As adopted by the ABCAQCB on April 13, 2006 andsubmitted to EPA as a SIP revision on May 24, 2006.“Major Modification” means any physical change in or changein the method of operation of a major stationary source thatwould result in a significant emissions increase of a regulatednew source review pollutant, and a significant net emissionsincrease of that pollutant fromthe major stationary source. Anysignificant emissions increase from any emissions units or netemissions increase at a major stationary source that issignificant for volatile organic compoundsoroxides of nitrogenshall be considered significant for ozone.The revision to 20.11.61.7.HH NMAC to revise thedefinition of “major modification” was adopted by theAlbuquerque AQCB on April 13, 2006 and submitted toEPA on May 24, 2006. This revision is necessary toidentify NOXas a precursor for ozone, consistent with40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(ii).This revision is approvable.40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i):(b) * * *(23)(i) * * ** * * * *Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organiccompounds or NOX20.11.61.7.YY “Significant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on December 22, 2005 andsubmitted to EPA as a SIP revision on May 24, 2006."Significant"means in reference to a net emissions increase orthe potential of a source to emit air pollutants, a rate of emissionthat would equal or exceed any of the rates listed in Table 2 of20.1 1.61.27 NMAC.20.11.61.27 Table 2 – Significant Emission RatesThe SIP-approved definition of “Significant” at20.11.61.7.YY NMAC refers to the SIP-approvedSignificant Emission Rates Table at 20.11.61.27 – Table2. This SIP-approved Table 2 does not identify NOXas aprecursor to ozone, as required at 40 CFR51.166(b)(23)(i).Further revisions are necessary to demonstrate adequacyof the Albuquerque PSD program for implementingNOXas a precursor to ozone for significant emission111Federal Requirements forImplementing NOXas a precursorfor 8-hour ozone70 FR 71612November 29, 2005Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD ProvisionsPOLLUTANT EMISSIONRATE(TONS/YR)***Ozone (as VOC, VolatileOrganic Compounds)40 (VOC)***rates.The ABCAQCB adopted further revisions to this sectionto address this in adequacy on July 14, 2010 andsubmitted these revisions to EPA on August 16, 2010.The August 16, 2010 submittal will be addressed later inthis table.No Changes to the definition of “Significant” or the SignificantEmission Rate Table in the April 13, 2006 adoption/May 24,2006 submittal packageThe April 13, 2006 revisions to the Albuquerque PSDprogram did not revise the significant emission ratestable.20.11.61.7.YY “Significant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010YY. “Significant”means:1.in reference to a net emissions increase or the potentialof a source to emit [air pollutants] any of the pollutantslisted in Table 2 of 20.11.61.27 NMAC, a rate of[emission] emissionsthat would equal or exceed anyof the corresponding emissionrates listed in Table 2 of20.11.61.27 NMAC;20.11.61.27 Table 2 – Significant Emission RatesPOLLUTANT EMISSIONRATE(TONS/YR)***Ozone (as VOC, VolatileOrganic Compounds)40 (VOC)or NOX***Note that this analysis only reviews the portions of the“Significant” definition and the “Significant EmissionRates” Table 2 that pertain to the implementation ofNOXas a precursor for ozone. The remaining revisionsto the definition and table will be evaluated by EPA in aseparate rulemaking because they are separable from ouranalysis of the implementation of the 8-hour ozoneNAAQS.The revisions to 20.11.61.7.YY(1) and 20.11.61.27Table 2 are necessary to identify NOXas a precursor toozone. These revisions areconsistent with 40 CFR51.166(b)(23)(i).The revisions identified are approvable. Therefore, therevisions submitted on August 16, 2010, correctlyimplement the 2005 8-hour ozone NAAQS anddemonstrate adequacy of NOXas a precursor for ozone.112Federal Requirements forImplementing NOXas a precursorfor 8-hour ozone70 FR 71612November 29, 2005Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisions40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i):(b) * * *(49) * * *(i) Any pollutant for which anational ambient air quality standardhas been promulgated and anyconstituents or precursors for suchpollutants identified by theAdministrator (e.g., volatile organiccompounds and NOXareprecursors for ozone);20.11.61.7.VV “Regulated New Source Review Pollutant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on December 22, 2005 andsubmitted to EPA as a SIP revision on May 24, 2006."Regulated new source reviewpollutant" means the following:(1) any pollutant for which a national ambient air qualitystandard has been promulgated and any constituents orprecursors for such pollutants identified by the administrator(e.g., volatile organic compoundsand oxides of nitrogen areprecursors for ozone);EPA SIP-approved this definition of Regulated NSRPollutant at 20.11.61.7.VV.1 NMAC on April 26, 2007.As SIP-approved, the Albuquerque SIP identifies at20.11.61.7.VV.1 NMAC that NOXis considered aprecursor for ozone, consistent with 40 CFR51.166(b)(49)(i).Further, the subsequent revisions to the AlbuquerquePSD SIP submitted on August 16, 2010, continue toidentify NOXas a precursor for ozone, consistent with40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i).20.11.61.7VV. “Regulatednew source review pollutant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010.means the following:(1)any pollutant for which a national ambient air qualitystandard has been promulgated and any [constituents orprecursors for such pollutants identified by the administrator(e.g. volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen areprecursors for ozone] pollutant identified under Paragraph(1) of Subsection VV of 20.11.61 NMAC as a constituent orprecursor to such pollutant; precursors identified by theadministrator for purposes ofnew source review are thefollowing:(a)volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides areprecursors to ozone in all attainment and unclassifiableareas:40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(e). Footnote1:(i) * * *(5) * * *(i) * * *(e) * * *1 Node minimisair quality level isprovided for ozone. However, any20.11.61.28 Table 3 – Significant Monitoring ConcentrationsAs adopted by the ABCAQCB on December 22, 2005 andsubmitted to EPA as a SIP revision on May 24, 2006.Pollutant Air Quality ConcentrationMicrogram per cubic meter(μg/m3)Averaging Time***EPA SIP-approved 20.11.61.28 Table 3 – SignificantMonitoring Concentrations on April 26, 2007. The SIPapproved version of the SMC table does not include footnote B as indicated in the table. This is a typographicalerror that the ABCAQCB corrected in subsequentrulemakings, evaluated later in this table.113Federal Requirements forImplementing NOXas a precursorfor 8-hour ozone70 FR 71612November 29, 2005Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisionsnet emissions increase of 100 tonsper year or more of volatile organiccompounds or nitrogen oxidessubject to PSD would be required toperform an ambient impact analysis,including the gathering of air qualitydata.Ozone B***[Note that the December 22, 2005 adoption did not includefootnote B]20.11.61.28 Table 3 – Significant Monitoring ConcentrationsAs adopted by the ABCAQCB on April 13, 2006 and submittedto EPA as a SIP revision on May 24, 2006.Pollutant Air Quality ConcentrationMicrogram per cubic meter(μg/m3)Averaging Time***Ozone B***B – No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone.However, any net increase of 100 tons per year or more ofvolatile organic compounds subject to PSD would berequired to perform an ambient impact analysis, includingthe gathering of ambient air quality data.The ABCAQCB adopted revisions to 20.11.61.28 Table3, to include footnote B on April 13, 2006 and submittedthis revision to EPA on May 24, 2006. This revisionidentifies that any net increase of 100 TPY or more ofVOC subject to PSD would require an ambient impactanalysis. This revision is approvable for VOC withrespect to ozone. However, this is not sufficient toimplement the 8-hour ozone NAAQS consistent with 40CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(e).Further revisions to the Albuquerque PSD program arenecessary. The ABCAQCB addressed NOXas aprecursor to ozone in a subsequent rulemaking,evaluated later in this table.20.11.61.28 Table 3 – Significant Monitoring ConcentrationsAs adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010.Pollutant Air Quality ConcentrationMicrogram per cubic meter(μg/m3)Averaging Time***Ozone b***b –No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone.However, any net emissionsincrease of 100 tons per year ormore of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxidessubject to PSD would be required to perform an ambientimpact analysis, including the gathering of ambient airThe revisions to 20.11.61.28 Table 3 are consistent withthe requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(e). Theserevisions correctly identify that NOXis a precursor toozone.The August 16, 2010 revision to 20.11.61.28 Table 3NMAC is approvable.114Federal Requirements forImplementing NOXas a precursorfor 8-hour ozone70 FR 71612November 29, 2005Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisionsquality data.

# 115 IV.D Demonstration that the Albuquerque PS D Program Adequately Implements the 1997

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as published May 16, 2008

This review of the May 2006 and August 2010 re visions to the Albuquerque PSD program is

being proposed as part of EPA’s action on the Al buquerque Infrastructure SIP. One element for

determining whether an infrastructure SIP is a pprovable is whether the PSD program adequately

implements the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. To implement the PSD permitting component of

section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# standards, states were required to submit the

necessary SIP revisions to EPA by May 16, 2011 under EPA’s Implementation of the New

Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulat e Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (73 FR 28321,

May 16, 2008).

How does a SIP satisfy the May 16, 2008 FRN requirements for PM 2.5 

# PSD permitting?

According to the May 16, 2008, the PSD regulat ions at 40 CFR 51.166 must be amended as

follows:

1. By revising paragraph (b )(23)(i) and (b)(49)(i);

2. By removing the word ‘‘or’’ at th e end of paragraph (b)(49)(iii);

3. By adding and reserving paragraph (b)(49)(v);

4. By adding paragraph (b)(49)(vi); and

5. By revising paragraphs (i)(5 )(ii) and (i)(5)(iii).

Table IV.D demonstrates how the Al buquerque PSD program satisfies the PM 2.5 

# PSD permitting

criteria listed above.116IV.D – Analysis of the Albuquerque SIP Revisions to Implement May 16, 2008 PM2.5PSD RequirementsFederal Requirements forPM2.5PSD Permitting73 FR 28321May 16, 2008Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisions40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i):(b) * * *(23)(i)Significantmeans, inreference to a net emissions increaseor the potential of a source to emitany of the following pollutants, arate of emissions that would equal orexceed any of the following rates:Pollutant and Emissions RateCarbon monoxide: 100 tons peryear (tpy)Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpySulfur dioxide: 40 tpyParticulate matter: 25 tpy ofparticulate matter emissions. 15tpy of PM10 emissionsPM2.5: 10 tpy of direct PM2.5emissions; 40 tpy of sulfur dioxideemissions; 40 tpy of nitrogenoxide emissions unlessdemonstrated not to be a PM2.5precursor under paragraph (b)(49)of this sectionOzone: 40 tpy of volatileorganic compounds ornitrogen oxidesLead: 0.6 tpyFluorides: 3 tpySulfuric acid mist: 7 tpyHydrogen sulfide (H2S): 10 tpyTotal reduced sulfur (includingH2S): 10 tpyReduced sulfur compounds20.11.61.7.YY “Significant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010YY. “Significant”means:1.in reference to a net emissions increase or the potentialof a source to emit [air pollutants] any of the pollutantslisted in Table 2 of 20.11.61.27 NMAC, a rate of[emission] emissionsthat would equal or exceed anyof the corresponding emissionrates listed in Table 2 of20.11.61.27 NMAC;20.11.61.27 TABLE 2– SIGNIGICANT EMISSIONRATES:Pollutant EmissionRate(Tons/YR)Carbon Monoxide100Fluorides 3Lead 0.6Municipal wastecombustor:Acid gases(measured as sulfurdioxide andhydrogen chloride)Metals (measured asparticulate matterOrganics (measuredas total tetra- throughocta-chlorinateddibenzo-p-dioxinsand dibenzofurans)40 (36 megagrams/yr)15 (14megagramslyear)0.0000035 (0.0000032megagrarndyr)Municipal solid wastelandfill emissions50 (45megagrams/vear)As discussed previously in this TSD, Albuquerquerevised the SIP-approved definition of significant at20.11.61.7.YY and the significant emission rates table at20.11.61.27 Table 2 in both May 2006 and August 2010.The Albuquerque PSD program definition of significantand the significant emission rates is consistent with therequirements at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i) forimplementing the PSD permitting for PM2.5.117Federal Requirements forPM2.5PSD Permitting73 FR 28321May 16, 2008Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisions(including H2S): 10 tpyMunicipal waste combustororganics (measured as total tetrathrough octa-chlorinateddibenzo-p-dioxins anddibenzofurans): 3.2 × 10–¥6megagrams per year (3.5 × 10¥6tons per year)Municipal waste combustor metals(measured as particulate matter):14 megagrams per year (15 tonsper year)Municipal waste combustor acidgases (measured as sulfur dioxideand hydrogen chloride): 36megagrams per year (40 tons peryear)Municipal solid waste landfillemissions (measured asnonmethane organiccompounds): 45 megagrams peryear (50 tons per year)* * * * *(measured as NMOC)Nitrogen oxides40Ozone (as VOC)40 VOC or NOXParticulate MatterParticulate MatterEmissionsPM10 EmissionsPM2.5 Emissions251510 tpy of direct PM2.5emissions; 40 tpyof sulfur dioxideemissions; 40 tpv ofnitrogen oxideemissions unlessdemonstrated not to bea PM 2.5 precursorunder Subsection VVof 20.11.61.7 NMACSulfur CompoundsHydrogen sulfide(H2S)Reduced sulfurcompounds (incl.H2S)Sulfur dioxideSulfuric acid mistTotal reduced sulfur(incl. H2S)101040710Any other pollutantregulated new sourcereview pollutantunderthe Actthat is notlisted in thistableAny emission rateEach regulatedpollutantEmission rate or netemissions increaseassociated with a118Federal Requirements forPM2.5PSD Permitting73 FR 28321May 16, 2008Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisionsmajor stationarysource or majormodification thatcauses an air qualityimpact of onemicrogram per cubicmeter or greater (24-hraverage) inany Class I Federalarea located within 10kmof the source.40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i):(b) * * *(49) * * *(i) Any pollutant for which anational ambient air quality standardhas been promulgated and anypollutant identified under thisparagraph (b)(49)(i) as a constituentor precursor to such pollutant.Precursors identified by theAdministrator for purposes of NSRare the following:(a) Volatile organic compounds andnitrogen oxides are precursors toozone in all attainment andunclassifiable areas.(b) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor toPM2.5 in all attainment andunclassifiable areas.(c) Nitrogen oxides are presumed tobe precursors to PM2.5 in allattainment and unclassifiable areas,unless the State demonstrates to theAdministrator’s satisfaction or EPAdemonstrates that emissions of20.11.61.7.VV “Regulated new source review pollutant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010.VV. “Regulated new source review pollutant”means thefollowing:(1)any pollutant for which a national ambient air qualitystandard has been promulgated and any [constituents orprecursors for such pollutants identified by theadministrator (e.g. volatile organic compounds and oxidesof nitrogen are precursors for ozone] pollutant identifiedunder Paragraph (1) of Subsection VV of 20.11.61 NMACas a constituent or precursor to such pollutant; precursorsidentified by the administrator for purposes of new sourcereview are the following:(a)volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides areprecursors to ozone in all attainment and unclassifiableareas:(b)sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM2.5in all attainmentand unclassifiable areas;(c)nitrogen oxides are presumed to be precursors to PM2.5in all attainment and unclassifiable areas, unless thestate demonstrates to the administrator’s satisfaction orEPA demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen oxidesfrom sources in a specific area are not a significantThe definition of “regulated new source reviewpollutant” is required at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49).The new revisions to the definition of “regulated NSRpollutant” at 20.11.61.7.VV(1)(a)-(d) submitted August2010 are consistent with federal requirements to identifythe precursors of PM2.5 for PM2.5 PSD permitting.119Federal Requirements forPM2.5PSD Permitting73 FR 28321May 16, 2008Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisionsnitrogen oxides from sources in aspecific area are not a significantcontributor to that area’s ambientPM2.5 concentrations.(d) Volatile organic compounds arepresumed not to be precursors toPM2.5 in any attainment orunclassifiable area, unless the Statedemonstrates to the Administrator’ssatisfaction or EPA demonstratesthat emissions of volatile organiccompounds from sources in aspecific area are a significantcontributor to that area’s ambientPM2.5 concentrations.contributor to that area’s ambient PM2.5concentrations;(d)volatile organic compounds are presumed not to beprecursors tp PM2.5in any attainment or unclassifiablearea, unless the state demonstrates to the administrator’ssatisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions ofvolatile organic compounds from sources in a specificarea are a significant contributor to that area’s ambientPM2.5concentrations;40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(v):(b) ***(49) * * *(v) [Reserved.]20.11.61.7.VV “Regulated new source review pollutant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010.VV. “Regulated new source review pollutant”means thefollowing:***(5) Reserved;The definition of “regulated new source reviewpollutant” is required at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49).The new revisions to the definition of “regulated NSRpollutant” at 20.11.61.7.VV(5) submitted August 2010are is consistent with the federal requirement to reservesection (v) for PM2.5 permitting.40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi):(b) ***(49) * * *(vi) Particulate matter (PM)emissions, PM2.5 emissions, andPM10 emissions shall includegaseous emissions from a source oractivity which condense to formparticulate matter at ambienttemperatures. On or after January 1,2011 (or any earlier date establishedin the upcoming rulemaking20.11.61.7.VV “Regulated new source review pollutant”As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010.VV. “Regulated new source review pollutant”means thefollowing:***(6) particulate matter (PM) emissions, PM2.5emissions, andPM10emissions shall include gaseous emissions from a sourceor activity which condense to form particulate matter atambient temperatures; on or after January 1, 1011 (or anyearlier date established in the upcoming rulemaking codifyingThe definition of “regulated new source reviewpollutant” is required at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49).The new revisions to the definition of “regulated NSRpollutant” at 20.11.61.7.VV(6) submitted August 2010are is consistent with the federal requirements for PM2.5permitting120Federal Requirements forPM2.5PSD Permitting73 FR 28321May 16, 2008Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisionscodifying test methods), suchcondensable particulate matter shallbe accounted for in applicabilitydeterminations and in establishingemissions limitations for PM, PM2.5and PM10 in PSD permits.Compliance with emissionslimitations for PM, PM2.5 andPM10 issued prior to this date shallnot be based on condensableparticular matter unless required bythe terms and conditions of thepermit or the applicableimplementation plan. Applicabilitydeterminations made prior to thisdate without accounting forcondensable particular matter shallnot be considered in violation of thissection unless the applicableimplementation plan requiredcondensable particular matter to beincluded.* * * * *test methods), such condensable particulate matter shall beaccounted for in applicability determinations and in establishingemissions limitations for PM, PM2.5and PM10in PSD permits;compliance with emissions limitations for PM, PM2.5and PM10issued prior to this date shall not be based on condensableparticulate matter unless requiredby the terms and conditions ofthe permit or the applicable implementation plan; applicabilitydeterminations made prior to this date without accounting forcondensable particulate matter shall not be considered inviolation of 20.11.61 NMAC unless the applicableimplementation plan required condensable particulate matter tobe included.40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(ii) and(i)(5)(iii):(i) * **(5) * * *(ii) The concentrations of thepollutant in the area that the sourceor modification would affect areless than the concentrations listedin paragraph (i)(5)(i) of thissection; or(iii) The pollutant is not listed inparagraph (i)(5)(i) of this section.20.11.61.18 MONITORING REQUREMENTS:As SIP-approved by EPA April 26, 200720.11.61.18***H.The department has the discretion to exempt a stationarysource or modification from the requirements of 20.11.61.18NMAC with respect to monitoring for a particular pollutant ifthe emissions of the pollutant from the new source or the netemissions increase of the pollutant from the modification wouldcause, in any area, increases inambient concentrations less thanthe levels listed in Table 3 of 20.111.61.28 NMAC.I.The department shall exempt a stationary source ormodification from the requirements of 20.1 1.61.18 NMACPreapplication analysis, post-construction monitoring,and operation of monitoring stations is required at 40CFR 51.166(m).The current SIP-approved language at 20.11.61.18(H)and (I) and the revisions submitted in August 2010 to20.11.61.18(H) are consistent with the requirements at40 CFR 51.166(m)(1).These revisions are approvable as implementing thePM2.5 PSD permitting requirements in the May 16,2008 FRN.121Federal Requirements forPM2.5PSD Permitting73 FR 28321May 16, 2008Corresponding Albuquerque Provision with Adoption andSubmittal DatesAnalysis of the Albuquerque PSD Provisionswith respect to preconstruction monitoring for a particularpollutant if:(1)for ozone, volatile organic compound emissions andoxides of nitrogen are less than 100 tons per year; or(2)the air pollutant is not a regulated new source reviewpollutant; or(3)the existing ambient concentrations of the pollutant inthe area affected by the source or modification are lessthan the concentrations listed in Table 3 of 20.11.61.28 NMAC.20.11.61.18 MONITORING REQUREMENTS-AIRQUALITY ANALYSIS:As adopted by the ABCAQCB on July 14, 2010 and submitted toEPA as a SIP revision on August 16, 2010.H.The department has the discretion to exempt a stationarysource or modification from the requirements of 20.11.61.18NMAC with respect to monitoring for a particular pollutant ifthe emissions increaseof the pollutant from the new source orthe net emissions increaseof the pollutant from themodification would cause, in any area, increases in ambientconcentrations less than the levels listed in Table 3 of20.111.61.28 NMAC.I.No Change

# V. Conclusion

The technical analysis provided in the preced ing sections has compared the applicable

sections of the CAA and 40 CFR Part 51 to Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Control

Board’s May 24, 2006 and August 16, 2010 proposed revisions to the Albuquerque State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for PSD permitting. Th is analysis found that the adoption of the

revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC submitted on May 24, 2006 and August 16, 20 10, are consistent

with the CAA and 40 CFR Part 51.166 and ar e necessary to implement the 1997 and 2008 8-

hour ozone NAAQS (NO X 

# as a precursor to ozone) and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 PSD

Permitting requirements (as published in th e May 16, 2008 FRN). Therefore, it is

recommended that a proposed approval of the following sections be published:

• 20.11.61.7 NMAC as submitted May 24, 2006

• 20.11.61.28 NMAC as submitted May 24, 2006

• 20.11.61.29 NMAC as submitted May 24, 2006

• 20.11.61.1 NMAC as submitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.2 NMAC as submitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.7 NMAC as submitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.11 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.12 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.14 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.15 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

20.11.61.16 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.17 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.18 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.19 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.20 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.21 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.23 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.24 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.25 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.26 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.27 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.28 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.29 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.30 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

• 20.11.61.31 NMAC as s ubmitted August 16, 2010

Because EPA severed from our review the A ugust 16, 2010, revisions to the Albuquerque

NNSR Program at 20.11.60 NMAC, it is recommended that EPA take no action on these

rules at this time. The August 16, 2010, NNSR SIP revisions remain before EPA for review

and possible incorporation into the Albuquerque SIP at a later date in a separate rulemaking

action.