Appendix E

Procedural Requirements and Authority
Exhibit E-I 

Delegation of Authority

EI-1
EI-2
Exhibit E-II 

Authorizing Statutes

EII-1
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-104 

 

A.R.S. § 49-104. Powers and duties of the department and director

A. The department shall:

1. Formulate policies, plans and programs to implement this title to protect the environment.

2. Stimulate and encourage all local, state, regional and federal governmental agencies and all 

private persons and enterprises that have similar and related objectives and purposes, 

cooperate with those agencies, persons and enterprises and correlate department plans, 

programs and operations with those of the agencies, persons and enterprises.

3. Conduct research on its own initiative or at the request of the governor, the legislature or 

state or local agencies pertaining to any department objectives.

4. Provide information and advice on request of any local, state or federal agencies and private 

persons and business enterprises on matters within the scope of the department.

5. Consult with and make recommendations to the governor and the legislature on all matters 

concerning department objectives.

6. Promote and coordinate the management of air resources to assure their protection, 

enhancement and balanced utilization consistent with the environmental policy of this state.

7. Promote and coordinate the protection and enhancement of the quality of water resources 

consistent with the environmental policy of this state.

8. Encourage industrial, commercial, residential and community development that maximizes 

environmental benefits and minimizes the effects of less desirable environmental conditions.

9. Assure the preservation and enhancement of natural beauty and man-made scenic qualities.

10. Provide for the prevention and abatement of all water and air pollution including that 

related to particulates, gases, dust, vapors, noise, radiation, odor, nutrients and heated liquids 

in accordance with article 3 of this chapter and chapters 2 and 3 of this title.

11. Promote and recommend methods for the recovery, recycling and reuse or, if recycling is 

not possible, the disposal of solid wastes consistent with sound health, scenic and 

environmental quality policies. Beginning in 2014, the department shall report annually on its 

revenues and expenditures relating to the solid and hazardous waste programs overseen or 

administered by the department.

12. Prevent pollution through the regulation of the storage, handling and transportation of 

solids, liquids and gases that may cause or contribute to pollution.

13. Promote the restoration and reclamation of degraded or despoiled areas and natural 

resources.

14. Assist the department of health services in recruiting and training state, local and district 

health department personnel.

15. Participate in the state civil defense program and develop the necessary organization and 

facilities to meet wartime or other disasters.

16. Cooperate with the Arizona-Mexico commission in the governor's office and with 

researchers at universities in this state to collect data and conduct projects in the United States 

and Mexico on issues that are within the scope of the department's duties and that relate to 

quality of life, trade and economic development in this state in a manner that will help the 

Arizona-Mexico commission to assess and enhance the economic competitiveness of this state 

and of the Arizona-Mexico region.

EII-2
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-104 

 

17. Unless specifically authorized by the legislature, ensure that state laws, rules, standards, 

permits, variances and orders are adopted and construed to be consistent with and no more 

stringent than the corresponding federal law that addresses the same subject matter. This 

provision shall not be construed to adversely affect standards adopted by an Indian tribe under 

federal law.

B. The department, through the director, shall:

1. Contract for the services of outside advisers, consultants and aides reasonably necessary or 

desirable to enable the department to adequately perform its duties.

2. Contract and incur obligations reasonably necessary or desirable within the general scope of 

department activities and operations to enable the department to adequately perform its 

duties.

3. Utilize any medium of communication, publication and exhibition when disseminating 

information, advertising and publicity in any field of its purposes, objectives or duties.

4. Adopt procedural rules that are necessary to implement the authority granted under this title, 

but that are not inconsistent with other provisions of this title.

5. Contract with other agencies, including laboratories, in furthering any department program.

6. Use monies, facilities or services to provide matching contributions under federal or other 

programs that further the objectives and programs of the department.

7. Accept gifts, grants, matching monies or direct payments from public or private agencies or 

private persons and enterprises for department services and publications and to conduct 

programs that are consistent with the general purposes and objectives of this chapter. Monies 

received pursuant to this paragraph shall be deposited in the department fund corresponding to 

the service, publication or program provided.

8. Provide for the examination of any premises if the director has reasonable cause to believe 

that a violation of any environmental law or rule exists or is being committed on the premises. 

The director shall give the owner or operator the opportunity for its representative to 

accompany the director on an examination of those premises. Within forty-five days after the 

date of the examination, the department shall provide to the owner or operator a copy of any 

report produced as a result of any examination of the premises.

9. Supervise sanitary engineering facilities and projects in this state, authority for which is 

vested in the department, and own or lease land on which sanitary engineering facilities are 

located, and operate the facilities, if the director determines that owning, leasing or operating is 

necessary for the public health, safety or welfare.

10. Adopt and enforce rules relating to approving design documents for constructing, improving 

and operating sanitary engineering and other facilities for disposing of solid, liquid or gaseous 

deleterious matter.

11. Define and prescribe reasonably necessary rules regarding the water supply, sewage 

disposal and garbage collection and disposal for subdivisions. The rules shall:

(a) Provide for minimum sanitary facilities to be installed in the subdivision and may 

require that water systems plan for future needs and be of adequate size and capacity 

to deliver specified minimum quantities of drinking water and to treat all sewage.

(b) Provide that the design documents showing or describing the water supply, sewage 

disposal and garbage collection facilities be submitted with a fee to the department for 

review and that no lots in any subdivision be offered for sale before compliance with the 

EII-3
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-104 

 

standards and rules has been demonstrated by approval of the design documents by the 

department.

12. Prescribe reasonably necessary measures to prevent pollution of water used in public or 

semipublic swimming pools and bathing places and to prevent deleterious conditions at such 

places. The rules shall prescribe minimum standards for the design of and for sanitary conditions 

at any public or semipublic swimming pool or bathing place and provide for abatement as public 

nuisances of premises and facilities that do not comply with the minimum standards. The rules 

shall be developed in cooperation with the director of the department of health services and 

shall be consistent with the rules adopted by the director of the department of health services 

pursuant to section 36-136, subsection H, paragraph 10.

13. Prescribe reasonable rules regarding sewage collection, treatment, disposal and reclamation 

systems to prevent the transmission of sewage borne or insect borne diseases. The rules shall:

(a) Prescribe minimum standards for the design of sewage collection systems and 

treatment, disposal and reclamation systems and for operating the systems.

(b) Provide for inspecting the premises, systems and installations and for abating as a 

public nuisance any collection system, process, treatment plant, disposal system or 

reclamation system that does not comply with the minimum standards.

(c) Require that design documents for all sewage collection systems, sewage collection 

system extensions, treatment plants, processes, devices, equipment, disposal systems, 

on-site wastewater treatment facilities and reclamation systems be submitted with a 

fee for review to the department and may require that the design documents anticipate 

and provide for future sewage treatment needs.

(d) Require that construction, reconstruction, installation or initiation of any sewage 

collection system, sewage collection system extension, treatment plant, process, device, 

equipment, disposal system, on-site wastewater treatment facility or reclamation 

system conform with applicable requirements.

14. Prescribe reasonably necessary rules regarding excreta storage, handling, treatment, 

transportation and disposal. The rules shall:

(a) Prescribe minimum standards for human excreta storage, handling, treatment, 

transportation and disposal and shall provide for inspection of premises, processes and 

vehicles and for abating as public nuisances any premises, processes or vehicles that do 

not comply with the minimum standards.

(b) Provide that vehicles transporting human excreta from privies, septic tanks, 

cesspools and other treatment processes shall be licensed by the department subject to 

compliance with the rules. The department may require payment of a fee as a condition 

of licensure. After July 20, 2011, the department shall establish by rule a fee as a 

condition of licensure, including a maximum fee. As part of the rule making process, 

there must be public notice and comment and a review of the rule by the joint 

legislative budget committee. After September 30, 2013, the department shall not 

increase that fee by rule without specific statutory authority for the increase. The fees 

shall be deposited, pursuant to sections 35-146 and 35-147, in the solid waste fee fund 

established by section 49-881.

15. Perform the responsibilities of implementing and maintaining a data automation 

management system to support the reporting requirements of title III of the superfund 

amendments and reauthorization act of 1986 (P.L. 99-499) and article 2 of this chapter.

EII-4
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-104 

 

16. Approve remediation levels pursuant to article 4 of this chapter.

17. Establish or revise fees by rule pursuant to the authority granted under title 44, chapter 9, 

article 8 and chapters 4 and 5 of this title for the department to adequately perform its duties. 

All fees shall be fairly assessed and impose the least burden and cost to the parties subject to 

the fees. In establishing or revising fees, the department shall base the fees on:

(a) The direct and indirect costs of the department's relevant duties, including employee 

salaries and benefits, professional and outside services, equipment, in-state travel and 

other necessary operational expenses directly related to issuing licenses as defined in 

title 41, chapter 6 and enforcing the requirements of the applicable regulatory program.

(b) The availability of other funds for the duties performed.

(c) The impact of the fees on the parties subject to the fees.

(d) The fees charged for similar duties performed by the department, other agencies 

and the private sector.

C. The department may:

1. Charge fees to cover the costs of all permits and inspections it performs to ensure compliance 

with rules adopted under section 49-203, except that state agencies are exempt from paying the 

fees. Monies collected pursuant to this subsection shall be deposited, pursuant to sections 35-

146 and 35-147, in the water quality fee fund established by section 49-210. 

2. Contract with private consultants for the purposes of assisting the department in reviewing 

applications for licenses, permits or other authorizations to determine whether an applicant 

meets the criteria for issuance of the license, permit or other authorization. If the department 

contracts with a consultant under this paragraph, an applicant may request that the department 

expedite the application review by requesting that the department use the services of the 

consultant and by agreeing to pay the department the costs of the consultant's services. 

Notwithstanding any other law, monies paid by applicants for expedited reviews pursuant to 

this paragraph are appropriated to the department for use in paying consultants for services.

D. The director may:

1. If the director has reasonable cause to believe that a violation of any environmental law or 

rule exists or is being committed, inspect any person or property in transit through this state 

and any vehicle in which the person or property is being transported and detain or disinfect the 

person, property or vehicle as reasonably necessary to protect the environment if a violation 

exists.

2. Authorize in writing any qualified officer or employee in the department to perform any act 

that the director is authorized or required to do by law. 

EII-5
This page is intentionally blank.

EII-6
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-106 

 

A.R.S. § 49-106. Statewide application of rules

The rules adopted by the department apply and shall be observed throughout this state, or as provided 

by their terms, and the appropriate local officer, council or board shall enforce them. This section does 

not limit the authority of local governing bodies to adopt ordinances and rules within their respective 

jurisdictions if those ordinances and rules do not conflict with state law and are equal to or more 

restrictive than the rules of the department, but this section does not grant local governing bodies any 

authority not otherwise provided by separate state law. 

EII-7
This page is intentionally blank.

EII-8
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-404

 

A.R.S. § 49-404. State implementation plan

A. The director shall maintain a state implementation plan that provides for implementation, 

maintenance and enforcement of national ambient air quality standards and protection of visibility as 

required by the clean air act.

B. The director may adopt rules that describe procedures for adoption of revisions to the state 

implementation plan.

C. The state implementation plan and all revisions adopted before September 30, 1992 remain in effect 

according to their terms, except to the extent otherwise provided by the clean air act, inconsistent with 

any provision of the clean air act, or revised by the administrator. No control requirement in effect, or 

required to be adopted by an order, settlement agreement or plan in effect, before the enactment of 

the clean air act in any area which is a nonattainment or maintenance area for any air pollutant may be 

modified after enactment in any manner unless the modification insures equivalent or greater emission 

reductions of the air pollutant. The director shall evaluate and adopt revisions to the plan in conformity 

with federal regulations and guidelines promulgated by the administrator for those purposes until the 

rules required by subsection B are effective. 

EII-9
This page is intentionally blank.

EII-10
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-406

Printed on recycled 

paper

A.R.S. § 49-406. Nonattainment area plan 

A. For any ozone, carbon monoxide or particulate nonattainment or maintenance area the governor 

shall certify the metropolitan planning organization designated to conduct the continuing, cooperative 

and comprehensive transportation planning process for that area under 23 United States Code section 

134 as the agency responsible for the development of a nonattainment or maintenance area plan for 

that area. 

B. For any ozone, carbon monoxide or particulate nonattainment or maintenance area for which no 

metropolitan planning organization exists, the department shall be certified as the agency responsible 

for development of a nonattainment or maintenance area plan for that area. 

C. For any ozone, carbon monoxide or particulate nonattainment or maintenance area, the department, 

the planning agency certified pursuant to subsection A of this section on behalf of elected officials of 

affected local government, the county air pollution control department or district, and the department 

of transportation shall, by November 15, 1992, and from time to time as necessary, jointly review and 

update planning procedures or develop new procedures. 

D. In preparing the procedures described in subsection C of this section, the department, the planning 

agency certified pursuant to subsection A of this section on behalf of elected officials of affected local 

government, the county air pollution control department or district, and the department of 

transportation shall determine which elements of each revised implementation plan will be developed, 

adopted, and implemented, through means including enforcement, by the state and which by local 

governments or regional agencies, or any combination of local governments, regional agencies or the 

state. 

E. The department, the planning agency certified pursuant to subsection A of this section on behalf of 

elected officials of affected local government, the county air pollution control department or district, 

and the department of transportation shall enter into a memorandum of agreement for the purpose of 

coordinating the implementation of the procedures described in subsection C and D of this section. 

F. At a minimum, the memorandum of agreement shall contain: 

1. The relevant responsibilities and authorities of each of the coordinating agencies. 

2. As appropriate, procedures, schedules and responsibilities for development of nonattainment 

or maintenance area plans or plan revisions and for determining reasonable further progress. 

3. Assurances for adequate plan implementation. 

4. Procedures and responsibilities for tracking plan implementation. 

5. Responsibilities for preparing demographic projections including land use, housing, and 

employment. 

6. Coordination with transportation programs. 

7. Procedures and responsibilities for adoption of control measures and emissions limitations. 

8. Responsibilities for collecting air quality, transportation and emissions data. 

9. Responsibility for conducting air quality modeling. 

10. Responsibility for administering and enforcing stationary source controls. 

EII-11
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-406

Printed on recycled 

paper

11. Provisions for the timely and periodic sharing of all data and information among the 

signatories relating to: 

(a) Demographics. 

(b) Transportation. 

(c) Emissions inventories. 

(d) Assumptions used in developing the model. 

(e) Results of modeling done in support of the plan. 

(f) Monitoring data. 

G. Each agency that commits to implement any emission limitation or other control measure, means or 

technique contained in the implementation plan shall describe that commitment in a resolution adopted 

by the appropriate governing body of the agency. The resolution shall specify the following: 

1. Its authority for implementing the limitation or measure as provided in statute, ordinance or 

rule. 

2. A program for the enforcement of the limitation or measure. 

3. The level of personnel and funding allocated to the implementation of the measure. 

H. The state, in accordance with the rules adopted pursuant to section 49-404, and the governing body 

of the metropolitan planning organization shall adopt each nonattainment or maintenance area plan 

developed by a certified metropolitan planning organization. The adopted nonattainment or 

maintenance area plan shall be transmitted to the department for inclusion in the state implementation 

plan provided for under section 49-404. 

I. After adoption of a nonattainment or maintenance area plan, if on the basis of the reasonable further 

progress determination described in subsection F of this section or other information, the control officer 

determines that any person has failed to implement an emission limitation or other control measure, 

means or technique as described in the resolution adopted pursuant to subsection G of this section, the 

control officer shall issue a written finding to the person, and shall provide an opportunity to confer. If 

the control officer subsequently determines that the failure has not been corrected, the county 

attorney, at the request of the control officer, shall file an action in superior court for a preliminary 

injunction, a permanent injunction, or any other relief provided by law. 

J. After adoption of a nonattainment or maintenance area plan, if, on the basis of the reasonable further 

progress determination described in subsection F of this section or other information, the director 

determines that any person has failed to implement an emission limitation or other control measure, 

means or technique as described in the resolution adopted pursuant to subsection G of this section, and 

that the control officer has failed to act pursuant to subsection I of this section, the director shall issue a 

written finding to the person and shall provide an opportunity to confer. If the director subsequently 

determines that the failure has not been corrected, the attorney general, at the request of the director, 

shall file an action in superior court for a preliminary injunction, a permanent injunction, or any other 

relief provided by law. 

K. Notwithstanding subsections A and B of this section, in any metropolitan area with a metropolitan 

statistical area population of less than two hundred fifty thousand persons, the governor shall designate 

an agency that meets the criteria of section 174 of the clean air act and that is recommended by the city 

EII-12
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-406

Printed on recycled 

paper

that causes the metropolitan area to exist and the affected county. That agency shall prepare and adopt 

the nonattainment or maintenance area plan. If the governor does not designate an agency, the 

department shall be certified as the agency responsible for the development of a nonattainment or 

maintenance area plan for that area. 

EII-13
This page is intentionally blank.

EII-14
Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-425

Printed on recycled 

paper

A.R.S. § 49-425. Rules; hearing 

A. The director shall adopt such rules as he determines are necessary and feasible to reduce the release 

into the atmosphere of air contaminants originating within the territorial limits of the state or any 

portion thereof and shall adopt, modify, and amend reasonable standards for the quality of, and 

emissions into, the ambient air of the state for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution. 

Additional standards shall be established for particulate matter emissions, sulfur dioxide emissions, and 

other air contaminant emissions determined to be necessary and feasible for the prevention, control 

and abatement of air pollution. In fixing such ambient air quality standards, emission standards or 

standards of performance, the director shall give consideration but shall not be limited to the relevant 

factors prescribed by the clean air act. 

B. No rule may be enacted or amended except after the director first holds a public hearing after twenty 

days' notice of such hearing. The proposed rule, or any proposed amendment of a rule, shall be made 

available to the public at the time of notice of such hearing. 

C. The department shall enforce the rules adopted by the director. 

D. All rules enacted pursuant to this section shall be made available to the public at a reasonable charge 

upon request. 

EII-15
Exhibit E-III 

Public Notice and Affidavit of Publication of Notice

EIII-1
Public Notice

 

Printed on recycled paper

 

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PUBLIC COMMENT 

PERIOD AND HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ARIZONA STATE 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION, ATTAINMENT PLAN FOR THE WEST 

PINAL PM10 PLANNING AREA (1987 NAAQS)

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) opens a 30-day public comment 

period with the publication of this notice on October 19, 2015, for the proposed 2015 West Pinal 

Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan. The plan demonstrates that the 

West Pinal PM10 planning area will meet the 1987 health and welfare based 24-hour PM10

National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by December 2018. 

A public hearing on the proposed attainment plan will be held at 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, 

November 19, 2015, at the Maricopa Agricultural Center Multipurpose Room, 37860 W. SmithEnke Rd., Maricopa, AZ 85138. All interested parties will be given an opportunity at the public 

hearing to submit verbal and written comments. To request an auxiliary aid or service for 

accessible communication, contact Alicia Pollard, Human Resources Assistant, at (602) 771-

4791 or aap@azdeq.gov, or dial 7-1-1 for TTY/TTD Services.

Copies of the proposal are available for review Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 

4:30 p.m. at the ADEQ Records Center, 1110 W. Washington St., Phoenix, AZ 85007, (602) 

771-4712. A copy of the proposal can also be viewed at the Pinal County Air Quality 

Department, 31 N. Pinal Street, Bldg. F, Florence, AZ 85132, (520) 866-6929, or online at 

http://www.azdeq.gov/ by selecting Air Quality – Public Notices, Meetings, and Hearings.

Written comments may be mailed to Catherine Lucke-McDowell, Air Quality Division, State

Implementation Plan Section, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 1110 W. 

Washington St., Phoenix, AZ 85007, faxed to (602) 771-2366, or e-mailed to LuckeMcDowell.Catherine@azdeq.gov. Mailed comments must state the name and mailing address of 

the person; be signed by the person, their agent, or attorney; and clearly set forth reasons why 

this proposed attainment plan should or should not be finalized. Grounds for comment are 

limited to whether or not this proposed attainment plan meets the criteria spelled out in federal 

air pollution control laws and/or rules. 

 

Comments must be received by ADEQ no later than November 19, 2015, by 5:00 p.m. or 

submitted at the public hearing. This proposed attainment plan will be submitted to the U.S. EPA 

following consideration of all comments received during the public comment period and hearing. 

EIII-2
EIII-3
EIII-4
Exhibit E-IV 

Public Hearing Agenda

EIV-1
AIR QUALITY DIVISION

PUBLIC HEARING 

ON THE PROPOSED

ARIZONA STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) REVISIONS FOR THE

WEST PINAL 1987 PM10 NONTATTAINMENT AREA

PLEASE NOTE THE MEETING LOCATION AND TIME:

Maricopa Agricultural Center Multipurpose Room

37860 W. Smith-Enke Rd. 

Maricopa, AZ 85138

November 19, 2015, 11:00 A.M.

Pursuant to 40 CFR § 51.102 notice is hereby given that the above referenced meeting is open to the 

public.

1. Welcome and Introductions

2. Purpose of the Oral Proceedings

3. Procedure for Making Public Comment

 

4. Brief Overview of the Proposed SIP Revisions 

 

5. Oral Comment Period

 

6. Adjournment of Oral Proceeding

Copies of the proposal are available for review at the ADEQ Records Center, First Floor, 1110 W. 

Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85007, (602) 771-4712, and at the Pinal County Air Quality 

Department, 31 N. Pinal Street, Bldg. F, Florence, AZ 85132, (520) 866-6929. The proposal can also be 

viewed online at http://www.azdeq.gov/cgi-bin/vertical.pl?d=2457346. For additional information 

regarding the hearing, please contact Catherine Lucke-McDowell, ADEQ Air Quality Division, at (602) 

771-4216 or Lucke-McDowell.Catherine@azdeq.gov. 

To request an auxiliary aid or service for accessible communication, contact ADEQ Human Resources at 

(602) 771-4792 or dial 7-1-1 for TTY/TTD Services. This document is also available in alternative formats 

by contacting ADEQ, TTD (602)771-4829. 

EIV-2
Exhibit E-V 

Public Hearing Sign-in Sheet

EV-1
EV-2
EV-3
Exhibit E-VI 

Public Hearing Officer Certification

EVI-1
EVI-2
Exhibit E-VII 

Compilation of Comments and State Responses

EVII-1
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY

to

Written Comments Received on Arizona State’s 2015 West Pinal Moderate PM10 Nonattainment 

Area SIP under the Clean Air Act to allow for Implementation of the 1987 PM10 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) has made corrections to the State

Implementation Plan revision to reflect grammatical and editorial errors. Also, ADEQ adjusted 

information regarding Pinal County’s proposed construction and fugitive dust rules to reflect the 

rules’ finalizations. Pinal County’s rulemaking documentation was added as Appendix H. In addition, 

a brief discussion was added to Section 6.2.3.8 in order to provide clarity regarding the practical 

implementation of the fugitive dust rule. 

The oral proceeding on the proposed 2015 West Pinal Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Area SIP was 

held on Thursday, November 19, 2015, 11:00 a.m., Maricopa Agricultural Center Multipurpose 

Room at 37860 W. Smith-Enke Road, Maricopa, AZ 85138. The public comment period began on 

October 19, 2015, and closed on November 19, 2015. No oral comments were received during the 

public hearing. Received written comments and the Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality’s (ADEQ) responses are below. The two comment letters are also attached.

EPA Comment #1: 

(EPA’s comment letter begins on page 13 of this Exhibit)

First, the proposed Plan's emissions inventory relies on estimates of agricultural activity based 

on data from the 2007 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Census (AgCensus). 

The proposed Plan assumes no growth in agricultural emissions from 2008 through 2018. 

USDA's 2012 AgCensus, however, shows increased agricultural activity in Pinal County between

2007 and 2012. We recommend that the Plan's emissions inventory incorporate updated

estimates, such as those in the 2012 AgCensus, to project 2018 emissions from 2008 estimates,

or provide a reasonable justification for the lack of growth in agricultural activity from 2008 to

2018, in light of the USDA 2012 AgCensus data.

ADEQ Response to EPA Comment #1: 

ADEQ does not believe that that USDA Census reported increase in total cropland between 2007 

and 2012 is representative of future conditions. The USDA AgCensus reported an 18% increase in 

total cropland acreage in Pinal County between the 2007 and 2012.1 This increase occurred 

during a period of time that was optimal for agricultural crop production in Pinal County. During 

this period, economic recession resulted in a slowing of residential and commercial growth, as 

1 The census notes total cropland acreage increasing from 256,042 acres in 2007 to 302,591 acres in 2012.

EVII-2
evidenced by the decrease in issued construction permits (please see Appendix B, Table 3-67). 

Concurrently, crop commodity prices increased significantly, according to agricultural 

representatives in the County. The combination of surging commodity prices and decreasing land 

price competition due to the slowing of urban development caused the fringe agricultural 

community (i.e. those farmers who only operate or increase production during periods of ideal 

commodity prices) to increase production during this period. ADEQ does not see this as a likely 

scenario in the future due to a number of national economic variables as well as resource 

limitations and cost. 

Long-term growth of most economic sectors in Pinal County is primarily limited by available 

water resources within the region.

2 Per Arizona’s Groundwater Management Act, planned 

subdivisions in Active Management Areas (AMAs)3 require developers to assure water supply for 

communities for 100 years from either a “city, town or private water company designated as 

having an assured water supply" by ADWR or by securing independent water resources and 

obtaining a “certificate of assured water supply.”4 The Arizona Department of Administration 

anticipates continued population growth for the County into the future.5

 The resulting 

competition for water rights between agricultural and urban development uses in the region is 

expected to negatively affect fringe agriculture in Pinal County. Increased water competition is

already being realized by the agricultural community, which proposes to relinquish a reported 

96,295 acre feet of Non-Indian Agricultural (NIA) priority Central Arizona Project (CAP) water in 

2017, in accordance with the Arizona Water Settlements Act.

6

 Also, according to the U.S. 

Secretary of Interior’s shortage criteria issued in 2007, during a shortage Arizona would have to 

implement mandatory Colorado River water restrictions if Lake Mead hits a threshold depth of 

1,075 ft.7 Hence, the State of Arizona could experience further reduced allocations of water 

moving into the future if Lake Mead drops to a level of 1,075 ft. Further, CAP’s prioritizes

municipal, industrial, and Indian water uses as having the “highest priority and [are] the last to be 

reduced in times of shortage,” unlike non-Indian agricultural water use.

8 In the negotiation for 

CAP water, Arizona agricultural CAP subcontractors agreed to junior priority water rights in 

2 For additional information, see Section 4.2.7 of Appendix F to the SIP Document (RACM Analysis).

3 The entire West Pinal PM10 Nonattainment Area is covered piecemeal by three AMAs, as noted in Section 

4.2.7 (p. 37) of Appendix F (RACM Analysis) of the SIP document. 4 See A.R.S. § 45-576(A), (B), & (J) (2015); see also id. §§ 9-463.01(I), 11-822(A). 5

Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) low series population projections were utilized in the 2015 West 

Pinal Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Area SIP. These projections predict continued countywide population 

growth, with a doubling of the current population by 2043 (based on information downloaded from 

https://population.az.gov/population-projections on 11/23/2015). 6 See Department of Water Resources (ADWR), Fiscal Year 2015 Annual Report at 11, available at 

http://www.azwater.gov/AzDWR/documents/ADWRDirector/2015%20ADWR%20Annual%20Report.pdf; see also 

Arizona Water Settlement Act §104(a)(2)(A), 43 U.S.C. 1504(a)(2)(A) (2004); ADWR, Non-Indian Agricultural Priority 

Central Arizona Project Water Reallocation Final Process and Evaluation Criteria (Feb. 2013), available at

http://www.azwater.gov/azdwr/PublicInformationOfficer/documents/2013-02-11FINALNIAProcessandCriteria.pdf. 7 The Secretary of the Interior, Colorado River Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages and the Coordinated 

Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead (Dec. 2007), available at

http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/strategies/RecordofDecision.pdf. 8 ADWR, Future Water Distribution CAP Priority System, available at 

http://www.azwater.gov/AzDWR/StateWidePlanning/CRM/FutureWaterDistribution.htm (last visited Nov. 25, 

2015).

EVII-3
exchange for subsidized rates, and “when CAP supplies are cut back, subcontracts for non-Indian 

agriculture will be reduced first.”9 Hence, a river water shortage would likely negatively impact 

non-Indian agricultural land uses in a Colorado River dependent area, such as Pinal County. 

The anticipated reduction in agricultural water resources and increased competition for water 

due to population growth in the region cause ADEQ to conclude that utilizing 2012 crop 

agricultural production is not a reasonable surrogate for 2018 production. ADEQ’s assertion is 

further supported by agricultural land use records supplied by the Pinal County Assessor’s 

Office.10 Acreage of Pinal County land in 2008 that was attributed to agricultural use totaled 

363,107 acres, while in 2012 this grew to 467,094 acres. This compares to the growth observed 

in the AgCensus between 2007 and 2012. However, the County assessor also reported that for 

2015, total agricultural acreage within the County had reduced to 347,580 acres. This reduction 

demonstrates a downward trend in agricultural production to levels lower than in 2008.

Therefore, based on information received from the Pinal County Assessor, 2008 agricultural 

production is a conservatively high estimate for current crop agricultural production. 

Given current agricultural production levels, resource limitation and competition, and uncertain 

future commodity prices, ADEQ does not believe that 2012 is a characteristic year for projecting

agricultural production. 

EPA Comment #2: 

Second, the proposed Plan's attainment demonstration should provide additional explanation 

and justification for the selection or exclusion of each candidate design day at each PM10

monitor. For example, the proposed Plan's supporting documentation should provide a rationale 

for not selecting April 26, 2008 as a stagnation design day at the Stanfield monitor. The

proposed Plan suggests that this day was considered, but provides no further analysis or basis for

the State's rejection of this day. Similarly, the proposed Plan should provide additional

explanation for not selecting September 8, 2008 as the high wind design day at the Stanfield

monitor. This day was not reviewed despite having a 24-hour average PM10 concentration of

264 micrograms/cubic meter compared to 178.6 micrograms/cubic meter on the selected design

day, November 21, 2008.

ADEQ Response to EPA Comment #2: 

Candidate design day selection occurred during the initial technical analysis planning stages of 

9 Symposium: Water Law and Policy Conference: Patching the Holes in the Bucket: Safe Yield and the Future of 

Water Management in Arizona, 49 Ariz. L. Rev. 361, 369 (fn 32. “In exchange for receiving CAP water at subsidized 

rates through 2030 from the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (‘CAWCD’), irrigation districts holding CAP 

non-Indian agricultural subcontracts relinquished their subcontract rights. After 2030, there is no guarantee that 

CAP water will be available to agriculture at subsidized rates. CAP supplies with the non-Indian agriculture priority 

will be used in the future to meet municipal demands and will be the first supplies reduced when Colorado River 

deliveries are reduced due to drought conditions.”); accord Arizona Water Settlement Agreement §§ 5.1, 7, 8.2 

(Aug. 16, 2004), available at http://www.cap-az.com/documents/departments/water-operations/Arizona-WaterSettlement-Agreement12-14-07.pdf. 10 ADEQ email correspondence with John Ellinwood (Oct. 28, 2015). 

EVII-4
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) preparation. Design day determination was a collaborative 

effort by a committee consisting of ADEQ, Pinal County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD), 

Sierra Research, and EPA. The design day selection methods outlined in the Inventory 

Preparation Plan (IPP), submitted as Appendix A in the SIP, and the resultant design days selected 

were approved in an email from EPA to ADEQ on July 22, 2013. To alleviate any and all concerns, 

ADEQ discussed design day methodology and adequacy with EPA leading up to this approval. 

The methods by which design days were chosen are also described in Appendix A of the 

proposed 2015 West Pinal Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Area SIP and to a lesser degree in 

Appendix B of the SIP. 

ADEQ believes it would be overly burdensome to include justification of the exclusion of every 

potential design day in the SIP, given the number of potential candidate days in Pinal County. For 

example, ADEQ modeled seven unique design days covering four exceeding monitors under two 

meteorological conditions. In the selection of the Cowtown high-wind design day, there were 38 

days in 2008 that had at least one hour of winds exceeding 12 mph and exceeded the standard. 

This represents only one of the seven design day selections. However, below, ADEQ discusses the 

reasons for excluding the two design days specifically identified in EPA’s comment:

Stanfield, April 26, 2008:

Exceedance days were ranked from highest to lowest concentration. Any date that with winds 

exceeding 12 mph were excluded as these exceedances would not be expected to exhibit

stagnation conditions. Additionally, any exceedance day that occurred on a weekend day was 

excluded from the analysis. Weekend days were unlikely to contain an adequate representation 

of normal day emission producing activities. The exclusion of weekend day exceedances 

precluded the use of April 26, 2008 as this was a Saturday.

Stanfield, September 8, 2008:

Exceedance days were ranked from highest to lowest concentration. Next, exceedance days 

were filtered to only include those days with multiple hours of winds exceeding 12 mph (the

design day selection committee determined that 7 hours of high winds were necessary for 

inclusion). The highest recorded average hourly wind speed for September 8, 2008 was 5.364 

m/s which converts to 11.999 mph. Additionally, this wind speed only occurred for one hour, 

failing to meet the minimum threshold of consecutive high wind hours. 

EPA Comment #3: 

Third, to address the quantitative milestones requirement, we recommend that the proposed

Plan incorporate specific metrics to assess progress over the 2016 through 2018 implementation 

period. Because the control strategy supporting the attainment demonstration is based entirely 

on the implementation of the Agricultural Best Management Practices (Ag BMP) Rules (18-2-

610, 610.03, 611, 611.03, 612, 612.01), we recommend that one metric be a 2017 review of 

BMPs selected by irrigation districts and farms engaged in cropland farming and animal 

operations as recorded in their BMP Program General Permit Record Forms, due December 31, 

2015 and March 31, 2017. The proposed Plan states that voluntary farm surveys will be used in 

a 2017 implementation review of the assumptions made in the Plan's attainment

EVII-5
demonstration. Instead, we recommend that Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ) obtain General Permit Record Forms and collect aggregate data concerning the type and

extent of BMPs used by a statistically valid preponderance of producers in each crop and animal 

operation category. For example, we recommend aggregate data be collected by crop/animal 

operation/unpaved road BMP category and associated acreage/mileage controlled or mitigated. 

To the degree that there is a shortfall in emission reductions, then additional control measures 

should be adopted and implemented prior to December 31, 2017.

ADEQ Response to EPA Comment #3: 

As stated in the plan (Section 7.2), ADEQ will submit a report that demonstrates how 

emissions reductions compare to those scheduled by the beginning of 2017, as well as analyze 

the correlation between the plan and monitoring data and whether the area is still 

anticipated meet its scheduled attainment date. ADEQ will make such a demonstration using 

agricultural compliance data if there is inadequate survey information. To clarify, such three 

year surveys are not voluntary; the surveys are required by the Agricultural rules.

11 

Per EPA policy, states submit CAA § 189(c) reasonable further progress demonstrations three 

years from the regulatory SIP submission date, rather than three years from the actual 

submission date.12 However, per the new agricultural rules,13 such survey data will not be 

available in time for the first RFP report (per EPA policy), which ADEQ intends to submit in the 

beginning of 2017. In the absence of such survey data, ADEQ will use inspection and 

compliance data to demonstrate progress. 

As an inspection process standard, ADEQ’s Compliance Section generally requests to review 

general permit record forms. ADEQ may supplement additional progress demonstrations with 

inspection and compliance for future reports, if such data is more representative. ADEQ will 

determine progress by analyzing survey and compliance data collected, such as acreage of 

cropland and operator implemented best management practices per the rule. ADEQ believes 

that the proposed reports and means of obtaining data will be sufficient to demonstrate 

progress. 

EPA Comment #4: 

Fourth, the proposed Plan identifies mitigation of emissions from public unpaved roads as a 

contingency measure if the area fails to make reasonable further progress or attain the NAAQS 

by the attainment date, December 31, 2018. The proposed Plan does not, however, adequately 

distinguish between public unpaved roads at which mitigation measures have already been 

implemented since 2008 and public unpaved roads that could be addressed through mitigation 

11 EPA mentions the submission of General Permit Record Forms. These forms are not submitted. These forms are 

required to be completed from and after December 31, 2015 and are thereafter required to be completed every 

year by March 31st. These forms are kept on site and shall be available upon request to ADEQ. 12 Fine PM NAAQS, SIP Requirements, Proposed Rule, 80 FR 15340, 15390 (Mar. 23, 2015). 13 e.g. R18-2-610.03(D) from Final Exempt Agricultural Rules, 21 A.A.R. 1156, 1169 (July 24, 2015).

EVII-6
measures in 2016, 2017, and 2018. In addition, ADEQ's submittal of the Plan should include 

documentation from entities responsible for meeting this requirement showing that they have

the legal authority and fiscal resources to do so, and a list of roadway segments that will be 

mitigated. The Plan should make clear the timing, location, and accountability for each public 

unpaved road mitigation project, either implemented and assumed within the Plan's baseline, or 

credited as a contingency measure within the Plan.

2 

ADEQ Response to EPA Comment #4: 

The SIP calculations account for which measures have been implemented since 2008 and which roads 

could be addressed in 2016, 2017, and 2018. ADEQ has compiled a list of completed and draft projects, 

which is available upon request. ADEQ finds it unnecessarily burdensome on outside agencies to include 

such information with the plan.

According to A.R.S. § 49-479, Pinal County’s Board of Supervisors, “shall adopt such rules as it 

determines are necessary and feasible to control the release into the atmosphere of air contaminants 

originating within the territorial limits of the county or multi-county air quality control region in order to 

control air pollution...” By adopting the Pinal County fugitive dust rule, the Board has deemed it 

necessary to regulate government owned roads to control PM10. The fugitive dust rule is applicable to 

all public entity owners of unpaved roads. In the case that the entities collectively fall short of paving 

the necessary length of road, all entities shall be held jointly and severally strictly liable for the violation. 

All entities are therefore incentivized, in order to avoid conflict and legal and penal expense, to reach a 

decision amongst themselves to pave the nonattainment area roads, as required. Additionally, once the 

MVEB is approved, entities will be further incentivized to pave roads in accordance with the rule. They 

will have to pave in accordance with planned TIP projects to allow for the area to conform to the 

approved SIP budget and TIP projects. Nonconformity could result in numerous negative impacts for all 

involved, including a possible dearth of federal funding of future development projects. 

EPA Comment #5: 

Fifth, the motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) and related analyses should be revised to meet 

transportation conformity requirements. The MVEB includes an "allowance" or "safety margin" 

for road construction projects. This "allowance/safety margin" increment of PM10 emissions 

should be calculated and presented as an element separate and distinct from the attainment

based MVEB. Also, the MVEB includes a line item for "Private Road" emissions. We recommend 

that this source category be removed from the MVEB.

ADEQ Response to EPA Comment #5: 

The commenter does not specifically address any unsatisfied transportation conformity requirements. 

ADEQ believes the MVEB demonstration is sufficient and meets conformity requirements. EPA’s 

suggested adjustments do not appear to be requirements, but rather organizational preferences. ADEQ 

believes the MVEB to be reasonably adequate for approval in its current form. 

EVII-7
ADEQ modeled attainment for all design days before considering any margin of safety. After modeling 

attainment, and “in order to leave as much room for growth in the MVEB as possible, ADEQ....scaled up 

the emissions rates from each road work project in the inventory until the model no longer showed 

attainment.”14 In other words, ADEQ included a margin of safety for emissions from transportation 

construction projects to provide for additional growth, while still meeting attainment. The addition of a 

margin of safety in no way affected ADEQ’s anticipated attainment date.

The motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB), attainment demonstration, and annual attainment 

emission inventory (presented respectively in Tables 5-4, 7-2, and 5-3 of the 2015 West Pinal Moderate 

PM10 Nonattainment Area SIP) all include this margin of safety. The annual nonattainment area-wide 

emissions associated with road construction from known projects are 88.1 tons of PM10.

15 These 88.1 

tons/year of known transportation construction project emissions were increased by an additional 

91.4% to allow for the MVEB’s margin of safety, but as to not allow any modeled monitor to exceed the 

standard for 2018 in the attainment demonstration. The 91.4% increase in emissions results in an 

additional 80.6 tons of emissions allowable each year (i.e. 91.4% of 88.1 tons).16 The addition of the 

margin of safety emissions to already known transportation construction emissions results in total road 

construction emissions of 168.8 tons/year (i.e. 88.1 tons/year + 80.6 tons/year ≈ 168.8 tons/year).17 If 

the margin of safety emissions in Table 5.4 of the SIP was represented as a separate line item, the 

resultant MVEB would be as presented in the table below:

MVEB Summary (separating margin of safety emissions)

Source Annual NA-Wide Emissions (TPY)

Exhaust, tire-, & brake-wear 173.7

Unpaved road dust 26,433.5

Reentrained paved road dust 1,211.1

Road construction/maintenance 88.1

Margin of safety added to road 

construction/maintenance 80.6

Total 27,987.1

14 Appendix D (Attainment TSD) of SIP at 43. 15 Id. 16 Id. 17 Please note that the example summation of 88.1 tons/year and 80.6 tons/year actually results in emissions of 

168.7 tons/year, but ADEQ is reporting 168.8 tons/year to keep consistency with the values reported in the SIP 

MVEB presented in Table 5-4. The reason for this discrepancy is truncation of the actual calculated emission 

values in this example.

EVII-8
Finally, ADEQ does not feel that removal of private roads from the MVEB is appropriate. ADEQ included 

private unpaved roads in the MVEB in part to be regionally consistent with other MVEBs in the state. 

Also, non-irrigation unpaved private road travel produces a significant proportion of transportation 

related emissions within the Pinal County PM10 nonattainment area. As presented in Table D4-1 of 

Appendix D of the proposed SIP, non-irrigation private unpaved roads were estimated to emit 9,133.5 

tons per year of PM10. The proposed MVEB totals 27,987.1 tons of PM10 per year. Therefore, nonirrigation private unpaved roads represent 32.6% of the total proposed MVEB. Given the relative 

importance of this transportation emission sector to the total MVEB and to provide consistency 

between the other Arizona nonattainment area MVEBs, ADEQ has determined that private unpaved 

road emissions should be included in the Pinal County PM10 nonattainment area MVEB. 

Volkswagen (VW) Comment #1: 

(Volkswagen’s comment letter begins on page 17 of this Exhibit)

Generally, Volkswagen is concerned that some of the language in Pinal County’s fugitive dust rule is

unclear and requests that the language be clarified. (This comment has been paraphrased) 

ADEQ Response to VW #1: 

ADEQ understands that Volkswagen Arizona Proving Grounds (“VW AZ Proving Grounds”), a vehicle 

testing facility located in Pinal County, AZ within the West Pinal PM10 Nonattainment Area, seeks 

clarification as to how Pinal County’s fugitive dust rule in Pinal County Air Quality Control District Code 

of Regulations, Chapter 4, Article 1 (§ 4-1-010, -015, -020, -020, -030, -040, -045, and -050) applies to the 

facility.18 The facility also specifically seeks clarification as to whether the vehicle testing facility 

exemption in PCAQCD Code § 4-1-015(1) (effective Jan. 1, 2016) covers the activities that the facility 

believes should be exempt from the fugitive dust rule. After consideration of the rule and consultation 

with Pinal County Air Quality Control District, ADEQ concludes that the vehicle testing exemption is 

suitably broad and that the rule is sufficiently clear. However, please discuss all matters responded to 

herein specifically with Pinal County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD), as it is agency authorized to 

enforce the rule. 

VW Comment #2: 

VW is unclear regarding the vehicle testing facility exemption applicability. Does evaluating and 

conditioning test tracks meet the vehicle testing facility exemption in Pinal County’s fugitive dust rule? 

Does the vehicle testing facility exemption apply at all times? Finally, does the exemption apply during 

driver training? (This comment has been paraphrased) 

ADEQ Response to VW Comment #2: 

The applicable standards of Pinal County’s fugitive dust rule exempts those “specified activities” at 

vehicle test and development facilities “...where dust is required to test and validate the design 

18 These rules were approved and finalized by the Board of Supervisors on October 28, 2015. Final West Pinal 

PM10 Moderate Nonattainment Area Fugitive Dust Rule, 21 A.A.R. 2925, Nov. 20, 2015 (effective Jan. 1, 2016).

EVII-9
integrity...” of car products for an equipment manufacturer.19 This exemption applies to vehicle testing 

facilities such as VW AZ Proving Grounds. 

A test track is a location where dust is required to test and validate the design integrity of cars. This is 

the exact type of location that the rule contemplates as a location where such “specified activities” are 

likely to take place. If controlling the dust on the track between testing periods would demean the 

nature of the track’s testing qualities, the lack of control would seem to fall under the exemption, 

whether testing is done on consecutive days or not. Similarly, track preparation and evaluation is a 

necessary activity for testing and safety purposes. Therefore, track preparation and evaluation are done 

in furtherance of such “specified activities” that the rule contemplates and the exemption applies to 

these activities. It also follows that employed or contracted drivers will need to train under the same or 

similar conditions as during vehicle testing, and such training is necessary to allow for safe and accurate 

vehicle testing. 

ADEQ and Pinal County therefore interpret the rule to allow the vehicle testing exemption to apply to 

driver training and associated tracks, and track evaluation and preparation because such activities are 

necessary to test and validate car product design integrity. Hence, any location or activity on the facility 

where dust is required to maintain the veracity of a vehicle test, including tracks, track site evaluation or 

preparation, and driver training needed to ensure that drivers have the skill and safety acumen in order 

to test the vehicles, is exempt from the requirements of this rule.

These test or training track locations would not become subject to this rule unless the testing nature of 

these locations ends indefinitely or Pinal County reasonably perceives that the locations have not been 

used for testing purposes for a reasonably extended period of time and considers them subject to the 

rule. 

ADEQ appreciates the suggestion that Pinal County include additional information regarding the 

exemption applicability to test track evaluation and preparation and driver training, but finds that the 

additional language is unnecessary to reasonably interpret the exemption as covering these activities.

VW Comment #3: 

The proposed rules define UNPAVED ROADS as those owned by federal, state, county, municipal and 

other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies. Thus, UNPAVED ROADS on private property do not 

appear to be within this category.

The proposed rules also define UNPAVED LOTS as any area not paved that is used for parking, 

maneuvering, materials handling, or storing motor vehicles such as auto impound yards, wrecking yards, 

auto dismantling yards, save yards, and storage yards. As indicated previously, in addition to dirt test 

tracks designed to test vehicles causing dust intrusion and dirt test areas designed to train drivers, the 

VW facility includes unpaved roads used by security, maintenance and utility vehicles. Under the 

proposed definitions, such private property unpaved roads would appear to be classified as UNPAVED 

LOTS, since they would experience occasional vehicle traffic. VW is requesting clarification of this 

19 Pinal’s Fugitive Dust Final Rule, PCAQCD Code § 4-1-015(1) (effective Jan. 1, 2016).

EVII-10
interpretation, so that it understands which controls, if any, are required with respect to the 

unpaved roads located within the facility.

ADEQ Response to VW Comment #3: 

An unpaved road under the proposed Pinal County fugitive dust rule “means any roads, equipment 

paths, or travel ways that are not paved. Unpaved roads are owned only by federal, state, county, 

municipal, or other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies. For the purposes of this Article, an 

unpaved road is not an agricultural road, horse trail, hiking path, bicycle path, or other similar path used 

exclusively for purposes other than travel by motor vehicles.”20 

From the definition above, ADEQ finds that the term “unpaved roads” clearly only applies to 

government owned roads and therefore does not apply to privately owned roads. Hence, VW AZ Proving 

Grounds would not have to maintain its roads in accordance with this rule as it pertains to unpaved 

roads. 

VW AZ Proving Grounds’ private unpaved roads would not have to apply controls in accordance with this 

rule as long as the unpaved road is used as a means for travel,21 and it is not regularly used for generally 

stationary or space limited purposes such as parking, maneuvering, material handling, or storing vehicles 

as a lot22 would be used. If the areas mentioned are used as unpaved lots, they will be regulated under 

the rule as unpaved lots.

20 Pinal’s Fugitive Dust Final Rule, PCAQCD Code § 4-1-020(16) (effective Jan. 1, 2016). 21 Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “road” as “a hard flat surface for vehicles, people, and animals to travel 

on.” See Definition of “Road,” Merriam-Webster, available at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/road. 22 Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “lot” as “a portion of land” or “ a measured parcel of land having fixed 

boundaries and designated on a plot or survey” or “an establishment for the storage or sale of motor vehicles.” 

See Definition of “Lot,” Merriam-Webster, available at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lot. 

EVII-11
VW Comment #4: 

Portions of the VW test facility are vacant open areas. In most cases, natural vegetation has been 

established and is maintained. In certain areas, however, it is necessary to mow the natural vegetation 

(i.e, tumbleweeds, etc.) to a height of approximately five inches in order to prevent the vegetation from 

blowing onto the dust test tracks where it could endanger the safety of the drivers who are testing 

vehicles at high speeds. The proposed regulations are unclear concerning which, if any, regulatory 

requirements apply to that activity. For example, since mowers transit the open vegetative areas when 

mowing, they could qualify as UNPAVED LOTS. Or, they could be considered OPEN AREASN ACANT LOTS. 

Or they could be considered DISTURBED SURF ACE AREAS since in many cases the areas were disturbed

many years ago, even though natural vegetation has reestablished itself. Finally, the act of mowing 

could be classified as qualifying under the section entitled Restriction on Removing Vegetation. Sec. 4-1-

030 E. The act of mowing vegetation to a height of five inches, does not lend itself to the types of 

controls required when removing vegetation, which seems to be the focus of this section of the 

proposed rules. VW is, therefore, asking that the rules be clarified relating to the mowing activities that 

are conducted solely for safety related to the high speed dust vehicle intrusion testing on the unpaved 

tracks.

ADEQ Response to VW Comment #4: 

Per the proposed rule, Disturbed Surface Area is not regulated as a specific emitting source. “Unpaved 

lots” and “open areas/vacant lots” are regulated sources. An “open area/vacant lot” may contain 

“disturbed surface area” so that the open area/vacant lot must be controlled per the proposed rule. 

An “unpaved lot” as used in the rule is any area that is not paved and that is used for parking, 

maneuvering, material handling, or storing motor vehicles and equipment. An unpaved lot includes, but 

is not limited to, automobile impound yards, wrecking yards, automobile dismantling yards, salvage 

yards, material handling yards, and storage yards. For the purpose of this rule, maneuvering shall not 

include military maneuvers or exercises conducted on federal facilities.”23 

From the description from VW AZ Proving Grounds, the land in question is not used for the purposes of 

storage, parking, material handling, or maneuvering. From available information then, the land does not 

seem to meet the description of “unpaved lot.” The question seems to be whether mowing is a type of 

maneuvering that would be regulated under “unpaved lot.” However, the purposes of mowing are not 

to maneuver, park, storage, or even handling materials. The purpose of mowing is to maintain the 

vegetation on the land, a description not covered in the “unpaved lot” description. The described plot 

of land does seem to fall under the “open areas/vacant lot” description. Under the proposed rule, “open 

areas/vacant lot” means:

“...a. An unsubdivided or undeveloped land whether or not it is adjoining a 

developed or a partially developed residential, industrial, institutional, 

governmental, or commercial area. 

23 Pinal’s Fugitive Dust Final Rule, PCAQCD Code (effective Jan. 1, 2016) (emphasis added).

EVII-12
b. A subdivided residential, industrial, institutional, governmental, or commercial 

lot that contains no approved or permitted buildings or structures of a temporary 

or permanent nature.

c. A partially developed residential, industrial, institutional, governmental, or 

commercial lot and contiguous lots under common ownership.”24 

The land VW AZ Proving Grounds described appears to be subdivided commercial land that contains no 

approved buildings or structures, which would therefore qualify it as an open area/vacant lot that must

be controlled under the rule. Maintaining vegetation is a possible control measure for such source type 

because vegetation and roots help to stabilize the earth and prevent PM10 from being easily reentrained. However, please consult with Pinal County for further clarification as to how to apply the 

control measures specifically to VW AZ Proving Grounds’ open areas. Further, mowing vegetation to 

five inches does not qualify as removing vegetation. Removing vegetation might be, as an example, 

pulling vegetation from the roots so that the roots fail to stabilize the land, or blading, discing, or 

plowing so as to overturn the surface crust and disturb the earth. Further, if VW AZ Proving Grounds 

were to remove vegetation, removal would need to occur in conjunction with implementation of one or 

more of the specific control measures outlined in the Pinal’s Fugitive Dust Final Rule, PCAQCD Code § 4-

1-030(2)(C).

24 Pinal’s Fugitive Dust Final Rule, PCAQCD Code § 4-1-020(8) (effective Jan. 1, 2016).

EVII-13
EVII-14
EVII-15
EVII-16
EVII-17
EVII-18
EVII-19
EVII-20
EVII-21
Exhibit E-VIII 

SIP Hearing Transcript

EVIII-1
1 PROPOSED ARIZONA AIR QUALITY 

2 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) 

3 FOR THE WEST PINAL 1987 PM10 NONTATTAINMENT AREA

4 

5 Oral Proceeding

6 Transcript

7 November 19, 2015

8 

9 Naveen Savarirayan : Good afternoon, and thank you for coming. I now open this 

10 hearing on the proposed revisions to Arizona’s State Implementation Plan, or SIP, 

11 for the West Pinal 1987 PM10 Nonattainment Area.

12

13 This proceeding is being recorded and will be preserved for the record. 

14

15 Today is November 19, 2015, and the time is 11:06 p.m., a.m., I am sorry. The 

16 location is the Maricopa Agricultural Center Multipurpose Room at 37860 W.

17 Smith-Enke Road, Maricopa, AZ 85138. My name is Naveen Savarirayan, and I 

18 have been appointed by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental 

19 Quality (ADEQ) to preside over this proceeding.

20 

21 The purpose of this proceeding are to provide the public an opportunity to:

22 (1) Hear about the substance of the proposed SIP revisions, and

23 (2) Present oral argument, data, and views regarding the revisions in the form of 

24 comments on the record. 

25

EVIII-2
1 Department representatives for today’s hearing are Ryan Templeton, Heidi 

2 Haggerty, and Marina Mejia of the Air Quality Division’s State Implementation 

3 Plan Section. 

4 

5 Public notice of the SIP revisions was published in the Arizona Republic on 

6 October 19 and 20, 2015, and was also provided on ADEQ’s website. Paper 

7 copies of the proposed SIP revisions were made available at the ADEQ Records 

8 Center in Phoenix and at the Pinal County Air Quality Department in Florence 

9 starting October 19, 2015, and will remain available until the close of comment 

10 period, which is at 5:00 p.m. today.

11

12 If you wish to make a verbal comment, you need to fill out a speaker slip, which is 

13 available at the sign-in table at the back, and bring it to the front. Using speaker 

14 slips allows everyone an opportunity to be heard and allows us to match the name 

15 on the official record with the comments. You may also submit written comments 

16 to the Department today. 

17

18 Please note the comment period for the proposed SIP revisions ends today and all 

19 comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. 

20

21 Comments made during the formal comment period are required by law to be 

22 considered by the Department when preparing the final State Implementation Plan

23 submission for the Environmental Protection Agency. This is done through the 

24 inclusion of a responsiveness summary in which the Department responds in 

25 writing to written and oral comments made during the formal comment period and 

26 at this hearing. 

27

EVIII-3
1 The agenda for this hearing is as follows:

2 

3 First, Heidi will present a brief overview of the proposed revisions to the State 

4 Implementation Plan.

5 

6 Then I will conduct the oral comment period. At that time, I will begin to call 

7 speakers in the order that I have received speaker slips.

8 

9 Please be aware that any comments at today's hearing that you want the 

10 Department to formally consider must be given either in writing or on the record 

11 during the oral comment period of this hearing. 

12

13 At this time, Heidi Haggerty will give a brief overview of the proposed revision 

14 relating to the West Pinal 1987 PM10 Nonattainment Area. Heidi? 

15

16 Heidi Haggerty: Thanks, Naveen. 

17

18 In 1987, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency promulgated a new 24-hour 

19 PM10 standard. The PM10 standard includes particles with a diameter of 10 

20 micrometers or less (in other words, 0.0004 inches or one-seventh the width of a 

21 human hair). The standard was set at 150 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3). 

22 Hence, an ambient air quality monitor attaining the standard could not measure 

23 volumetric levels of particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometers or less in 

24 an amount greater than 150 micrograms per cubic meter (μ/m3) more than once per 

25 year on average over a consecutive three-year period. 

26

EVIII-4
1 Effective July 2, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency redesignated a 

2 portion of western Pinal County from "unclassifiable” to nonattainment, meaning 

3 the area was not meeting the 1987 promulgated 24-hour PM10 National Ambient 

4 Air Quality Standards (or NAAQS). 

5 

6 In response to the nonattainment designation, ADEQ and its partners developed a 

7 comprehensive state implementation plan to reduce emissions to healthy levels. 

8 The proposed plan is comprised of Agricultural, Construction, and other fugitive 

9 dust control measures to ensure that the West Pinal area attains the 1987 PM10

10 standard by the end of 2018. 

11

12 * * * * *

13

14 Mr. Savarirayan: This concludes the explanation period of this proceeding on the 

15 proposed revisions to the State Implementation Plan.

16

17 * * * * *

18

19 I now open this proceeding for oral comments.

20

21 Has anyone filled out a speaker slip or would like to make an oral comment at this 

22 time? 

23

24 Seeing that there are no speaker slips, this concludes the oral comment period of 

25 this proceeding.

26

27 * * * * *

EVIII-5
1 

2 If you have not already submitted written comments, you may submit them to me 

3 at this time. Again, the comment period for these proposed revisions to the State 

4 Implementation Plan ends today at 5:00 p.m. 

5 

6 Thank you for attending.

7 

8 The time is now 11:12 a.m.. I now close this oral proceeding.

 9 

10

EVIII-6