# Enclosure 1

State Implementation Plan Revisions:

x CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for 2008 Ozone NAAQS

x CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS

x CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) for al l future and previous NAAQS

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act **Section 110(a)(2)(D)**

2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Air Quality Division December 3, 2015 FINAL

# This page is intentionally blank.

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# Table of Contents

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. ............... iii

List of A ppendices ............................................................................................................ ............... iii

Completeness Criteria (40 C.F.R. Part 51, Appendix V, § 2.0) ....................................................... iv

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. ...... 1

2 Clean Air Act Transpor t Requireme nts ............................................................................... 2

3 Arizona’s Impact on Downwind Stat es ............................................................................... 3

4 Arizona Source Overview .................................................................................................... 4

5 Controls on Anthropogenic Emissions in Arizona ............................................................... 5

6 Meteorology Affectin g Transport ....................................................................................... 6

7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... ....... 7



# List of Appendices

Appendix A: Source Maps for NO x 

# and VOCs

Appendix B, Table 1: VOC Data from 2011 NEI and Non-Exhausti ve List of Source Sector
Controls

Appendix B, Table 2: NO x 

# Data from 2011 NEI and Non-Exha ustive List of Source Sector
Controls

Appendix C: Arizona Regional Haze Plan: Controls and Cost Effectiveness

Appendix D: Electric Generating Faciliti es’ Allowable Emissions in Maricopa County According to Arizona’s 2009 Boundar y Recommendation for 2008 Ozone
NAAQS

Appendix E: HYSPLIT Ensemble Modeled Tr ajectories on May 4, 2011 (and May 25, 2011)

December 3, 2015 FINAL Page iii

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# Completeness Criteria (40 C.F.R. Part 51, Appendix V, § 2.0)

Appendix V § 2.1 - Administrative Materials

(a) A formal signed, stamped, an d dated letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesti ng EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof (hereafter “the plan ”). If electing to submit a paper submission with a copy in electroni c version, the submittal letter must verify that the electronic copy prov ided is an exact duplicate of the paper submission.

See the cover letter for this SIP submission signed by Eric C. Massey, Director of the ADEQ Air Quality Division, and Enclosure 2 which contains delegation of authority from Misael Cabrera, Director of ADEQ and the Governor’s designee , to Mr. Massey to perform any act the ADEQ Director is authorized to perform.



# (b) Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter “document”) in final fo rm. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date.

See cover letter.



# (c) Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan.

Arizona is authorized to adopt and implement SIPs under Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 49-104, 49-106, 49-404, 49-406 and 49-425, unofficial copies of which are attached in Enclosure 2.

December 3, 2015 FINAL Page iv

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)

(d) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including indication of the changes made (suc h as redline/strikethrough) to the existing approved plan, where appl icable. The submission shall include a copy of the official State regulation/document, signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State offici al indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of any regulation/document contained in the submission shall, wh enever possible, be indicated in the regulation/document itself; otherwis e the State should include a letter signed, stamped, and dated by the ap propriate State official indicating the effective date. If the regulation/document provided by the State for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan is a copy of an existing publication, the State su bmission should, whenever possible, include a copy of the publication cover page and table of contents.

Not applicable.



# (e) Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State’s laws an d constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan.

Proof that ADEQ followed procedural require ments of Arizona State laws and Arizona’s Constitution to adopt this plan is located in Enclosure 2.



# (f) Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice.

An Affidavit of Publication, proof that ADEQ gave notice of the SIP Revision in accordance with A.R.S. § 49-444, is attached in Enclosure 2. The Arizona Republic newspaper published ADEQ’s
SIP revision notice on October 16, 2015, and October 19, 2015. Public notice was also given through ADEQ’s website and sent to a subscriber list of interested stakeholders on October 16,

2015.



# (g) Certification that public hearing(s) were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State’s laws and constitution, if applicable and consistent with the public hearing requirements in 40 CFR 51.102.

The certification and other documents related to the public hearing held on November 17, 2015, are attached in Enclosure 2.

December 3, 2015 FINAL Page v

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)

(h) Compilation of public comments and the State’s response
thereto.

The public comment responsiveness summa ry is attached in Enclosure 2.



# Appendix V § 2.1 - Technical Support

(a) Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan.

The regulated pollutant is ozone.



# (b) Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/ nonattainment de signation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected areas(s).

Not Applicable.



# (c) Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estima tes of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations
of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision.

Not applicable.



# (d) The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of si gnificant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstrat ion, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. For all requests to redesignate an area to attainme nt for a national primary ambient air quality standard, under section 107 of the Act, a revision must be submitted to provide for the main tenance of the national primary ambient air quality standards for at le ast 10 years as required by section
175A of the Act.

Applicable demonstrations are made within the body of this infrastruc ture SIP revision and supplement demonstrations previously submitted.

December 3, 2015 FINAL Page vi

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)

(e) Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, justification of model selections, ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used, justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis.

Modeling was not a necessary component of this SIP, but some meteorological analysis is included within the body of the SIP revisions and attached appendices.



# (f) Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are
based on continuous emissi on reduction technology.

Not applicable.



# (g) Evidence that the plan cont ains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeep ing/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels.

Not applicable.



# (h) Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice.

Not applicable.



# (i) Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies, or an ex planation of why such justifications are not necessary.

No known deviations from EPA policy.

December 3, 2015 FINAL Page vii

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 1 Introduction

This State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision addresses the Clean Air Ac t interstate transport requirements for the 2008 Ozone National Ambien t Air Quality Standard s (NAAQS), for which precursors are nitrogen oxides (NOx) and vola tile organic compounds (VOC). The explanation below supports a negative declar ation of significant contributio n of interstate transport to surrounding nonattainment and maintenance areas. In addition, other aspects of the transport requirement are satisfied or are expected to be sufficiently addressed through Regional Haze SIPs, Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs), rules, and the ongoing New Source ReviewPrevention of Significant Deterioration (NSR-PSD) revision 1



# .

1 

# See generally Revisions to Air Plan; Arizona; Stationary So urces; New Source Review, 80 Fed. Reg. 14044 (proposed Mar. 18, 2015).



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 1

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 2 Clean Air Act Transport Requirements

Under the Clean Air Act (C.A.A.) § 110(a)(2)(D), each State Impl ementation Plan (SIP) shall contain adequate provisions to prohibit any source or type of emission activity from contributing significantly to any other state’s no nattainment of a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) or from interfering with ma intenance of such NAAQS. Also, a SIP shall prohibit any source or emission activity from in terfering with any other state’s ability to comply with prevention of significant deterioration of ai r quality or from protecting visibility. Finally, a state must show in its SIP that it is ensuring compliance with requirements of interstate and international pollution abatement as set forth in CAA §§ 115 and 126. 2



# The United States Environmental Protection Ag ency (EPA) has established the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and its predecessor transport rules to address the collective
contributions from the 37 states in the Easter n United States. The 11 Western U.S. states, including Arizona, have not been formally evalua ted for transport rule applicability; hence, no specific rule is applicable other than the genera l authority of the statute. The EPA has recently issued a policy memorandum 3 

# in which the EPA states that it will evaluate certain western state contributions on a case-by-case basis.

2 

# Clean Air Act (CAA) § 110(a)(2)(D), 42 U.S.C. § 7410(a)(2)(D) (1990).

3 

# Memorandum: Information on the Interstate Transpor t “Good Neighbor” Provision for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS under the CAA, “Good Neighbor Memo,” Steven D. Page, Di rector, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA. January 22, 2015.



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 2

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 3 Arizona’s Impact on Downwind States

Arizona has been in close communication with th e EPA regarding transport since the release of the transport memo and associated modeling. EP A’s initial modeling released in January 2015 indicated Arizona would potentially impact down wind nonattainment receptors, specifically the El Centro monitor in Imperial County, CA. 4 5 

# Updated modeling results released in July 2015 showed Arizona also potentially significantly impacts only one of seven Los Angeles area

monitors 6 7 

# and contributes a small amount to other states, which does not significantly
interfere with the areas’ attainment or maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

In eastern states, the EPA has chosen a 1% of the standard threshold as a significant contribution. However, Arizona consid ers the Southwest to be different. 8 

# One of the strongest rationale’s in the East in support of a one pe rcent threshold is that it captures a high percentage of the total pollution transport affecting downwind nonattainment areas, areas where nonattainment problems result from the combined impact of relatively small contributions from many upwind states. 9 

# It is unclear at this point what threshold is significant
for southwestern states. Accord ing to the modeling, an L.A. monitor receives interstate transport totaling 1.98 ppb, of which Arizona is said to contribute 0.86 ppb, making Arizona’s contribution alone 40% of the total transport. 10 

# In this instance, Arizona’s contribution is a little less than half of the total transport, but it is st ill not clear that 0.86 ppb or even the total 1.98 ppb is a significant contribution to a nonattain ment area where the projected 2017 design value is projected to be 86 ppb. When considering the controls al ready in place in Arizona, the total amount of aggregated transported pollution to the Imperial and L.A. monitors relative to the design values in those areas, and the di fference in geography between the East and the West, Arizona doubts that its transport significantly impacts any areas in California.

4 

# Monitor ID: 60251003.

5 

# Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS Transpor t Assessment, Appendix C, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, January 2015.

6 

# Monitor ID: 60379033.

7 

# Updated Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Docu ment for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS Transport Assessment, Appendix C, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, August 2015.

8 

# For example, consider the Allegan County Monitor (#260050003) where the aggregate modeled interstate pollution contribution is 30 ppb, with the majority of individual interstate contributions modeled to be under 3 ppb, and all to be under 10 ppb. There are large numbers of smaller contributions that have significant impacts to the grand total interstate pollution in Allegan County. Th ese smaller contributions total nearly 40% of the total design value projected for the Allegan County monitor, which his 75.5 ppb.

9 

# Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals (CSAPR Final Rule), 76 FR 48208, 48237 (Aug. 8, 2011).

10 

# The Imperial monitor is a similar case, with inters tate pollution totaling 3. 35 ppb, Arizona’s modeled contribution listed as 1.78, totaling 53% of the total tr ansport to a nonattainment area with a projected design value of 79.3 ppb.



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 3

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 4 Arizona Source Overview

Arizona aggregated information from the 2011 Nati onal Emission Inventory (NEI) data (v.2) in the absence of a comprehensive statewide emissions inventory.

The biogenic sector is by far the greatest cont ributor of emissions; it contributes more VOC
emissions than all other sources combined. Bi ogenic contributions ar e followed by fires, particularly wildfires as the se cond largest source of VOC emi ssions. The highest contributing anthropogenic sector is mobile sources, followed by solvents, and then gas stations. From a point source perspective, VOC emissions origin ate in larger contributions from electric generating units (EGUs), airports, and several miscellaneous source categories aggregated together. The point source locations of EGUs, airp orts, and non-classified source categories are shown in Appendix A. Also, Appendix B, Table 1 lists the VOC emissions from all NEI source sectors, including area and mobile sources.

Mobile sources are the highest contributors of NO x in Arizona, by far, followed by EGUs and fires, particularly wildfires. From a point source perspective, NOx emissions originate in larger contributions from EGUs by far, followed by th e airport and Portland ceme nt operations source categories. 11 

# The locations of these highest emitting point sources are shown in Appendix A. Also, Appendix B, Table 2, lists the NOx emission s from all source sectors, including area and
mobile sources.

11 

# Note that the pulp and paper plant in Snowflake, AZ, which contributed most of the pulp and paper emissions, is no longer in operation.



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 4

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 5 Controls on Anthropogenic Emissions in Arizona

Over the years, Arizona, including Marico pa County, has adopted and implemented SIP provisions that cover all VOC and NOx emitting sources and source cate gories. Federal rules, some state-delegated, also provide controls for emissions reductions.

The EPA has focused its Good Neighbor transp ort control efforts on reducing NOx as a precursor pollutant for downwind ozone. 12 

# One of the regulatory instruments the EPA uses to control NOx is the Regional Haze Rule, which ou tlines state requirements to address visibility impairment in national parks a nd wilderness areas. Under the Re gional Haze Rule NOx emission sources, such as refineries, smelters, and coal-f ired EGUs, may be contro lled by Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to prevent haze. Besides mobile sources, EGUs are the largest
contributors of NOx in the co untry, as well as in Arizona. 13 

# Because NOx is a precursor for ozone, the Regional Haze Rule also helps to pr event ozone. Arizona has several sources subject
to BART that are now or will be controlled in the near future. Many of the sources are controlled through Federal Implementation Plan s (FIPs), and some are, or will soon be, controlled through SIPs. Appendix C lists facilities subject to BART and the associated SIP or FIP revision implementing such controls. No EGU in Maricopa County is subj ect to BART; however, ADEQ lists Maricopa County EGU NOx and VOCs emission limits in the State’s 2009 Ozone Boundary Recommendation, attached as Appendix D

.
Besides EGUs, Arizona, including Maricopa County, also has controls on many other sources
within the state. Please see Appendix B for a non-exhaustive list of NEI source sector controls per Arizona State, Maricopa Coun ty, and Federal law. As a practi cal matter, Arizona focused on Maricopa County controls because Maricopa is the most populous county in the state and accounts for a large portion of a ll NOx and VOC emissions. Maricopa County is currently in the process of updating and increasing stringency of ozone preventative rules. A more stringent level of control will be in place by 2017.

12 

# “Good Neighbor Memo,” supra note 3, at 3.

13 

# It is possible that some EGUs outside of Arizona’s jur isdiction contribute to the total level of NOx and ozone within Arizona but more data, especially meteorol ogical, is needed to make this determination.



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 5

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 6 Meteorology Affecting Transport

According to internal meteorological review, la rge scale airflow over Arizona is generally a westerly flow (from the west to the east). This circulation pattern is most pronounced in winter, bringing occasional storm systems that progress eastward on the westerly flow. In warmer months, high pressure produces a more southerly component to the airflow over the state. Arizona has complex topography, including many interconnected mountain ranges, creating barriers between local airsheds and preventing di spersion of emissions outside of local sources in the absence of synoptic storm systems.

Because airflow over Arizona is predominantly from the west, Arizona is unlikely to significantly contribute long-range transport to a nonattainment area in California. 14 

# ADEQ utilized the
HYSPLIT model to evaluate the 16 actual exceedan ce days in Imperial County in 2011, including
both the El Centro – 9 th 

# Street and the Calexico-Ethel monitoring sites. 15 

# The analysis included running 72 hour backward trajectories with an ensemble approach at both 10 meter and 500 meter levels. The ensemble approach allows fo r a range of possible solutions by altering the initial conditions slightly. One can place higher co nfidence in a resultant trajectory if all of the modeled traces align into the one trajectory. A wide range of solutions indicates that there is wide potential for actual variance. Air parcel traj ectories originating at 10 meters were used to capture ground level ozone, while 500 meters was chosen to account for potential dispersion of ozone within the planetary boundary layer. Af ter reviewing trajectory analyses, it was found that only one exceedance day, May 4, 201 1, had potential for Arizona contribution, 16 

# shown in
the attached Appendix E

. 17 

# The ensemble HYSPLIT 72 hour back ward trajectories for this date indicate a variety of model solutions, with only some solutions indicating possible air parcel traces originating from Arizona into California. It should be noted that not all ensemble members crossed over Arizona, which lowers conf idence that Arizona significantly contributed to Imperial County’s exceedance on that day.

14 

# Regional-scale Transport of Air Pollutants: Impacts of Southern California Emission s on Phoenix Ground-Level Ozone Concentrations, J. Li et al., Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions , 15, 8361-8401 (2015).

15 

# Imperial County Air Pollution District, Annual Network Plan for Ambient Air Monitoring , July 2012, available at http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti 1/files/networkplans/CAImperialPlan2012.pdf.

16 

# This one exceedance day displays relatively unco mmon wind patterns. Another year may not include an exceedance day with meteorological patterns such as this.

17 

# For contrast, also attached in Appendix E are examples of a more common trajectory into Imperial County during the May-June timeframe, traveling from west to east, from northern California to southern California.



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 6

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)



# 7 Conclusion

In summary, with respect to preventing pollution transport, all emitting NEI source sectors for
both VOCs and NOx in Arizona are sufficientl y controlled by Regional Haze Plans, other statewide statutes and regulations, Maricopa County regulations, and federal regulations. Arizona has few, if any, uncontrolled signific ant anthropogenic source types that are under Arizona’s jurisdiction. It is likely, considerin g observed meteorology and anthropogenic source controls, that Arizona’s SIP provisions are ade quate to prevent significant contribution to a nonattainment area and to prevent another ar ea’s maintenance of the NAAQS. Arizona’s expected and observed meteorological conditions make significant transport to the west of the state especially unusual and difficult. Current Regi onal Haze FIPs and SIPs protect Class I area visibility. ADEQ is unaware of any internatio nal pollution or interstate abatement claim pursuant to C.A.A. §§ 115 and 126, respectively. 18 

# Additionally, any other aspects of the transport requirement are being sufficiently a ddressed through the ongoing NSR-PSD revision. All of the above supports a finding that Arizona’s SIP is adequate to comply with the transport requirements of CAA § 110(a)(2)(D).

18 

# Clean Air Act (CAA) § 110(a)(2)(D), 42 U.S.C. § 7410(a)(2)(D) (1990).



# December 3, 2015 FINAL Page 7

#  ǣ           Airports EGUs

Portland Cement Manufacturing Uncategorized Sources

# Appendix B, Table 1 ǣ    ʹͲͳͳ   Ǧ     

NEI Sector Emissions (TPY) Statewide Controls/Programs Maricopa County Controls/Programs Federal Controls/Program Biogenics Ͳ Vegetation and Soil 2102964.5

Bulk Gasoline Terminals 249.5344811 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360 40 CFR 60, Subpart XX

Commercial Cooking 245.2226445 Commercial Bread Bakeries MC Rule 343

Fires Total 349637.61 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602

Ͳ Unlawful Open Burning Maricopa County Rule 314 Ͳ Open Outdoor Fires and

Indoor Fireplaces (commercial); enforcement of AZ

statute on open burning

Agricultural Field Burning 478.869369
Prescribed Fires 19881.51366
Wildfires 329277.2248

Commercial/Institutional Fuel Combustion Total 72.25443008 Voluntary permit operating limitations and

controls for emergency ICE to avoid higher permitting thresholds, if applicable; requirements for ICE not subject to NSPS in

A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 719; Incorporation of NSPS in

A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 and of

NESHAP in Article 11; various NSR/PSD

statutes and rules Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360 and NESHAP at MC Rule 370; NSR/PSD in MC Rule

240 Various NSPS and NESHAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Biomass 14.871998

Coal 0.2038

Natural Gas 56.48266376
Oil 0.298769198

Other 0.39719912

EGU Fuel Combustion Total 473.868081 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C

. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 and of NESHAP in Article

11 ; various NSR/PSD statutes and rules

, Regional Haze SIPs and FIPs mostly for NOx

emissions (See Appendix C) ; Voluntary permit operating limitations and controls for

emergency ICE to avoid higher permitting thresholds, if applicable; various Standards of

Performance for Existing sources, in A.A.C.
Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 7 including

Standards of Performance for Existing fossil

Ͳ fuel fired EGUs A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 703 Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360
and NESHAP at MC Rule 370; and NSR/PSD in MC
Rule 240 Various NSPS and NESHAP; Regional Haze

FIPS mostly for NOx emissions ( See Appendix C )

Biomass 1.32945

Coal 344.74522

Natural Gas 124.7896936
Oil 2.94002063

Other 0.063696766

Industrial Boilers Fuel Combustion Total 163.310713 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 and of NESHAP in Article

11 ; various NSR/PSD statutes and rules ; Voluntary permit operating limitations to
avoid higher permitting thresholds, if applicable Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360 and NESHAP at MC Rule 370; NSR/PSD in MC Rule 240 Various NSPS and NESHAP

Coal 12.7184

Natural Gas 140.2449639
Oil 7.279202655

Other 3.06814648

Residential Fuel Combustion Total 3176.663025 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602

Ͳ Unlawful Open Burning Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360 40 CFR 60 Subparts AAA; RRRR; QQQQ Ͳ NSPS for New Residential Wood Heaters
and New Residential Hydronic Heaters
and Forced Air Furnaces

Natural Gas 101.399049
Oil 0.054776833

Other 13.9149181

Wood 3061.294281

Gas Stations 12460.93819 Gasoline in Stationary Dispensing Tanks MC Rule 353 59 FR 16262 (1994) 40 CFR Parts 86, 88,
and 600 ORVR requirements

1NEI Sector Emissions (TPY) Statewide Controls/Programs Maricopa County Controls/Programs Federal Controls/Program

Industrial Total 3273.174593 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 and of NESHAP in Article
11; various NSR/PSD statutes and rules ;
A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 7. Standards

of performance for various existing sources, including Existing Asphalt Concrete Plants (R18

Ͳ 2 Ͳ 708) and Existing Unclassified Sources (R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 730) Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360 and NESHAP at MC Rule 370; NSR/PSD in MC Rule
240; Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt MC Rule 340;

Ferrous Sand Casting Rule 347; S torage of Organic Liquids MC Rule 350; Loading of Organic Liquids MC
Rule 351; Rubber Sports Ball Manufacturing MC Rule
334; Semiconductor manufacturing MC Rule 338; Pharmaceutical, Cosmetic and vitamin manufacturing operations MC Rule 349; Metal Investment Casting
Rule 341 Various NSPS and NESHAP

Industrial Ͳ various including cement and chemical manufacturing, mining, ferrous metals, oil and gas

production, non

Ͳ ferrous metals, pulp and paper 499.94

Industrial Ͳ Storage and Transfer 333.9973279

Industrial Ͳ not elsewhere classified (but likely includes

rubber and plastics manufacturing) 2439.237265

Non

Ͳ Industrial Misc. Ͳ not elsewhere classified 5080.757461 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 and of NESHAP in Article

11 ; various NSR/PSD statutes and rules;

Standards of Performance for Unclassified

Sources
, A.A.C R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 730 Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360
and NESHAP at MC Rule 370; NSR/PSD in MC Rule
240; voluntary lawn and garden equipment replacement program Various NSPS and NESHAP

Waste Disposal 1201.568019 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9; Standards of Performance

for Unclassified Sources, A.A.C R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 730;

A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Ͳ Unlawful Open Burning; ( R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 731 for

Standards of Performance for Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills) Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County Rule 360,
Incinerators, Burn

Ͳ off Ovens, and Crematories in MC
Rule 313; Open Outdoor Fires and Indoor Fireplaces at
Commercial and Institutional MC Rule 314; Hospital/Medial/Infectious Waste Incinerators MC
Rule 316; (Municipal Solid Landfills MC Rule 321 ) Various NSPS and NESHAP

Solvent Total 49012.2252 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C. Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 ; Standards of Performance

for Unclassified Sources, A.A.C R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 730; Spray painting operations, A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 727 Solvent Cleaning MC Rule 331 ; Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning Rule 333 ; Architectural Coatings MC Rule 335 ; Surface Coating Operations MC Rule 336 ; Graphic Arts
Rule 337 ; Vegetable Oil Extraction Processes MC Rule

339 ; Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures MC Rule

342 ; Coating Wood Millwork MC Rule 346 ; Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations MC Rule 348 Various NSPS and NESHAP

Consumer & Commercial Solvent Use 33866.74635 Degreasing 1381.193203 Dry Cleaning 26.4213 Graphic Arts 291.649
Industrial Surface Coating & Solvent Use 6049.591795

Non

Ͳ Industrial Surface Coating 7396.62355
Mobile

Aircraft 718.1091359 Tier 6 & Tier 8 Aircraft Standards, and

other Federal standards

Locomotives 1228.283095 regulation of mobile sources including

locomotives 40 CFR Parts 85, 86, 600,
1033, 1036,
1037, 1039, 1065, 1066, and 1068

Non

Ͳ road equipment 38223.47217 Tier 3 & Tier 4, 40 CFR part 89 & 1039
and other emission and control requirements
Diesel 2502.565804

Gasoline 35353.52567

Other 367.3807007

On

Ͳ Road 51893.18333 Annual Emissions Inspection of Motor Vehicles

in Area A & B A.R.S. §§ 49

Ͳ 541 Ͳ 49

Ͳ 558.01 ; Vehicle Emissions Inspection Rules in Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 10 ; Emissions control and

clean burning or alternative fuel requirements
for buses A.R.S. §§ 49

Ͳ 571 Ͳ 49

Ͳ 573 ; Travel

Reduction Program in Area A in A.R.S. §§ 49

Ͳ 581 Ͳ 49

Ͳ 593; Goal to provide alternative fuel

stations statewide network A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 413 ; ADEQ to require exemption justifications for

non

Ͳ alternative fuel government vehicles

A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 412 In Maricopa County: Various public awareness and

alternative transportation encouragement programs,
Mass Transit alternatives; Coordiation of Traffic Signal
Systems; Ordinance P

Ͳ 21

Ͳ Vehicle Idling Restriction (Diesel) Tier 2 & Tier 3 emission standards and gasoline sulfur program; control of

hazardous air pollutants from mobile

sources; on

Ͳ board refueling vapor

recovery ( ORVR ), Exhaust and evaporative emission standards for light

Ͳ duty vehicles and trucks, heavy duty

diesel fuel sulfur control requirements; Compliance Assurance Program 2000 for

standard durability; and other emission

and control requirements

Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles 5903.854116

Diesel Light Duty Vehicles 893.52308

non

Ͳ Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles 639.3583331

non

Ͳ Diesel Light Duty Vehicles 44456.4478

*Beginning in 2015, Maricopa County Air Quality Department intends to revise rules related to VOC's to make them more stringent. These rule revisions should be implemented by 2017. For more information on these rulemakings: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/aq/pdf/meetings/AQEROPItems_2015

Ͳ 06

Ͳ 05.pdf

**The above listed rules and statutes are currently enforced in Arizona, but not all of them are necessarily updated into or approved into the SIP. ADEQ is not requesting EPA action on any of the above listed rules and statutes.

2

# Appendix B, Table 2 ǣ   ʹͲͳͳ   Ǧ   


NEI Sector Emissions (TPY) Statewide Controls Maricopa County Controls Federal Controls
Biogenics Ͳ Vegetation and Soil 14234.169

Fires Total 21577.14768 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Ͳ Unlawful
Open Burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 1501 through 1515 Forest and Range
Management Burns Rule 314 Ͳ Open Outdoor Fires and Indoor Fireplaces (Commercial/Institution)

Agricultual Field Burning 265.8575814

Prescribed 1079.060345

Wildfires 20232.22975

Comm/Institutional Fuel Combustion Total 1407.607628 Rule 323 Ͳ Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/ Institutional
Sources; Rule 324 Ͳ Stationary Internal

Combustion Engines Various NSPS and NESHAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Biomass 169.913893

Coal 0.033

Natural Gas 1223.298954

Oil 12.4752333

Other 1.886548

EGU Fuel Combustion Total 35431.39268 Incorporation of NSPS and

NESHAP generally in A.A.C. Title
18, Chapter 2, Ariticle 9 and 11,

A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 903

Ͳ NSPS Fossil

Fuel generators, various

Standards of Performance for
Existing sources, in A.A.C. Title
18, Chapter 2, Article 7 including A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 703 Standards of Performance for
Existing fossil

Ͳ fuel fired EGUs ;
R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 1605 Regional haze

rules ( See Appendix C ), (backstop) State Standards of

Performance for Mercury (including boiler tune

Ͳ ups) at

A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 734 Rule 322 Ͳ Power Plant Operations; Rule

324 Ͳ Stationary Internal Combustion
Engines Regional Haze FIPs (See Appendix C), 40 CFR 63 Subpart
UUUUU, MATs rule Ͳ boiler tune

Ͳ
ups, Various NSPS & NESHAP

Biomass 210.961

Coal 32752.29

Natural Gas 2401.903793

Oil 65.43994248

Other 0.79794

Industrial Boilers Fuel Combustion Total 6558.291178 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C.

Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 ;
various NSR/PSD statutes and

rules ; Voluntary permit operating limitations to avoid higher permitting thresholds, if applicable; various other

standards for existing sources in

Article 7, including R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 719

Standards of Performance for
Existing Stationary Rotating Machinery Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County

Rule 360 ; NSR/PSD in MC Rule 240 Various NSPS and NESHAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Biomass 0.007

Coal 2162.13

Natural Gas 2292.292674

Oil 2028.010466

Other 75.851038

Residential Fuel Combustion Total 2395.421425 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Unlawful
Open Burning Rule 318 Ͳ Approval of Residential Woodburning Devices, Ordinance P

Ͳ 26 Ͳ Residential Woodburning Restriction, Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County

Rule 360 40 CFR 60 Subparts AAA; RRRR,
QQQQ Ͳ NSPS for New Residential

Woood Heaters

Natural Gas 1733.00072

Oil 1.408546979

Other 376.339989

Wood 284.6721686

1NEI Sector Emissions (TPY) Statewide Controls Maricopa County Controls Federal Controls

Industrial Processes Total 6006.324768 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C.

Title 18, Chapter 2, Ariticle 9 ;
various other standards for
existing sources in Article 7, including R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 719 Standards

of Performance for Existing Stationary Rotating Machinery and R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 705 Existing Source

Performance Standards,

Portland Cement Rule 324

Ͳ Stationary Internal Combustion
Engines Various NSPS and NESHAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Cement Manufacturing 2358.03526

Chemical Manufacturing 137.5846
Mining 217.05394

Non

Ͳ ferrous metals 327.9875

Ferrous Metals &Oil and Gas Production & Pulp and
Paper & Storage and Transfer 52.17

Industrial Ͳ not elsewhere classified 2913.493468

Waste Disposal 508.365094 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Ͳ Unlawful
Open Burning, Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa County

Rule 360

, Incinerators, Burn

Ͳ off Ovens, and

Crematories in MC Rule 313 ; Open

Outdoor Fires and Indoor Fireplaces at
Commercial and Institutional MC Rule 314 ; Hospital/Medial/Infectious Waste

Incinerators MC Rule 316 ; (Municipal Solid

Landfills MC Rule 321 )

Solvent 1.26692

Mobile

Aircraft 2913.493468 40 CFR Part 87.1 to 87.64 Ͳ Control of Pollution for Aircraft

and Aircraft Engines

Locomotives 24124.48098 40 CFR Part 92.1 to 92.1108 Ͳ Control of Air Pollution from

Locomotives

Non

Ͳ road equipment Total 29796.32751 R

Ͳ 18

Ͳ 802 through 805,

Emissions from (non

Ͳ road)

mobile sources Tier 3 & Tier 4, 40 CFR part 89 &

1039 and other emission and

control requirements

Diesel 24432.29457

Gasoline 3821.023603

Other 1543.009337

On

Ͳ Road Total 134015.8149 R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 1001 through 1031,

Vehicle Emissions Inspection

and Maintanence Program,

A.R.S 49

Ͳ 541

Ͳ 558.01

, Annual

Emissions Inspection of Motor

Vehicles in Area A & B
, A.R.S.

49

Ͳ 581

Ͳ 584, Ͳ 587 and 49

Ͳ 588 through Ͳ 593 Travel Reduction
Program in Area A
, A.R.S 49

Ͳ 413 Goal to provide alternative

fuel statewide network ; A.R.S

49

Ͳ 412 ADEQ to require exemption justifications for non

Ͳ alt fuel gov't vehicles Ordinance P

Ͳ 21 Ͳ Vehicle Idling Restriction (Diesel) Tier 2 emissions standards (current), Tier 3 (start in 2017) Ͳ 40 CFR Part 86 Control of

Emissions from New and In

Ͳ use Highway Vehicles and Engines;

control of hazardous air pollutants from mobile sources; Exhaust and evaporative

emission standards for light

Ͳ duty

vehicles and trucks, heavy duty

diesel fuel sulfur control
requirements; Compliance

Assurance Program 2000 for

standard durability; and other

emission and control
requirements

Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles 67596.86623

Diesel Light Duty Vehicles 2790.250397

non

Ͳ Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles 1722.518502

non

Ͳ Diesel Light Duty Vehicles 61906.17974

*Beginning in 2015, Maricopa County Air Quality Department intends to revise rules 322, 323, 324, related to NOx emissions, to make them more stringent. These rule revisions should be implemented by 2017. For more information on these rulemakings: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulati ons/aq/pdf/meetingsAQEROPItems_2015

Ͳ 06

Ͳ 05.pdf

**The above listed rules and statutes are currently enforced in Arizona, but not all of them are necessarily updated into or approved into the SIP. ADEQ is not requesting EPA action on any of the
above listed rules and statutes.

2Appendix C: Arizona Regional Haze Plan: Controls and CostEffectiveness1FacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIP orFIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance Datefor NOx ControlsAEPCOApacheStationUnit 1(SIP)-Emissions limit of 0.056lb/MMBtu based appliedto either: 1) the boilerwhen operating alone, or2)the boiler and simplecycle turbine whenoperated in combinedcycle mode-Fuel Switchingto pipelinenatural Gas-In 2015, the emissionslimit revised to 0.10lb/MMBtu based ondetermination that theprior emissions limit wasunachievableEPA SIP approval77 FR 72511 (Dec.5, 2012) andEmissions limitrevisions approval80 FR 19220(April10, 2015)N/AiiUnit 1, 2 &3:12/5/2017Unit 2 & 3(FIP)-Emissions limit of 0.070lb/MMBtu determined asan average of the twounits, based on a rolling30-boiler-operating-dayaverage-Achievable throughupgrades to existingscrubbers andelectrostaticprecipitatorsIn 2015, SIP revision approvedwithfollowing:-Unit 2: conversion fromprimary coal-fired unit toone that combustspipeline-quality naturalgas, and-Unit 3: remain as coalfired unit and retrofittedwith SNCRFIP Promulgation77 FR 72514 (Dec.5, 2012) andSIP Approval80 FR 19220 (April10, 2015)N/Aii2FacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIPor FIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance Datefor NOx ControlsAPSCholla StationUnits 2, 3,& 4(FIP)-Emissions limit of 0.055lb/MMBtu determinedas an average of thethree units, based on arolling 30-boileroperating-day averageA BART reassessment iscurrentlytaking placefor the Cholla facility.FIPPromulgated77 FR 72514(Dec. 5, 2012)$3,114-$3,472for all unitsiii12/5/2017SRPCoronadoStationUnits 1 &2(FIP)-Emissions limit of 0.065lb/MMBtudeterminedas an average of thetwo units, based on arolling 30-boileroperating-day averageOn March 31, 2015, EPA published aNPRM-Proposed:Unit 1: emissions rate of 0.065lb/MMbtu, which corresponds with ascenario consisting of low-load cyclingoperations (with steam reheat) and 3cold startups within a 30-day period,to be a reasonable estimate ofaverage SCR performanceUnit 2: emissions limit would remainat the level prescribed in a consentdecree of 0.080 lb/MMBtu based on a30-BOD basisFIPPromulgated77 FR 72514(Dec. 5, 2012)andNPRM forrevisions toNOx standard(March31,2015)$2,405 for unit1iii12/5/20173FacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIPor FIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance DateFor NOx ControlsFreeportMcMoranMiamiSmelter(FIP)-Annual emissions limitof 40 tpy of NOxemissions from BARTeligible units, which isconsistent with currentemissionsFIPPromulgated-79FR 52420(September 3,2014)Not applicable,no controltechnologyinstalled9/2/2016ASARCOHaydenSmelter(FIP)Annual emissions limit of40 tpy of NOx emissionsapplied to the convertersand anode furnacesFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(September 3,2014)Not applicable,no controltechnologyinstalled9/4/2013Sundt StationUnit 4(FIP)-Emission limit of 0.36lb/MMBtu, which isconsistent with the useof SNCR with theexisting LNBFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(September 3,2014)$3,222iv9/4/2017Nelson LimePlantKiln 1 &2(FIP)-Kiln 1: Emission limit of3.80 lb/ton of lime on a12-month rollingaverage, consistentwith use of LNB andSNCR-Kiln 2: emission limit of2.61 lb/ton on a 30-dayrolling average,consistent with useofLNB and SNCRFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(September 3,2014)$807-$817 forboth kilnsiv9/4/20174FacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIPor FIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance Datefor NOx ControlsPhoenixCementCompanyClarkdaleKiln 4(FIP)2.12 lb/ton based on a 30-day rolling average,consistent with use ofSNCRFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(Sept. 3, 2014)$1,14212/31/2018CalPortlandCementRillitoKiln 4(FIP)2.67 lb/ton based on a 30-day rolling average,consistent with use ofSNCRFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(Sept. 3, 2014)$1,04712/31/2018iCost-effectiveness determination is EPA’sBART analysis for the Arizona Regional HazeFederal Implementation Plan unless otherwise notediiCost-effectiveness determination is not available for Arizona SIP revision related to AEPCOiiiU.S. EPA, Arizona Regional Haze Technical Support Document, July 2012iv79 FR 9318, February 18, 2014

# ǣ Electric Generating Facilities’ Allowable

Emissions in Maricopa County According to Arizona’s 2009 Boundary
Recommendation for 2008 Ozone NAAQS

The table above lists the capacities and allowable NOx and VOC emissions for each facility in tons per year (tpy). Of the 14 existing power plants as of early 2009, 9 were located within the existing 8-hour ozone nonattainment area boundary.

Maricopa County Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) regulates all fossil fuel powered EGU’s (constructed prior to May 10, 1996) within Maricopa County. As of Sept. 2015, Maricopa County Air Quality Department began the rule revision process to Rule 322 in order to implement more stringent NOx controls. Revisions will include requirements for use of Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for NOx emitting sources. Final rule revisions are scheduled to be implemented by 2017.
For more information: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/aq/process.aspx# Table III.10: Planned and Existing Power Plants

Name Capacity (MW) Allowable Emissions

NOx (tpy) VOC (tpy)
Maricopa County
APS Ocotillo Power Plant 330 135 19
APS West Phoenix Power Plant 1,000 405 56
APS Redhawk Power Station 1,060 1,452 242 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station 4,000 SRP Agua Fria Generating Station 626 160 35 SRP Kyrene Generating Station 521 141 26 SRP Santan Generating Station 1,225 1,269 94 Harquahala Generating Station 1,000 324 102 Mesquite Generating Station 1,200 408 295 Dynergy Energy Arlington Valley 570 242 123
Gila River Power Station 2,300 860 144 Pinal County SRP Desert Basin Generating Station 580 214 104 APS Sundance Generating Station 450 351 165 APS Saguaro Power Plant 410 9,442 80 Transcanada Coolidge Generating Station (planned) 576 245 245

SRP Abel Generating Station (planned) 360 95 45 Electrical District No. 3 (planned) <6 24 15 Pinal Central (on hold) n/a n/a n/aǣͶǡʹͲͳͳȋʹͷǡʹͲͳͳȌϭ&ŝŐƵƌĞϭƐŚŽǁƐĂϭϬŵĞƚĞƌ͕ϳϮŚŽƵƌ,z^W>/dďĂĐŬǁĂƌĚƚƌĂũĞĐƚŽƌLJŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůŽƵŶƚLJůĞŶƚƌŽͲεƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚŵŽŶŝƚŽƌ͕ĞŶĚŝŶŐŽŶDĂLJκ͕ϮϬϭϭ͘dŚĞĨŝŐƵƌĞƐŚŽǁƐĂǁŝĚĞƐƉƌĞĂĚŽĨƉŽƐƐŝďůĞƚƌĂĐĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͘&ŝŐƵƌĞϮƐŚŽǁƐĂρϬϬŵĞƚĞƌ͕ϳϮŚŽƵƌ,z^W>/dďĂĐŬǁĂƌĚƚƌĂũĞĐƚŽƌLJŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůŽƵŶƚLJůĞŶƚƌŽͲεƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚŵŽŶŝƚŽƌ͕ĞŶĚŝŶŐŽŶDĂLJκ͕ϮϬϭϭ͘dŚĞĨŝŐƵƌĞƐŚŽǁƐĂǁŝĚĞƐƉƌĞĂĚŽĨƉŽƐƐŝďůĞƚƌĂĐĞƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͘&ŝŐƵƌĞϯ^ŚŽǁƐ͕ĂƐĂŶĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ĂŵŽƌĞƚLJƉŝĐĂůϳϮŚŽƵƌ,z^W>/dďĂĐŬǁĂƌĚƚƌĂũĞĐƚŽƌLJĂƚϭϬŵĞƚĞƌƐŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůŽƵŶƚLJůĞŶƚƌŽͲεƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚŵŽŶŝƚŽƌ͕ĞŶĚŝŶŐŽŶDĂLJϮρ͕ϮϬϭϭ͘&ŝŐƵƌĞκ^ŚŽǁƐ͕ĂƐĂŶĞdžĂŵƉůĞ͕ĂŵŽƌĞƚLJƉŝĐĂůϳϮŚŽƵƌ,z^W>/dďĂĐŬǁĂƌĚƚƌĂũĞĐƚŽƌLJĂƚρϬϬŵĞƚĞƌƐŝŶƚŽƚŚĞ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůŽƵŶƚLJůĞŶƚƌŽͲεƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚŵŽŶŝƚŽƌ͕ĞŶĚŝŶŐŽŶDĂLJϮρ͕ϮϬϭϭ͘

# This page is intentionally blank.

# SIP Supplement: Clean Air Act **Section 110(a)(2)(D)**

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards



# Air Quality Division December 3, 2015 – Final

# This page is intentionally blank.

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# Table of Contents

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. ............................ iii

List of Appendices ............................................................................................................ ............................ iii

Completeness Criteria (40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, Section 2.0) .............................................................. iv

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ ..................... 1

2 Section 110(a)(2)(D ) Requirements ........................................................................................... ...... 2

3 Arizona’s NO 2 

# Impact on Other States ............................................................................................. 3

3.1 Current National NO 2 

# Designations .................................................................................... 3

3.2 Current National NO 2 

# Emissions ......................................................................................... 3

4 Significant Deterioration Prevention and Visibility Protection ........................................................ 4

4.1 New Source Review ......................................................................................................... ... 4
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality NSR/PSD Revisions .................. 4 4.1.1

Other Arizona Counties’ NSR/PSD Revisions ...................................................... 5 4.1.2

4.2 Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan .............................................................................................. 5

5 Arizona’s Provisions for Interstate Air Pollution Abatement ........................................................... 6

5.1 Notification to Neighboring States ..................................................................................... 6

5.2 Interstate Transport Violations ........................................................................................... 7

6 Arizona’s NO 2 

# Air Monitoring Network ............................................................................................ 8

6.1 Near-Roadway Monitoring ................................................................................................. 8

6.2 Area-Wide Monitoring ...................................................................................................... .. 8

7 Arizona’s NO X 

# Source Control Measures ....................................................................................... 10

8 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. .................... 11



# List of Appendices

Appendix A: Regional Haze Plan Controls and Cost Effectiveness..............................................................12

Appendix B: 2011 NO X 

# Emissions and Non-Exhaustive List of Source Controls..........................................16



# December 3, 2015 Final iii

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# Completeness Criteria (40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, Section 2.0)

Appendix V, Section 2.1 – Administrative Materials

(a) A formal signed, stamped, and dated letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof (hereafter “the plan”). If electing to submit a paper submission with a copy in electronic version, the submittal letter must verify that the electronic copy provided is an exact duplicate of the paper submission.

See the cover letter for this SIP submission and Enclosure 2 which contains delegation of authority from Misael Cabrera, Director of AD EQ, to Eric Massey, Director of the ADEQ Air Quality Division, authorizing Mr. Massey to perfor m any act the ADEQ Director is authorized to perform under the state air quality statutes, including the submission of SIPs to EPA.

This SIP was submitted online through EPA’s eSIP system; therefore no paper copy was
submitted.



# (b) Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter “document”) in final form. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date.

See cover letter.



# (c) Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan.

Arizona is authorized to adopt and implement SIPs under Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) Sections 49-104, 49-106, 49-404, 49-406, and 49-425. Copies of these statutes are in Enclosure

2.

December 3, 2015 Final iv

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS

(d) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including indication of the changes made (such as redline/strikethrough) to the existing approved plan, where applicable. The submission shall include a copy of the official State regulation/document, signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effect ive date of any regulation/document contained in the submission shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the regulation/document itself; otherwise the State should include a letter signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official indicating the effective date. If the regulation/document provided by the State for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan is a copy of an existing publication, the State subm ission should, whenever possible, include a copy of the publication cover page and table of contents.

Not applicable.



# (e) Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State’s laws and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan.

Proof that ADEQ followed procedural requirements of Arizona State laws and constitution in adopting this plan is located in Enclosure 2.



# (f) Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice.

Proof that ADEQ gave notice of the SIP revision in accordance with A.R.S. Section 49-444 is in Enclosure 2. ADEQ published a notice of this SIP revision in the Arizona Republic newspaper on October 16, 2015, and October 19, 2015. Public notice was also given through ADEQ’s website
and sent to an email subscriber list of inte rested stakeholders on October 16, 2015.



# (g) Certification that public hearing(s) were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State’s laws and constitution, if applicable and consistent with the public hearing requirements in 40 CFR 51.102.

The certification and other documents related to the public hearing are in Enclosure 2. ADEQ held a public hearing on November 17, 2015.

December 3, 2015 Final Page v

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS

(h) Compilation of public comments and the State’s response thereto.

The public comment responsiveness summary is in Enclosure 2.



# Appendix V, Section 2.1 – Technical Support

(a) Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan.

The regulated pollutant is nitrogen dioxide.



# (b) Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/ nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected areas(s).

Not applicable.



# (c) Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the
differences between certain baseli ne levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision.

Not applicable.



# (d) The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. For all requests to redesignate an area to attainment for a national primary ambient air quality standard, under section 107 of the Act, a revision must be submitted to provide for the maintenance of the national primary ambient air quality standards for at least 10 years as required by section
175A of the Act.

Not applicable.

December 3, 2015 Final Page vi

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS

(e) Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, justification of model selections, ambien t monitoring data used, meteorological data used, justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis.

Not applicable.



# (f) Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology.

Not applicable.



# (g) Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/re porting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels.

Not applicable.



# (h) Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice.

Not applicable.



# (i) Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies, or an explanation of why such justifications are not necessary.

No known deviations from EPA policy.

December 3, 2015 Final Page vii

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 1 Introduction

Within three years after the promulgation of a primary or secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or any revision of a NAAQS, Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(1) requires each state to submit to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) an infrastructure state implementation plan (I-SIP) revision that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2) sets the specific content requirements for these infrastructure plans.

This I-SIP supplement is meant to address deficiencies identified by EPA and found in the 2013 nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 

# ) I-SIP submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) after promulgation of the 2010 NO 2 

# NAAQS.

This supplement addresses CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) relating to the transport of Arizona’s air pollution across states and foreign countries, referred to as “interstate and international pollution transport.” The following explanation supports a negative declaration of significant contribution of interstate transport for Arizona’s NO 2 

# emissions to surrounding nonattainment and maintenance areas. Other CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements are satisfied or are expected to be sufficiently addressed through Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan, control measures, near-roadway air monitoring network implementation, and the ongoing NSR program revision.

December 3, 2015 Final Page 1

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 2 Section 110(a)(2)(D) Requirements

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that state implementation plans (SIPs) contain adequate provisions—

(i)(I) prohibiting any source or type of emission activity from contributing significantly to any other state’s nonattainment of a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) (also known as “prong 1”), or from interfering with maintenance of such NAAQS (“prong 2”),

(i)(II) prohibiting any source or emission activity from interfering with any other state’s ability to comply with prevention of significant deterioration of air quality (“prong 3”) or from protecting visibility (“prong 4”), and

(ii) ensuring compliance with requirements of interstate and international pollution abatement
as set forth in CAA sections 115 and 126.

Within this document, see Arizona’s provisions for:

x CAA § 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) in section 3

x CAA § 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) in section 4

x CAA § 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) in section 5

x Arizona’s nitrogen dioxide air monitoring network in section 6

x Arizona’s nitrogen oxides source control measures in section 7

December 3, 2015 Final Page 2

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 3 Arizona’s NO 2 

# Impact on Other States

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires that infrastructure state implementation plans (I-SIPs) contain adequate provisions prohibiting that any source or other type of emissions activity within Arizona from emitting NO 2 

# in amounts that will contribute significantly to a
nonattainment area or interfere with the maintenance of an area in another state.

As discussed below, current national NO 2 

# area designations and emissions levels indicate that there is no potential for Arizona’s NO 2 

# emissions to significantly impact another state’s
nonattainment or maintenance area. Should NO 2 

# nonattainment or maintenance areas be designated in the future, Arizona’s NO 2 

# air monitoring network and nitrogen oxides source control measures are in place (see sections 6-7).



# 3.1 Current National NO 2 

# Designations

The State of Arizona and the rest of the nation are designated as “unclassifiable/attainment”
for the 2010 NO 2 

# NAAQS based on EPA’s assertion that “available information did not indicate that the air quality in [the area exceeded] the 2010 NO 2 

# NAAQS.” 1 

# Therefore, there are no nonattainment or maintenance areas in the nation that Arizona could significantly contribute to
for the 2010 NO 2 

# standards.



# 3.2 Current National NO 2 

# Emissions

The 2010 NO 2 

# primary one-hour standard is set at 100 parts per billion (ppb). The primary and secondary annual standard is 53 ppb. 2



# Based on the most recent available NO 2 

# Design Value Report 3 

# , Arizona’s 2013 one-hour design values range from 37-64 ppb, and current annual design values range from 8-25 ppb (Table 5a and Table 5b). No violating counties or monitor sites are identified by EPA based on 2013 annual design values (Table 4a and Table 5a). Additionally, there are no violating counties identified for the 2011-2013 one-hour design values and no violating monitor sites identified based on the 2013 one-hour design values (Table 4b and Table 5b). While historically some monitor sites have exceeded the NAAQS, none have since 2011 (Table 6a and Table 6b).

Arizona’s network of monitors show annual and one-hour NO 2 

# levels are below the 2010 standards, and thus, there is no potential for NO 2 

# interstate transport impact.

1 

# 77 Fed. Reg. 9532 (February 17, 2012).

2 

# See EPA’s table of current NAAQS here: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/criteria.html

3 

# EPA Design Values Reports, Air Trends, available at: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html (Accessed 7/29/15).



# December 3, 2015 Final Page 3

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 4 Significant Deterioration Prevention and Visibility

Protection

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires infrastructure state implementation plans (I-SIPs) contain adequate provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity within Arizona from emitting nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 

# ) in amounts that will interfere with another state’s prevention of significant deterioration and protection of visibility.

In Arizona, the prevention of significant deterioration of designated attainment and unclassified areas is mandated by the state’s New Source Review (NSR) program. As part of NSR, ADEQ’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules require any major source that could contribute emissions that would impact an area’s NAAQS compliance be subject to specific permitting and control measures. ADEQ’s PSD program therefore controls Arizona’s sources in order to lessen the probability of emissions transport to other states that are preventing significant deterioration of their own attainment or classified areas.

Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan provides visibility protection in Arizona, in turn maintaining surrounding states’ visibility. Within Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan, sources emitting nitrogen oxides (NO X 

# ), including NO 2 

# , are subject to Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) controls to
limit emissions.

The following sections provide more informat ion on Arizona’s prevention of significant deterioration and visibility protection provisions.



# 4.1 New Source Review

Currently ADEQ’s SIP-approved PSD program within its NSR extends to areas wherein ADEQ has jurisdiction, including Pinal County. Maricopa and Pima Counties do not have SIP-approved PSD programs and instead have EPA’s Federal PSD program.



# Arizona Department of Environmental Quality NSR/PSD 4.1.1
Revisions

In 2012 ADEQ submitted a SIP update to the state’s NSR program for major and minor sources in both attainment and nonattainment areas. On November 2, 2015, EPA issued a final rule of limited approval/limited disapproval, citing defi ciencies but generally determining the updates were an overall strengthening of Arizona’s NSR program. 4 

# ADEQ is currently working with EPA on revising its NSR program and plans to submit an updated version for approval in 2016.

The 2016 NSR revisions will bring the State of Arizo na’s SIP for areas under ADEQ’s jurisdiction into compliance with the PSD requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), as well as CAA

4 

# 80 FR 67319 (November 2, 2015).



# December 3, 2015 Final Page 4

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS

sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110( a)(2)(D)(ii), and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 51, Subpart I “Review of New Sources and Modifications.”



# Other Arizona Counties’ NSR/PSD Revisions 4.1.2

The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (M CAQD) is currently revising its NSR program. MCAQD began a public comment period for NSR-related rules on July 31, 2015. MCAQD is updating its NSR program rules in order to fill the “SIP gap” between NSR rules set forth in the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations and the rules that have been approved by EPA into the Maricopa County portion of the Arizona SIP.

Pima Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) is currently working on an NSR rule package that will adopt a similar NSR/PSD program to ADEQ’s.

Pinal County Air Quality Control District (PCAQCD) is in the preliminary stages of drafting its NSR/PSD program updates. As part of this proc ess, PCAQCD will be reviewing Maricopa’s and ADEQ’s updated and proposed NSR/PSD rules.



# 4.2 Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan

The visibility requirement of CAA section 110( a)(2)(D) encompa sses Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan, in accordance with EPA’s 1999 Regional Haze Rule, which outlines the requirements for states to follow in order to address visibility impairment in Class I areas 5 

# caused by nitrogen oxides (NO X 

# ), sulfur oxides (SO X 

# ), and particulate matter (PM) emitters.

Arizona’s current Regional Haze Plan is a combination of requirements found in Arizona’s SIP, Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs), and subsequent SIP revisions that collectively create the state’s strategy for achieving it s 2018 Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for visibility protection. ADEQ has drafted its Five-Year Regional Haze Progress Report and is currently in the first phase of public process with federal land managers. ADEQ provided public notice of the report on September 28, 2015, and plans to submit to EPA in early 2016.

Under the Regional Haze Rule, Arizona’s NO X 

# -emitting sources are subject to BART and are now or will be controlled in the near future by SIPs or FIPs. See Appendix A for a list of sources subject to BART and the associated SIP or FIP revision implementing controls.

5 

# Class 1 federal lands include areas such as national parks, national wilderness areas, and national monuments.



# December 3, 2015 Final Page 5

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 5 Arizona’s Provisions for Interstate Air Pollution

Abatement

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) mandates that each plan contain adequate provisions to ensure compliance with applicab le requirements of CAA sections 115 and 126.

CAA section 115 sets the process and requirements for when a foreign country submits evidence to the Administrator showing that emis sions from a state are endangering the public health or welfare in the foreign country. When the Administrator deems a state is in fact contributing to air pollution in another country, he/she will give a formal notification to the Governor of the responsible state and the state must revise its SIP. Currently the requirements of CAA section 115 do not apply to Arizona, because there are no pending actions from other countries against the state.

The applicability of CAA section 126 to Arizona is outlined below in sections 5.1 – 5.2.



# 5.1 Notification to Neighboring States

CAA section 126(a) requires notification to affected, nearby states of major proposed new or modified sources. Arizona’s provisions are with in its Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. As mentioned in section 4, on November 2, 2015, EPA issued a final rule of limited approval/limited disapproval of ADEQ’s NSR program updates. In that action, EPA approved Arizona’s PSD-related rules at section R18-2-402 “General” into Arizona’s SIP, which helps the state comply with CAA section 126(a) and outlines ADEQ’s responsibility to send a copy of the required public notice for a major proposed new or modified source to the Administrator and to “the officials and agencies having cognizance over the location where the proposed major source or major alteration would occur.” 6 

# These rules for notice are consistent with EPA’s requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iv) “Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality.”

In a July 14, 2015 action for Arizona’s Ozone an d Lead infrastructure SIPs submittals, EPA found that area’s under ADEQ’s jurisdiction, including Pinal County, meet the requirements of CAA section 126(a), citing ADEQ’s authorit y over Pinal County’s PSD program. 7 

# Maricopa and Pima Counties are covered by EPA’s Federal PSD program.

6 

# See R18-2-402, Subsection I.

7 

# 80 FR 40905 (July 14, 2015).



# December 3, 2015 Final Page 6

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 5.2 Interstate Transport Violations

Clean Air Act sections 126(b) and (c), which pertain to petitions by affected states to EPA regarding sources violating the provisions of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), do not apply to Arizona because there are no petitions from other states against Arizona.

December 3, 2015 Final Page 7

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 6 Arizona’s NO 2 

# Air Monitoring Network

The 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 

# ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established the requirement for a NO 2 

# air monitoring network at locations where maximum NO 2 

# levels are expected to occur, including within 50 meters of major roadways. 8 

# EPA acknowledges that high

NO 2 

# concentrations drop off considerably as dist ance from the roadway increases, so emissions impact is localized, thus posing no potential for transport that would contribute significantly to
a nonattainment area or interfere with the maintenance of the NO 2 

# standards in another state.



# 6.1 Near-Roadway Monitoring

In order to comply with the 2010 NO 2 

# NAAQS, two metro areas in Arizona (Phoenix and Tucson) must meet the new near-roadway NO 2 

# air monitoring network deadlines set forth in 78 Fed. Reg. 16184 (March 14, 2013).

Phoenix’s Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) popula tion is greater than 2.5 million, and is thus required to have two near-roadway monitors. 9 

# Phoenix’s first near-roadway NO 2 

# monitor, the “Diablo” site, was activated in February 2014 after being approved by the EPA in 2013. 10 

# As of June 2015, Maricopa County Air Quality Division ’s second near-road monitoring site, “ThirtyThird,” is near completion. 11



# The Tucson metro area’s population is greater than 500,000 but less than 1,000,000 and thus requires one near-roadway monitor. Pima Department of Environmental Quality is included inphase three of near-roadway monitor implementation and will not be required to install a nearroadway station until 2017. 12



# 6.2 Area-Wide Monitoring

According to ADEQ’s 2015 Air Monitoring Network Plan, 13 

# ADEQ currently operates two NO 2 

# monitors throughout the state of Arizona located at the JLG Supersite (Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Station) and Alamo Lake (Special Purpose Monitor). 14

8 

# 75 Fed. Reg. 6474, 6474 (February 9, 2010).

9 

# 78 Fed. Reg. 16184, 16185 (March 14, 2013).

10 

# Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 2013 Air Monitoring Final Network Plan, December 8, 2014, available

at: http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/mon itoring/docs/pdf/2013_Network_Plan.pdf (Accessed 7/29/15).

11 

# Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 2014 Air Monitoring Network Plan, available at: http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/monitoring/docs/pdf/2014_Network_Plan.pdf (Accessed 9/28/15).

12 

# 78 Fed. Reg. 16184, 16186 (March 14, 2013).

13 

# Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, State of Arizona Air Monitoring Network Plan for the Year 2015

, July 1, 2015, available at: http://www.azdeq.gov/function/forms/dow nload/air_monitoring_network_plan2015.pdf (Accessed 9/28/15).

14 

# The Alamo Lake NO 2 

# Special Purpose Monitor will be removed in June 2016.



# December 3, 2015 Final Page 8

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS

The Phoenix metropolitan area’s population exceeds 1,000,000 people and therefore is the only area in the state required to operate at least one area-wide NO 2 

# monitor. 15 

# Maricopa County Air Quality Division currently operates four area-wide NO 2 

# monitors at the Buckeye, Central Phoenix, Greenwood, 16 

# and West Phoenix monitoring sites within the Phoenix metropolitan

area. 17



# There are no minimum requirements for the number of NO 2 

# monitoring sites in Pima County. 18


# However, Pima County operates area-wide NO 2 

# monitors at the 22 nd 

# St. and Craycroft and the
Children’s Park sites. 19



# Should NO 2 

# transport impacts be an issue in the future, Arizona has a comprehensive NO 2 

# monitoring network that will help measure and assess emissions transport.

15 

# 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4. 3, “Nitrogen Dioxide Design Criteria.”

16 

# Maricopa County’s Greenwood NO2 monitor is also part of EPA’s Susceptible and Vulnerable Populations NO2 monitoring system. See more: http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/svpop.html

. 17 

# Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 2014 Air Monitoring Network Plan, available at: http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/monitoring/docs/pdf/2014_Network_Plan.pdf (Accessed 9/28/15).

18 

# 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, Section 4. 3, “Nitrogen Dioxide Design Criteria.”

19 

# Pima County Department of Environmental Quality, 2014 Ambient Air Monitoring Five Year Network Assessment
and Plan , available at: http://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Environmental%20Quality/Air/Air%20Mon itoring/2015NetworkReview.pdf (Accessed 9/28/15).



# December 3, 2015 Final Page 9

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 7 Arizona’s NO X 

# Source Control Measures

In addition to Arizona’s nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 

# ) air monitoring network, the state over the years has adopted and implemented SIP provisions, in particular for ozone and PM 2.5 

# , which cover nitrogen oxides (NO X 

# ) emitting sources and source categories. Since NO 2 

# is part of the NO X 

# family, these NO X 

# controls will help mitigate interstate transport of emissions should
determination of new NO 2 

# nonattainment or maintenance areas occur.

Sources of NO X 

# in Arizona were taken from the 2011 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data (v.2). The majority of NO X 

# point sources in Arizona come from electrical generating units (EGU) and airports. Major non-point sources of NO X 

# originate from fires, particularly wildfires. The largest source of NO X 

# in Arizona are mobile sources.

Please see Appendix B for a non-exhaustive list of controls for those NO X 

# sources retrieved from
the 2011 NEI.

December 3, 2015 Final Page 10

# Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D) SIP Revision – 2010 NO2 NAAQS



# 8 Conclusion

Currently there are no nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 

# ) nonattainment or maintenance areas in the nation, and NO 2 

# Design Values show that each state is reporting NO 2 

# emission levels below the 2010 NAAQS. Therefore ADEQ finds it reasonable to believe Arizona’s NO 2 

# emissions are not contributing to the nonattainment or maintenance of an area in another state, and there is no potential for interstate pollution impact.

ADEQ is currently revising its NSR program an d plans to submit in 2016, which will provide provisions to protect a surrounding state’s ability to prevent significant deterioration in an
attainment or unclassified area. Arizona’s PSD-re lated rules require the notification to nearby states of major proposed new or modified sources. These rules apply to areas under ADEQ’s jurisdiction, including Pinal County. Major proposed new or modified NO 2 

# sources within Maricopa and Pima Counties are subject to EPA’s Federal PSD program. These provisions maintain the prevention of significant deterioration in surrounding states and comply with PSD requirements in CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Arizona’s requirements in its Regional Haze Plan protect visibility in Arizona as well as surrounding states.

Additional NO X 

# controls exist for Arizona’s primary emit ters, EGUs and airports. These controls help limit NO 2 

# , ozone, and PM 2.5 

# pollution. Should new NO 2 

# nonattainment or maintenance areas be identified, Arizona has the pertinent source controls in place. Arizona county air departments are also working on updating the state’s NO 2 

# air monitoring network, ensuring
there will be air monitors near sources where NO 2 

# emissions are the highest, especially near roadways. Phoenix and Tucson will be installing new roadway air monitors and should have the
last of them established near 2017.

All of the above supports a finding that Arizona’ s SIP complies with the interstate air pollution transport requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D).

December 3, 2015 Final Page 11AppendixǣRegional Haze Plan Controls and Cost Effectiveness1ϮFacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIP orFIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance Datefor NOx ControlsAEPCOApacheStationUnit 1(SIP)- Emissions limit of 0.056lb/MMBtu based appliedto either: 1) the boilerwhen operating alone, or2)the boiler and simplecycle turbine whenoperated in combinedcycle mode-Fuel Switchingto pipelinenatural Gas-In 2015, the emissionslimit revised to 0.10lb/MMBtu based ondetermination that theprior emissions limit wasunachievableEPA SIP approval77 FR 72511 (Dec.5, 2012) andEmissions limitrevisions approval80 FR 19220(April10, 2015)N/AiiUnit 1, 2 &3:12/5/2017Unit 2 & 3(FIP)- Emissions limit of 0.070lb/MMBtu determined asan average of the twounits, based on a rolling30-boiler-operating-dayaverage-Achievable throughupgrades to existingscrubbers andelectrostaticprecipitatorsIn 2015, SIP revision approvedwithfollowing:-Unit 2: conversion fromprimary coal-fired unit toone that combustspipeline-quality naturalgas, and-Unit 3: remain as coalfired unit and retrofittedwith SNCRFIP Promulgation77 FR 72514 (Dec.5, 2012) andSIP Approval80 FR 19220 (April10, 2015)N/AiiϭϯFacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIPor FIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance Datefor NOx ControlsAPSCholla StationUnits 2, 3,& 4(FIP)- Emissions limit of 0.055lb/MMBtu determinedas an average of thethree units, based on arolling 30-boileroperating-day averageA BART reassessment iscurrentlytaking placefor the Cholla facility.FIPPromulgated77 FR 72514(Dec. 5, 2012)$3,114-$3,472for all unitsiii12/5/2017SRPCoronadoStationUnits 1 &2(FIP)- Emissions limit of 0.065lb/MMBtudeterminedas an average of thetwo units, based on arolling 30-boileroperating-day averageOn March 31, 2015, EPA published aNPRM-Proposed:Unit 1: emissions rate of 0.065lb/MMbtu, which corresponds with ascenario consisting of low-load cyclingoperations (with steam reheat) and 3cold startups within a 30-day period,to be a reasonable estimate ofaverage SCR performanceUnit 2: emissions limit would remainat the level prescribed in a consentdecree of 0.080 lb/MMBtu based on a30-BOD basisFIPPromulgated77 FR 72514(Dec. 5, 2012)andNPRM forrevisions toNOx standard(March31,2015)$2,405 for unit1iii12/5/2017ϭκFacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIPor FIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance DateFor NOx ControlsFreeportMcMoranMiamiSmelter(FIP)- Annual emissions limitof 40 tpy of NOxemissions from BARTeligible units, which isconsistent with currentemissionsFIPPromulgated-79FR 52420(September 3,2014)Not applicable,no controltechnologyinstalled9/2/2016ASARCOHaydenSmelter(FIP)Annual emissions limit of40 tpy of NOx emissionsapplied to the convertersand anode furnacesFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(September 3,2014)Not applicable,no controltechnologyinstalled9/4/2013Sundt StationUnit 4(FIP)- Emission limit of 0.36lb/MMBtu, which isconsistent with the useof SNCR with theexisting LNBFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(September 3,2014)$3,222iv9/4/2017Nelson LimePlantKiln 1 &2(FIP)- Kiln 1: Emission limit of3.80 lb/ton of lime on a12-month rollingaverage, consistentwith use of LNB andSNCR- Kiln 2: emission limit of2.61 lb/ton on a 30-dayrolling average,consistent with useofLNB and SNCRFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(September 3,2014)$807-$817 forboth kilnsiv9/4/2017ϭρFacilitySourcesEmissions Limits/Controltechnology of original SIPor FIPSubsequent RevisionActionsCostEffectivenessDetermination(average $/ton)iCompliance Datefor NOx ControlsPhoenixCementCompanyClarkdaleKiln 4(FIP)2.12 lb/ton based on a 30-day rolling average,consistent with use ofSNCRFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(Sept. 3, 2014)$1,14212/31/2018CalPortlandCementRillitoKiln 4(FIP)2.67 lb/ton based on a 30-day rolling average,consistent with use ofSNCRFIPPromulgated79 FR 52420(Sept. 3, 2014)$1,04712/31/2018iCost-effectiveness determination is EPA’sBART analysis for the Arizona Regional HazeFederal Implementation Plan unless otherwise notediiCost-effectiveness determination is not available for Arizona SIP revision related to AEPCOiiiU.S. EPA, Arizona Regional Haze Technical Support Document, July 2012iv79 FR 9318, February 18, 2014

#  ǣ ʹͲͳͳ    Ǧ    

NEI Sector Emissions (TPY) Statewide Controls Maricopa County Controls Federal Controls
Biogenics Ͳ Vegetation and Soil 14234.169

Fires Total 21577.14768 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Ͳ Unlawful
Open Burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 1501 through 1515 Forest and Range
Management Burns Rule 314 Ͳ Open Outdoor Fires and Indoor Fireplaces (Commercial/Institution)

Agricultual Field Burning 265.8575814

Prescribed 1079.060345

Wildfires 20232.22975

Comm/Institutional Fuel Combustion T ota l 1407.607628 Rule 323 Ͳ Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/ Institutional
Sources; Rule 324 Ͳ Stationary Internal

Combustion Engines Various NSPS and NESHAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Biomass 169.913893

Coal 0.033

Natural Gas 1223.298954

Oil 12.4752333

Other 1.886548

EGU Fuel Combustion Total 35431.39268 Incorporation of NSPS and

NESHAP generally in A.A.C. Title
18, Chapter 2, Ariticle 9 and 11,

A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 903

Ͳ NS PS Fossil

Fuel generators, various

Standards of Performance for
Existing sources, in A.A.C. Title
18, Chapter 2, Article 7 including A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 703 Standards of Performance for
Existing fossil

Ͳ fuel fired EGUs ;
R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 1605 Regional haze

rules ( See Appendix C ), (backstop) State Standards of

Performance for Me rcury (including boiler tune

Ͳ ups) at

A.A.C. R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 734 Rule 322 Ͳ Power Plant Operations; Rule

324 Ͳ Stationary Internal Combustion
Engines Regional Haze FIPs (See Appendix C), 40 CFR 63 Subpart
UUUUU, MATs rule Ͳ boiler tune

Ͳ
ups, Various NSPS & NESHAP

Biomass 210.961

Coal 32752.29

Natural Gas 2401.903793

Oil 65.43994248

Other 0.79794

Industrial Boilers Fuel Combustion Total 6558.291178 Incorporation of NSPS in A. A.C.

Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 9 ;
various NSR/PSD statutes and

rules ; Voluntary permit operating limitations to avoid higher permitting thresholds, if applicable; various other

standards for existing sources in

Article 7, including R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 719

Standards of Performance for
Existing Stationary Rotating Machinery Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa C ounty
Rule 360 ; NSR/PSD in MC Rule 240 Various NSPS and NESHAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Biomass 0.007

Coal 2162.13

Natural Gas 2292.292674

Oil 2028.010466

Other 75.851038

Residential Fuel Combustion Total 2395.421425 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Unlawful
Open Burning Rule 318 Ͳ Approval of Residential Woodburning Devices, Ordinance P

Ͳ 26 Ͳ Residential Woodburning Restriction, Incorporation of NS PS in Mar icopa County

Rule 360 40 CFR 60 Subparts AAA; RRRR,
QQQQ Ͳ NSPS for New Residential

Woood Heaters

Natural Gas 1733.00072

Oil 1.408546979

Other 376.339989

Wood 284.6721686

1 ςNEI Sector Emissions (TPY) Statewide Controls Maricopa County Controls Federal Controls

Industrial Processes Total 6006.324768 Incorporation of NSPS in A.A.C.

Title 18, Chapter 2, Ariticle 9 ;
various other standards for
existing sources in Article 7, including R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 719 Standards

of Performance for Existing Stationary Rotating Machinery and R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 705 Existing Source

Performance Standards,

Portland Cement Rule 324

Ͳ Stationary Internal Combustion
Engines Various NS PS and NES HAP (including RICE engine regulations)

Cement Manufacturing 2358.03526

Chemical Manufacturing 137.5846
Mining 217.05394

Non

Ͳ ferrous metals 327.9875

Ferrous Metals &Oil and Gas Production & Pulp and
Paper & Storage and Transfer 52.17

Industrial Ͳ not elsewhere classified 2913.493468

Waste Disposal 508.365094 A.R.S. § 49

Ͳ 501 Unlawful open burning, R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 602 Ͳ Unlawful
Open Burning, Incorporation of NSPS in Maricopa C ounty
Rule 360

, Incinerators, Burn

Ͳ off Ovens, and

Crematories in MC Rule 313 ; Open

Outdoor Fires and Indoor Fireplaces at
Commercial and Institutional MC Rule 314 ; Hospital/Medial/Infectious Waste

Incinerators MC Rule 316 ; (Municipal Solid

Landfills MC Rule 321 )

Solvent 1.26692

Mobile

Aircraft 2913.493468 40 CFR Part 87.1 to 87.64 Ͳ Control of P ollution for A ircraft

and Aircraft Engines

Locomotives 24124.48098 40 CFR Part 92.1 to 92.1108 Ͳ Control of Air Pollution from

Locomotives

Non

Ͳ road equipment Total 29796.32751 R

Ͳ 18

Ͳ 802 through 805,

Emissions from (non

Ͳ road)

mobile sources Tier 3 & Tier 4, 40 CFR part 89 &

1039 and other emission and

control requirements

Diesel 24432.29457

Gasoline 3821.023603

Other 1543.009337

On

Ͳ Ro ad Total 134015.8149 R18

Ͳ 2

Ͳ 1001 th rough 1031,

Vehicle Emissions Inspection

and Maintanence Program,

A.R.S 49

Ͳ 541

Ͳ 558.01

, Annual

Emissions Inspection of Motor

Vehicles in Area A & B
, A.R.S.

49

Ͳ 581

Ͳ 584, Ͳ 587 and 49

Ͳ 588 through Ͳ 593 Travel Reduction
Program in Area A
, A.R.S 49

Ͳ 413 Goal to provide al te rnative

fuel statewide network ; A.R.S

49

Ͳ 412 ADEQ to require exemption justifications for non

Ͳ alt fuel gov't vehicles Ordinance P

Ͳ 21 Ͳ Vehicle Idling Restriction (Diesel) Tier 2 emissions standards (current), Tier 3 (start in 2017) Ͳ 40 CFR Part 86 Control of

Emissions from New and In

Ͳ use Highway Vehicles an d Engines;

cont rol of hazardous air pollutants from mobile sources; Exhaust and evaporative

emission standards for light

Ͳ duty

vehicles and trucks, heavy duty

diesel fuel sulfur control
requirements; Compliance

Assurance Program 2000 for

standard durability; and other

emission and control
requirements

Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles 67596.86623

Diesel Light Duty Vehicles 2790.250397

non

Ͳ Diesel Heavy Du ty Vehic les 1722.518502

non

Ͳ Diesel Light Duty Vehicles 61906.17974

*Beginning in 2015, Maricopa County Air Quality Department intends to revise rules 322, 323, 324, related to NOx emissions, to make them more stringent. These rule revisions should be implemented by 2017. For more information on these rulemakings: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulation s/aq/pdf/meetingsAQEROPItems_2015

Ͳ 06

Ͳ 05.pdf

**The above listed rules and statutes are currently enforced in Arizona, but not all of them are necessarily updated into or approved into the SIP. ADEQ is not requesting EPA action on any of the
above listed rules and statutes.

ϭϳ

# This page is intentionally blank.

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act **Section 110(a)(2)(K)**

Air Quality Division
'HFHPEHU , 2015 )LQDO

# This page is intentionally blank.

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# Table of Contents

Table of Co ntents ............................................................................................................. ............................ iii

Completeness Criteria (40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, Section 2.0) .............................................................. iv

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ ..................... 1

1.1 Affected SIP Revisions .................................................................................................... ..... 1

1.2 Section 110(a)(2)(K) Requirements..................................................................................... 1

2 Modeling for Plan Development ............................................................................................... ....... 3

2.1 ADEQ and MPO Authority ................................................................................................... 3

2.2 County Air Pollution Control Department Authority .......................................................... 4

3 Modeling for Preconstruction Permits ........................................................................................ .... 7

3.1 State Authority ........................................................................................................... ......... 7

3.1.1 New Minor Sources and Minor Modifications ................................................... 7

3.1.2 New Major Sources and Major Modifications to Existing Major Sources .......... 8

3.2 County Authority........................................................................................................... .... 10

4 General Authority to Conduct Modeling a nd Submit Data to Administrator ................................ 11

Appendix A – Arizona Revised Statutes Section 49-104(A)(3) and (B)(1) ................................................... 13



# iii

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# Completeness Criteria (40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, Section 2.0)

Appendix V Section 2.1 - Administrative Materials

(a) A formal signed, stamped, and dated letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof (hereafter “the plan”). If electing to submit a paper submission with a copy in electronic version, the submittal letter must verify that the electronic copy provided is an exact duplicate of the paper submission.

See the cover letter for this SIP submission and Enclosure 2, which contains delegation of authority from Misael Cabrera, Director of AD EQ, to Eric Massey, Director of the ADEQ Air Quality Division, authorizing Mr. Massey to perfor m any act the ADEQ Director is authorized to perform under the state air quality statutes, including the submission of SIPs to EPA.



# (b) Evidence that the State has adop ted the plan in th e State code or body of regulations; or issued th e permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter “document”) in final form. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date.

See cover letter.



# (c) Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan.

Arizona is authorized to adopt and implement SIPs under Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) Sections 49-104, 49-106, 49-404, 49-406 and 49-425. Copies of these statutes are in Enclosure

2.

iv

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

(d) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including indication of the changes made (such as redline/strikethrough) to the existing approved plan, where applicable. The submission shall include a copy of the official State regulation/document, signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effect ive date of any regulation/document contained in the submission shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the regulation/document itself; otherwise the State should include a letter signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official indicating the effective date. If the regulation/document provided by the State for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan is a copy of an existing publication, the State subm ission should, whenever possible, include a copy of the publication cover page and table of contents.

A certified copy of A.R.S. Sect ion 49-104(A)(3) and (B)(1) to be approved into the SIP is in Appendix A.



# (e) Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State’s laws and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan.

Proof that ADEQ followed procedural requirements of Arizona state laws and constitution in adopting this plan is in Enclosure 2.



# (f) Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice.

Proof that ADEQ gave notice of the SIP Revision in accordance with A.R.S. Section 49-444 is in Enclosure 2. ADEQ published a notice of this SIP revision in the Arizona Republic newspaper on October 16, 2015, and October 19, 2015. Public notice was also given through ADEQ’s website and sent to an email subscriber list of interested stakeholders on October 16, 2015.



# (g) Certification that public hearing(s) were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State’s laws and constitution, if applicable and consistent with the public hearing requirements in 40 CFR 51.102.

The certification and other documents related to the public hearing are in Enclosure 2. ADEQ held a public hearing on November 17, 2015.

v

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

(h) Compilation of public comments and the State’s response thereto.

The public comment responsiveness summary is in Enclosure 2.



# Appendix V Section 2.1 - Technical Support

(a) Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan.

This revision applies to all previous and future National Ambient Air Quality Standards for all criteria pollutants.



# (b) Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/ nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected areas(s).

Not applicable.



# (c) Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the
differences between certain baseli ne levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision.

Not applicable.



# (d) The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. For all requests to redesignate an area to attainment for a national primary ambient air quality standard, under section 107 of the Act, a revision must be submitted to provide for the maintenance of the national primary ambient air quality standards for at least 10 years as required by section
175A of the Act.

Not applicable.

vi

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

(e) Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, justification of model selections, ambien t monitoring data used, meteorological data used, justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis.

Not applicable.



# (f) Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology.

Not applicable.



# (g) Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/re porting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels.

Not applicable.



# (h) Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice.

Not applicable.



# (i) Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies, or an explanation of why such justifications are not necessary.

No known deviations from EPA policy.

vii

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# 1 Introduction

1.1 Affected SIP Revisions

Within three years after the promulgation of a primary or secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or any revision of a NAAQS, Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(1) requires each state to submit to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) an infrastructure state implementation plan (I-SIP) revision that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2) sets the specific content requirements for these infrastructure plans.

On November 5, 2012, EPA approved in part and disapproved in part infrastructure SIPs the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted for the 1997 8-hour ozone and
1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 

# NAAQS. 1 

# On July 14, 2015, EPA partially approved and partially disapproved ADEQ’s infrastructure SIP submissions for the new 2008 lead and 2008 ozone
NAAQS. 2 

# With respect to CAA section 110(a)(2)(K), EPA disapproved the submissions because ADEQ, Pinal, Pima, and Maricopa counties did not submit adequate provisions or a narrative that explained how existing state and county laws satisfy requirements related to air quality modeling and submission of air quality modeling data to the Administrator.

This submittal explaining how Arizona complies with CAA section 110(a)(2)(K) applies to the above infrastructure SIPs, as well as any infras tructure SIPs ADEQ may submit in the future.



# 1.2 Section 110(a)(2)( K) Requirements

CAA section 110(a)(2)(K) requires that SIPs provide for—

(i) the performance of such air quality modeling as the Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a national ambient air quality standard, and

(ii) the submission, upon request, of data related to such air quality modeling to the
Administrator.

Modeling “for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of” criteria pollutants is required in two contexts relevant to CAA section 110—

1 

# 77 FR 66398 (November 5, 2012).

2 

# 80 FR 40906 (July 14, 2015).



# 1

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

1. Developing plans designed to assure that all areas of the state either already meet or will attain the National Ambient Air Qual ity Standards (NAAQS) and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements. 3



# 2. Issuing preconstruction permits designed to assure that a new source does not cause or contribute to a NAAQS violation. 4



# EPA guidance recommends that, at a minimum, states identify the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide state and local air agenci es the authority to perform the above actions, along with a narrative of how the provisions meet the requirements above. 5 

# The following discussion demonstrates how Arizona statutes and rules establish the necessary modeling authority for state and local agencies charged with meeting the planning (Section 2) and permitting (Section 3) responsibilities of the Clea n Air Act. Finally, it describes general grants of authority to ADEQ that also encompass the ability to conduct modeling (Section 4).

3 

# See CAA §§ 110(a)(1), (a)(2)(I), (a)(2)(K); 163; 172(a)(1) and (6)

4 

# See CAA §§ 110(a)(2)(C); 165

5 

# 2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance, pg. 55, accessed here: http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/sipstatus/docs/Guidance_on_Infrastructure_SIP_Elements_Multipollutant_FINA L_Sept_2013.pdf



# 2

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# 2 Modeling for Plan Development

The Arizona legislature has vested responsibilit y for the development of state implementation plans (SIPs) and, thus, primary authority to conduct modeling connected with plan development in ADEQ and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs).

ADEQ’s and the MPOs’ plan development modeling responsibilities extend to areas subject to the jurisdiction of county air pollution control departments (APCDs). The legislature has not given direct responsibility for plan development modeling to the APCDs but has authorized ADEQ and the MPOs to delegate that responsibility to the counties.



# 2.1 ADEQ and MPO Authority

Section 49-406(A) and (B), Arizona Revised St atutes (A.R.S.), divides responsibility for developing SIPs for certain nonattainment and maintenance plans as follows:

A. For any ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate nonattainment or maintenance area the governor shall certify the metropolitan planning organization [MPO] 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 [ADEQ] shall be certified as the agency responsible for development of a nonattainment or maintenance area plan for that area.

Section 49-404 gives ADEQ responsibility for the development of other SIPs:

A. The director shall maintain a state implementation plan that provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforc ement 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 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. 6



# (Emphasis added.)

6 

# ADEQ has not adopted rules establishing SIP adoption or revision procedures under subsection (B), so subsection (C) remains operative.



# 3

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

Thus, in ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter nonattainment and maintenance areas with MPOs, the MPOs have responsibility for developing ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter nonattainment and maintenance plans under section 49-406(A). 7 

# ADEQ has responsibility for the development of all other SIPs under sections 49-406(B) and 49-404.

State law defines a SIP as “the accumulated record of enforceable air pollution control measures, programs, and plans adopted by the director and submitted to the administrator pursuant to 42 United States Code section 7410.” 8



# The authority to develop a SIP necessarily encompasses the authority to conduct modeling and to submit modeling results to EPA. 9 

# Without the authority to conduct modeling, ADEQ and the MPOs could not develop SIPs meeting the requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act “in conformity with federal regulations and guidelines promulgated by the administrator,” as directed by the legislature. In addition to the explicit requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) itself, numerous provisions of section 110 and requiremen ts cross-referenced in section 110 implicitly require modeling to determine whether the NAAQS will be attained. 10



# In addition, as discussed in greater detail in the following section of this document, A.R.S. sections 49-406(C)-(F) provide for the adoption of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) for the division of plan development responsibilities am ong state, regional, and local agencies. Section 49-406(F)(9) requires the MOA to address the “[r]esponsibility for conducting air quality modeling.” Thus, the Arizona legislature has sp ecifically recognized that SIP development necessarily entails the ability to perform modeling.

Therefore, ADEQ and the MPOs have the authority to conduct modeling and submit the results to EPA required by section 110(a)(2)(K). The joint authority of ADEQ and the MPOs extends to all areas of the state, including areas subject to the APCDs.



# 2.2 County Air Pollution Cont rol Department Authority

The primary role of APCDs is to develop and enforce control requirements, including permit programs, for stationary sources that may be included in a SIP, as well as other control requirements required by state or federal law. 11 

# In Arizona, the APCDs are the Pinal County Air

7 

# In Arizona, the relevant MPOs are Maricopa Association of Governments, Pima Association of Governments, and Sun Corridor Metropolitan Planning Organization (Pinal County). The MPO plans are submitted to ADEQ, which
then submits them to the Administrator.

8 

# See A.R.S. § 49-401.01(35) “Definitions.”

9 

# See Ethridge v. Arizona State Bd. of Nursing , 165 Ariz. 97, 105 (Ct. App. 1989) (state agency has authority that “may be reasonably implied from the statutory scheme so as to carry out the purpose and intent of the legislative mandate.”)

10 

# See, e.g., CAA §§ 110(a)(1), 110(a)(2)(A), 172(c)(1).

11 

# See A.R.S. §§ 49-479, 49-480, 49-510 to 514. Sect ion 3 addresses the authority of the APCDs to conduct modeling in connection with permit programs adopted under these authorities. The division of regulatory, permitting, and enforcement authority between ADEQ and the APCDs is explained in ADEQ’s 2014 NSR SIP Revision Supplement.



# 4

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

Quality Control District, Pima County Departme nt of Environmental Quality, and Maricopa County Air Quality Department.

Although the APCDs thus do not have direct responsibility for conducting modeling in connection with SIP development, that authority may be delegated to the counties.

ADEQ has broad authority to delegate “any functions, powers, or duties,” to local agencies, including APCDs, under A.R.S. section 49-107(A). ADEQ could delegate the responsibility to conduct plan development modeling to the county APCDs under this provision.

Section 49-406(C)-(F), A.R.S., provides another mechanism for assigning modeling responsibility to county APCDs:

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 [MPO], 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 [MPO], 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 co mbination 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 [MPO], 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.

5

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

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 conduc ting air quality modeling. 10. Responsibility for administering and enforcing stationary source
controls. 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.

(Emphasis added.)

Under A.R.S. section 49-406, ADEQ, the relevant MPO, air pollution control department, and department of transportation must enter into a memorandum of agreement. The memorandum must address the division of responsibilities for the development of ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter nonattainment and maintenance area plans, including the responsibility for conducting air quality modeling.

Thus, a county APCD may be delegated the responsibility to conduct modeling for plan development purposes and, when that occurs, will possess the authority required under CAA section 110(a)(2)(K).

On the other hand, when modeling authority has not been delegated, 12 

# the authority to conduct plan development modeling rests with ADEQ and the MPOs, and this authority covers
the entire state.

12 

# As of October 16, 2015 the current MOA under section 49- 406 for Pima County assigns modeling responsibility to the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality, as well as ADEQ and PAG; neither Maricopa nor Pinal County currently has delegated authority to conduct modeling under an MOA or delegation agreement.



# 6

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# 3 Modeling for Precon struction Permits

ADEQ has authority to conduct or require air quality modeling when issuing preconstruction permits for minor and major sources as well as modifications.

Pinal, Pima, and Maricopa Counties’ air pollution control departments also have authority under their regulations to conduct air quality modeling related to preconstruction permits for major sources as well as modifications.



# 3.1 State Authority

3.1.1 New Minor Sources and Minor Modifications

ADEQ has adopted Arizona Administrative Code (A.A.C.) R18-2-334 to establish a minor NSR program satisfying section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA. EPA has granted limited approval to this

program. 13 

# Subsection (C)(2) of R18-2-334 gives ADEQ the authority to require modeling from, or perform air quality modeling on behalf of, a new or modified minor source as follows:

C. The Director shall not issue a proposed final Class I permit or permit revision or a Class II permit or permit revision subject to this Section to a person proposing to
construct a new source or make a minor NSR modification unless the source or modification meets one of the following conditions for each regulated minor NSR pollutant subject to this section:

.... 2. An ambient air quality assessment demonstrates that emissions from the
source or minor NSR modification will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of a standard imposed in Article 2 of this Chapter. a. An owner or operator may elect to have the Director perform a
SCREEN model of its emissions. If the results of the SCREEN model
indicate that the source or minor NSR modification will interfere with attainment or maintenance of a standard imposed in Article 2 of this Chapter, the owner or operator may perform a more refined model to make the demonstration required by this subsection. b. The requirements of this subsection shall be satisfied, if the results of the SCREEN or more refined modeling conducted pursuant to subsection (B)(2)(a) demonstrate either of the following: i. Ambient concentrations resulting from emissions from the source or modification combined with existing concentrations of regulated minor NSR pollutants will not cause or exacerbate the violation of a standard imposed in Article 2 of this Chapter.

13 

# 80 FR 67319 (November 2, 2015).



# 7

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

ii. Emissions from the source or minor modification will have an ambient impact below the significance levels as defined in R18-

2-401. c. The assessment required by this subsection shall take into account any limitations, controls, or emissions decreases that are or will be enforceable in the permit or permit revision for the source.

Section R18-2-334(I), A.A.C., sets requ irements for the air quality modeling:

I. All modeling required pursuant to this Section shall be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 51, Appendix W.

Thus, under A.A.C. section R18-2-334, ADEQ has authority to require modeling from, or perform air quality modeling on behalf of, a minor source in order to assess whether the source will cause or contribute to a NAAQS violation, and that modeling must be performed in accordance with EPA guidelines.



# 3.1.2 New Major Sources and Major Modifications to Existing Major
Sources

Sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (a )(2)(J) of the CAA require SIPs to include a preconstruction permit program for major sources and major modifications meeting the requirements of CAA section 165 for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD). A PSD program must include a requirement that the owner or operator of the source demonstrate (through monitoring and modeling) that the source will not cause or contribute to a violation. 14



# ADEQ has the authority to require modeling meeting PSD requirements under R18-2-406(A)(5) and (6), which has also been granted limited approval by EPA:

A. Except as provided in subsections (B) through (G) below and R18-2-408 (Innovative control technology), no permit or permit revision under this Article shall be issued to a person proposing to construct a new major source or make a major modification to a major source that would be constructed in an area designated as attainment or unclassifiable for any regulated NSR pollutant unless the source or modification meets the following conditions:

.... 5. The person applying for the permit or permit revision under this Article performs an air impact analysis and mo nitoring as specified in R18-2-407, and such analysis demonstrates that allowabl e emission increases from the proposed new major source or major modification, in conjunction with all other applicable emission increases or reductions, including secondary emissions, for all pollutants listed in R18-2-218(A), and including minor and mobile source emissions of nitrogen oxides and PM10:

14 

# CAA § 165(a)(3).



# 8

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

a. Would not cause or contribute to concentrations of conventional air pollutants in violation of any ambient air quality standard in Article 2 of this Chapter in any air quality control region or any applicable
maximum allowable increase under R18-2-218 over the baseline concentration for any attainment or unclassified area; or
b. Would not contribute to an increase in ambient concentrations for a pollutant by an amount in exce ss of the significan ce level for such pollutant in any adjacent area in which Arizona primary or secondary ambient air quality standards for that pollutant are being violated. A new major source of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides, or a major modification to a major source of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides shall be presumed to contribute to violations of the Arizona ambient air quality standards for ozone if it will be located within 50 kilometers of a nonattainment area for ozone. The presumption may be rebutted for a new major source or major modification if it can be satisfactorily demonstrated to the Director that emissions of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides from the new major source or major modification will not contribute to violations of the Arizona ambient air quality standards for ozone in adjacent nonattainment areas for ozone. Such a demonstration shall include a showing that topographical, meteorological, or other physical factors in the vicinity of the new major source or major modification are such that transport of volatile organic compounds emitted from the source are not expected to contribute to violations of the ozone standards in the adjacent

nonattainment areas. 6. Air quality models: a. All estimates of ambient concentrations required under this Section shall be based on the applicab le air quality models, data basis, and other requirements specified in 40 CFR 51, Appendix W, “Guideline On Air Quality Models,” as of July 1, 2011 (and no future amendments or editions), which shall be referred to hereinafter as “Guideline” and is adopted by reference and is on file with the Department. b. Where an air quality impact mode l specified in the “Guideline” is not applicable, the model may be modified or another model substituted. Such a change shall be subject to notice and opportunity for public comment. Written approval of the EPA Administrator shall be obtained for any modification or substitution.

Under section R18-2-406, ADEQ will not issue a permit to a new major source or a major source making major modifications unless the source seeking the permit performs air quality modeling as part of an air impact analysis or monitoring in order to indicate whether or not the source will contribute to a NAAQS violation. Any air quality modeling conducted shall follow requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51, Appendix W. If a model specified in 40 CFR 51, Appendix W

9

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

is not applicable, the model can be modified or another model substituted, as long as there is proper public notice and comment period and written permission from the Administrator.



# 3.2 County Authority

Maricopa County has proposed amendments to its NSR program to require minor sources to conduct an air quality impact assessment at the request of the Control Officer and to bring the county’s major NSR program into full compliance with current EPA and ADEQ requirements. 15


# Pima and Pinal county APCDs are currently deve loping amendments to bring their minor and major NSR programs into compliance with federal and state rules.

Each of the county APCDs has existing regulations establishing the authority to require modeling in connection with PSD permits th at are substantially identical to ADEQ’s. 16



# In addition, as explained in the July 20, 2014 State Implementation Plan for NSR Supplemental Information sections 2.2(b) and 2.4, Pinal County currently has delegated authority to administer ADEQ’s PSD program.

15 

# 21 A.A.R. 2124 (October 2, 2015).

16 

# Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations, Rule 240, § 308.1(e)-(f); Pima County Code of Regulations § 17.16.590(A)(5)-(6); Pinal County Air Quality Control District Code of Regulations § 3-3-250(A)(5)-(6).



# 10

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# 4 General Authority to Conduct Modeling and Submit

Data to Administrator

In addition to the specific provisions relating to plan development and preconstruction modeling, a number of statutes provide ADEQ broad general authority that encompasses the ability to conduct modeling and submit the results to EPA.

Section 49-104(A)(3)-(4), Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.), gives ADEQ authority to conduct air quality modeling and provide such data to the Administrator as follows:

A. The department shall:

.... 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.

Section 49-104(B)(1) and section 49-104(B)(5), A.R.S., grant ADEQ the authority to contract outside services to help the department perform its duties, including air quality modeling:

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.

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

Section 49-104(B)(3), A.R.S., gi ves ADEQ the authority to use any medium of communication, publication, and exhibition when sharing and distributing air quality information:

B. The department, through the director, shall:

.... 3. Utilize any medium of communication , publication, and exhibition when disseminating information, advertising, and publicity in any field of its purposes, objectives, or duties.

Thus, under A.R.S. section 49-104, ADEQ has the broad authority to conduct air quality modeling and provide air quality modeling informat ion as part of its general research or at the request of EPA. If certain air quality modeling is outside of ADEQ’s scope, the agency can contract outside services. In addition, section 49-104 provides ADEQ the authority to use any medium of communication when sharing this information, further enabling the agency to submit air quality modeling data to EPA required by CAA section 110(a)(2)(K).

11

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)

Finally, section 49-422(A)(3), A.R.S., gives ADEQ the authority to require any source to assess its impact on levels of air pollution:

A. In addition to any other powers vested in it by law, the department [ADEQ] may:

.... 3. Require, as specified in subsections B and C of this section, any source of air contaminants to monitor, sample, or perform other studies to quantify emissions of air contaminants or levels of air pollution that may reasonably be attributable to that source, if the director either: (a) Determines that monitoring, sampling, or other studies are necessary to determine the effects of the source on levels of air pollution. (b) Has reasonable cause to believe a violation of this chapter, rules adopted pursuant to this chapter or a permit issued pursuant to this chapter has been committed. (c) Determines that those studies or data are necessary to accomplish the purposes of this chapter, and that the monitoring, sampling, or other studies by the source are necessary in order to assess the impact of the source on the emission of air contaminants.

12

# SIP Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(K)



# Appendix A – Arizona Revised Statutes Section 49- 104(A)(3) and (B)(1)

13

# This page is intentionally blank.

# Enclosure 2

Administrative Materials:

x Copies of Arizona State Legal Authorities:

o A.R.S. Section 49-104

o A.R.S. Section 49-106

o A.R.S. Section 49-404

o A.R.S. Section 49-406

o A.R.S. Section 49-425

x Letter to Eric Massey from Misael Cabrera dated August 17, 2015

x Public Process Documentation:

o Affidavit of Public Notice Publication

o Public Hearing Offi cer Certification

o Public Hearing Agenda

o Public Hearing Sign-In Sheet

o Public Hearing Transcript

o Responsiveness Summary

# This page is intentionally blank.

# 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, regi onal 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 effect s 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 chapte rs 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 commis sion 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.

# Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49-104

17. Unless specifically authorized by the legislat ure, 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 th e 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 nece ssary 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 fi eld 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 provid e 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 pr ojects 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 fac ilities for disposing of solid, liquid or gaseous
deleterious matter. 11. Define and prescribe reasonably necessar y rules regarding the water supply, sewage disposal and garbage collection and disp osal 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

# 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 no t comply with the minimu m 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 bo rne or insect borne diseases. The rules shall: (a) Prescribe minimum standards for the de sign of sewage collection systems and treatment, disposal and reclamation sy stems and for operating the systems. (b) Provide for inspecting the premises, syst ems and installations and for abating as a public nuisance any collection system, proce ss, 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, processe s, 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 rega rding 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 fe e. 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 implem enting 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.

# 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 outsid e 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 requiremen ts 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 auth orizations to determin e 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 belie ve 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.

# This page is intentionally blank.

# 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, co uncil 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.

# This page is intentionally blank.

# 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 ai r 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 ad opted 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 nonattainmen t or maintenance area for any air pollutant may be modified after enactment in any manner unless the mo dification 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 subsec tion B are effective.

# This page is intentionally blank.

# Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49 -406

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

A. For any ozone, carbon monoxide or particulat e nonattainment or maintenance area the governor shall certify the metropolitan planning organizati on designated to conduct the continuing, cooperative and comprehensive transportation pla nning 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 particulat e nonattainment or maintenance area for which no metropolitan planning organization exists, the depart ment 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 co ntrol 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 subsecti on C of this section, the department, the planning agency certified pursuant to subsection A of this sect ion on behalf of elected officials of affected local government, the county air pollution control depa rtment 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 st ate 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 pursua nt to subsection A of this section on behalf of elected officials of affected local government, the co unty air pollution control department or district, and the department of transportation shall enter in to a memorandum of agreement for the purpose of coordinating the implementation of the procedures de scribed in subsection C and D of this section.

F. At a minimum, the memorandum of agreement shall contain: 1. The relevant responsibilities and authorit ies of each of the coordinating agencies. 2. As appropriate, procedures, schedules and responsibilities for development of nonattainment or maintenance area plans or pl an revisions and for determinin g 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 conduc ting air quality modeling. 10. Responsibility for administering and enforcing stationary source controls.

# Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49 -406

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 emis sion limitation or other control measure, means or technique contained in the implementation plan shal l 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 sect ion 49-404, and the governing body of the metropolitan planning organization shall ad opt 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 de partment 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 th is 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 pe rson, 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 a rea 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 su bsection 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 sectio n, in any metropolitan ar ea with a metropolitan statistical area population of less than two hundred fifty th ousand persons, the governor shall designate an agency that meets the criteria of section 174 of th e clean air act and that is recommended by the city

# Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49 -406

that causes the metropolitan area to exist and the af fected 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.

# This page is intentionally blank.

# Authorizing Statute

A.R.S. § 49 -425

A.R.S. § 49-425. Rules; hearing

A. The director shall adopt such rules as he determin es 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 amen d 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 particul ate 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 am bient air quality standards, emission standards or standards of performance, the director shall give co nsideration 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 publ ic at a reasonable charge
upon request.

# This page is intentionally blank.

# This page is intentionally blank.

# Public Hearing Transcript

PROPOSED ARIZONA AIR QUALITY 1 

# STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) 2 

# REVISIONS FOR 2008 OZONE AND 2010 NITROGEN DIOXIDE TRANSPORT AND 3 

# MODELING FOR ALL STANDARDS 4

5

6 

# Oral Proceeding 7 

# Transcript 8

9 

# November 17, 2015 10

11 

# Bruce Friedl: Good afternoon, thank you for coming. I now open this hearing on 12 

# the proposed revisions to Arizona’s State Implementation Plan, or SIP, regarding 13 

# interstate transport of emissions for th e 2008 Ozone and 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide 14 

# National Ambient Air Quality Standards and air quality modeling for all standards. 15

16 

# The proceeding is being recorded and wi ll be preserved for the record. 17

18 

# Today is November 17, 2015, and the time is 2:14 p.m. The location is conference 19 

# room 3100B at the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 1110 West 20 

# Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. My name is Bruce Friedl, and I have 21 

# been appointed by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental 22 

# Quality (ADEQ) to presid e at this proceeding. 23

24 

# The purposes of this proceeding are to provide the public an opportunity to: 25 

# (1) Hear about the substance of the proposed SIP revisions, and 26 

# (2) Present oral argument, data, and views regarding the revisions in the form of 27 

# comments on the record. 28

29 

# Department representatives for today’s hearing are Lesley Forst, Heidi Haggerty, 30 

# and Natalie Muilenberg of the Air Quality Division’s State Implementation Plan 31 

# Section. 32

1

# Public Hearing Transcript

1 

# Public notice of the SIP revisions was published in the Arizona Republic on 2 

# October 16 and 19, 2015, and was also provid ed on ADEQ’s website. Paper copies 3 

# of the proposed SIP revisions were made available at the ADEQ Phoenix Records 4 

# Center starting October 16, 2015, and will remain available until the close of 5 

# comment period, which is 5:00 p.m. today. 6

7 

# If you wish to make a verbal comment, you ne ed to fill out a sp eaker slip, which is 8 

# available at the sign-in table, and give it to me. Using sp eaker slips allows 9 

# everyone an opportunity to be heard and allows us to match the name on the 10 

# official record with the comments. You may also submit written comments to me 11 

# today. 12

13 

# Please note the comment period for the proposed SIP revisions ends today and all 14 

# comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. 15

16 

# Comments made during the formal comment period are required by law to be 17 

# considered by the Department when preparing the final State Implementation 18 

# Plan submission for the Environmental Protection Agency. This is done through 19 

# the inclusion of a responsiveness summary in which the Department responds in 20 

# writing to written and oral comments made during the formal comment period 21 

# and hearing. 22

23 

# The agenda for this hearing is as follows: 24

25 

# First, we will present a brief overview of the proposed revisions to the State 26 

# Implementation Plan. 27

28 

# Then I will conduct the oral comment period. At that time, I will begin to call 29 

# speakers in the order that I have received speaker slips. 30

31

2

# Public Hearing Transcript

Please be aware that any comments at today's hearing that you want the 1 

# Department to formally consider must be given either in writing or on the record 2 

# during the oral comment period of this hearing. 3

4 

# At this time, Lesley Forst will give a brief overview of the proposed revision 5 

# relating to interstate transport of emis sions for the 2008 ozone National Ambient 6 

# Air Quality Standards. Lesley? 7

8 

# Lesley Forst: Thanks, Bruce. 9

10 

# Clean Air Act (C.A.A.) section 110(a)(2)(D) requires each State Implementation 11 

# Plan (SIP) to contain adequate provisions to prohibit any source or type of 12 

# emission activity from contributing significantly to any other state’s 13 

# nonattainment of a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) or from 14 

# interfering with maintenance of such NAAQS. Also, a SIP shall prohibit any source 15 

# or emission activity from interfering with any other state’s ability to comply with 16 

# prevention of significant deterioration of air quality or from protecting visibility. 17

18 

# This State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision addresses these interstate pollution 19 

# transport requirements fo r the 2008 Ozone Nation al Ambient Air Quality 20 

# Standards (NAAQS). The submitted document supports a negative declaration of 21 

# significant contribution of interstate transport to surrounding nonattainment and 22 

# maintenance areas in other states. In addition, other aspects of the transport 23 

# requirement covered in CAA § 110(a)(2)(D) are satisfied or are expected to be 24 

# sufficiently addressed through Regional Haze SIPs, Federal Implementation Plans 25 

# (FIPs), and relevant state and federal air quality rules. 26

27 

# Mr. Friedl: Thanks, Lesley. Now Natalie will give a brief overview of the revisions 28 

# relating to interstate transport of emissions for the 201 0 Nitrogen Dioxide 29 

# standards and the state’s ability to conduct air quality modeling and submit such 30 

# data to the Environmental Protection Agency. Natalie? 31

32

3

# Public Hearing Transcript

Natalie Muilenberg: Thanks, Bruce. 1

2 

# First, I will discuss the revision pertaini ng to interstate transport of nitrogen 3 

# dioxide emissions. The same Clean Air Act section that Lesley discussed applies to 4 

# nitrogen dioxide as well. Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires SIPs to contain provisions 5 

# that essentially protect surrounding states and even countries from another 6 

# state’s emissions. This SIP revision for the 2010 nitrogen dioxide standards shows 7 

# that Arizona’s emissions are too low to impact surrounding states and countries. 8 

# In addition, the SIP describes Arizona’s future changes to its nitrogen dioxide air 9 

# quality monitoring network, in order to comply with the 2010 standards and 10 

# provide data for future SIP development. Other aspects of the nitrogen dioxide 11 

# transport requirements are satisfied or are expected to be sufficiently addressed 12 

# through Arizona’s Regional Haze Plan, control measures, and the state’s New 13 

# Source Review program. 14

15 

# Finally, Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(K) requires SIPs for all criteria pollutants to 16 

# contain adequate provisions that provide for modeling used to predict emission 17 

# effects on air quality. This section also requires provisions that provide for the 18 

# submission of such modeling data to EPA. This SIP revision details Arizona’s legal 19 

# authority to conduct air quality modeling in relation to SIP development and 20 

# permitting, as well as authorities that allow the state to submit such modeling 21 

# data to EPA. This revision will be applied to all past and future SIPs. 22

23 

# * * * * * 24

25

26

27 

# Mr. Friedl: Thanks, Natalie. This concludes the explanation period of this 28 

# proceeding on the proposed revisions to the State Implementation Plan. 29

30 

# * * * * * 31

32 

# I now open this proceed ing for oral comments. 33

4

# Public Hearing Transcript

1 

# I have received no speaker slips. Does anybody wish to comment? 2

3 

# Ok, hearing none, this concludes the oral comment period of this proceeding. 4

5 

# * * * * * 6

7 

# If you have not already submitted written comments, you may submit them to me 8 

# at this time. Again, the comment period for these proposed revisions to the State 9 

# Implementation Plan ends today at 5:00 p.m. 10

11 

# Thank you for attending. 12

13 

# The time is now 2:21 p.m.. I now close this oral proceeding. 14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

5

# Responsiveness Summary

Response to Testimony Taken at Oral Proceedings and Written Comments Received on Arizona State Implementation Plan Revisions for CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS, CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS, and CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) for all previous and future NAAQS

The oral proceeding on the State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision, CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS, CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS, and CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) for all previous and future NAAQS was held on Tuesday, November 17, 2015, at 2:00 p.m. in the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Conference Room 3100B, 1110 West Washington Street, Phoenix, Arizona. The public comment period closed on Tuesday, November 17, 2015, at 5:00 p.m. No oral or written comments were received by ADEQ for these SIP revisions.

During its final review of the proposed revision s, ADEQ determined further clarifications were
needed. These clarifications are described below:

1. In the proposed revision for CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) for all previous and future NAAQS, footnote #13 had a pre-publication version of a Federal Register notice. The final revision now reflects the published Federal Register notice (see page 7).

2. In the proposed revision for CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS, footnote #4 also mentions the same pre-publication version of the aforementioned Federal Register Notice. The final revision now reflects the published Federal Register notice (see page 4).

3. Section 3.2 “County Authority” in the final revision for CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) for all previous and future NAAQS was edited to provide more clarity and updated information regarding county New Source Review programs (see page 10).

4. In the CAA Section 110(a)(2)(K) proposed revision, a certified copy of Arizona Revised Statute (A.R.S.) Section 49-104(A)(3) and (B)(1) was not included. The proposed SIP did cite and quote the statute for reference. ADEQ has obtained a certified copy and added it to the final revision as Appendix A. The subject matter and effect of the proposed and final revisions are the same; the certified copy of the statute is included now in order to comply with submission requirements set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 51, Appendix V.