Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2016 / Proposed Rules 42597 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications and will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 22, 2016. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2016–15618 Filed 6–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0522; FRL–9948–51– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Removal of 

Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio 

EPA) on July 15, 2015 and February 29, 

2016, concerning the state’s Stage II 

vapor recovery (Stage II) program for the 

Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Dayton 

ozone areas in Ohio. The revision 

removes Stage II requirements for the 

three areas as a component of the Ohio 

ozone SIP. The submittal also includes 

a demonstration as required by the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) that addresses 

emissions impacts associated with the 

removal of the program. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 1, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2015–0522 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source 

Program Manager, Control Strategies 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061, 

acevedo.francisco@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Background 

II. What changes have been made to the 

Ohio Stage II vapor recovery program? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittal? 

IV. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Stage II and onboard refueling vapor 

recovery systems (ORVR) are two types 

of emission control systems that capture 

fuel vapors from vehicle gas tanks 

during refueling. Stage II systems are 

specifically installed at gasoline 

dispensing facilities (GDF) and capture 

the refueling fuel vapors at the gasoline 

pump nozzle. The system carries the 

vapors back to the underground storage 

tank at the GDF to prevent the vapors 

from escaping to the atmosphere. ORVR 

systems are carbon canisters installed 

directly on automobiles to capture the 

fuel vapors evacuated from the gasoline 

tank before they reach the nozzle. The 

fuel vapors captured in the carbon 

canisters are then combusted in the 

engine when the automobile is in 

operation. Stage II and vehicle ORVR 

were initially both required by the 1990 

Amendments to the CAA under sections 

182(b)(3) and 202(a)(6), respectively. In 

some areas Stage II has been in place for 

over 25 years, but Stage II was not 

widely implemented by the states until 

the early to mid-1990s as a result of the 

CAA requirements for moderate, 

serious, severe, and extreme ozone 

nonattainment areas, and for states in 

the Northeast Ozone Transport Region 

(OTR) under CAA section 184(b)(2). 

CAA section 202(a)(6) required EPA 

to promulgate regulations for ORVR for 

light-duty vehicles (passenger cars). 

EPA adopted these requirements in 

1994, at which point moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas were no longer 

subject to the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement. However, some moderate 

areas retained Stage II requirements to 

provide a control method to comply 

with rate-of-progress emission reduction 

targets. ORVR equipment has been 

phased in for new passenger vehicles 

beginning with model year 1998, and 

starting in 2001 for light-duty trucks and 

most heavy-duty gasoline-powered 

vehicles. ORVR equipment has been 

installed on nearly all new gasolinepowered light-duty vehicles, light-duty 

trucks and heavy-duty vehicles since 

2006. 

During the phase-in of ORVR controls, 

Stage II has provided volatile organic 

compound (VOC) reductions in ozone 

nonattainment areas and certain 

attainment areas of the OTR. Congress 

recognized that ORVR and Stage II 

would eventually become largely 

redundant technologies, and provided 

authority to EPA to allow states to 

remove Stage II from their SIPs after 

EPA finds that ORVR is in widespread 

use. 

Effective May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28772), 

EPA determined that ORVR is in 

widespread nationwide use for control 

of gasoline emissions during refueling of 

vehicles at GDFs. Currently, more than 

75 percent of gasoline refueling 

nationwide occurs with ORVR-equipped 

vehicles, so Stage II programs have 

become largely redundant control 


sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
42598 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1 In areas where certain types of vacuum-assist 

Stage II systems are used, the differences in 

operational design characteristics between ORVR 

and some configurations of these Stage II systems 

result in the reduction of overall control system 

efficiency compared to what could have been 

achieved relative to the individual control 

efficiencies of either ORVR or Stage II emissions 

from the vehicle fuel tank. 

2CAA section 193 is not relevant because Ohio’s 

Stage II rule was not included in the SIP before the 

1990 CAA amendments. 

3EPA, Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline 

Vapor Control Program from State Implementation 

Plans and Assessing Comparable Measure, EPA– 

457/B–12–001 (August 7, 2012), available at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/pdfs/

20120807guidance.pdf. This guidance document 

notes that ‘‘the potential emission control losses 

from removing Stage II vapor recovery systems 

(VRS) are transitional and relatively small. ORVRequipped vehicles will continue to phase in to the 

fleet over the coming years and will exceed 80 

percent for all highway gasoline vehicles and 85 

percent of all gasoline dispensed during 2015. As 

the number of these ORVE-equipped vehicles 

increase, the control of attributed to Stage II VRS 

will decrease even further, and the potential 

foregone Stage II VOC emission reductions are 

generally expected to be no more than one percent 

of the VOC inventory in the area.’’ 

4Cleveland is currently designated nonattainment 

for the 2012 Annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

NAAQS. While VOC is one of the precursors for 

PM2.5 formation, a study (Journal of Environmental 

Engineering—Qualifying the sources of ozone, fine 

particulate matter, and regional haze in the 

Southeastern United States, June 24, 2009, available 

at: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journalofenvironmental-management) indicates that in 

portions the Midwest (including portions of Ohio) 

where Stage II has been implemented, emissions of 

PM2.5 and the precursor sulfur dioxide (SO2) are 

more significant to ambient PM2.5 concentrations 

than nitrogen oxides (NOx) and VOC. Specifically, 

PM2.5 sensitivities to anthropogenic VOC emissions 

are near zero for the entire region, including the 

Cincinnati region. This study also indicated that the 

impact of SO2 emission, especially from electric 

generating units, was most significant in the 

Cincinnati area due to SO2 emissions in the entire 

mid-west region (Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, 

Michigan, and Ohio). In fact, emissions from the 

mid-west had the largest effect in the Cleveland and 

Dayton areas. The technical analysis has met EPA’s 

guidance and demonstrates anthropogenic VOCs are 

insignificant to the formation of PM2.5 in these 

areas. Currently, the Cleveland area is also 

designated nonattainment for sulfur dioxide (Lake 

Co.) and lead (Cuyahoga Co.) and those pollutants 

are not affected by the removal of Stage II 

requirements. 

systems and Stage II systems achieve an 

ever declining emissions benefit as more 

ORVR-equipped vehicles continue to 

enter the on-road motor vehicle fleet.1

EPA also exercised its authority under 

CAA section 202(a)(6) to waive certain 

Federal statutory requirements for Stage 

II gasoline vapor recovery at GDFs. This 

decision exempts all new ozone 

nonattainment areas classified serious 

or above from the requirement to adopt 

Stage II control programs. Similarly, any 

state currently implementing Stage II 

programs may submit SIP revisions that, 

once approved by EPA, would allow for 

the phase out of Stage II control 

systems. To assist states in the 

development of SIP revisions to remove 

Stage II requirements from their SIPs, 

EPA released its ‘‘Guidance on 

Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor 

Control Programs from State 

Implementation Plans and Assessing 

Comparable Measures’’ (EPA–457/B– 

12–001) on August 7, 2012. 

II. What changes have been made to the 

Ohio Stage II vapor recovery program? 

The Ohio EPA originally submitted a 

SIP revision to EPA on June 7, 1993, to 

satisfy the requirement of section 

182(b)(3) of the CAA. The revision 

applied to the Cleveland (Ashtabula, 

Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, 

Medina, Portage and Summit counties), 

Cincinnati (Butler, Clermont, Hamilton 

and Warren counties), and Dayton 

(Clark, Greene, Miami and Montgomery 

counties) ozone nonattainment areas in 

Ohio. EPA partially approved Ohio’s 

Stage II program on October 20, 1994 

(59 FR 52911), including the program’s 

legal authority and administrative 

requirements found in the Ohio 

Administrative Code (OAC) rules 3745– 

21–09 (DDD)(1)–(4). 

As a result of EPA’s May 16, 2012 

determination that ORVR is in 

widespread nationwide use for control 

of gasoline emissions during refueling of 

vehicles at GDFs, Ohio EPA initiated a 

rulemaking process to revise its SIP to 

remove Stage II requirements for all 

facilities in the Cleveland, Cincinnati 

and Dayton areas. As part of that 

rulemaking process, an Ohio-specific 

analysis following EPA’s recommended 

methodology was also completed. The 

analysis concluded that, starting in 

calendar year 2017, ORVR would be in 

widespread use in Ohio and that there 

would be no remaining emissions 

reduction benefit from Stage II 

requirements beyond the benefits from 

ORVR. 

On July 15, 2015, and February 29, 

2016, the Ohio EPA submitted a SIP 

revision requesting EPA approval of 

amendments to OAC 3745–21–09 (DDD) 

that removes Stage II requirements from 

the Ohio ozone SIP and allows GDFs 

currently implementing Stage II in the 

Cleveland, Cincinnati and Dayton areas 

to decommission their systems by 2017. 

To support the removal of the Stage II 

requirements, the revision included 

amended copies of OAC 3745–21–09 

(DDD), as adopted on April 29, 2013, 

and January 17, 2014; a summary of 

Ohio-specific calculations based on EPA 

guidance used to calculate program 

benefits and demonstrate widespread 

use of ORVR in Ohio; and a section 

110(l) demonstration that includes 

documentation that addresses the 

period, 2013–2017, when Stage II 

requirements were waived in Ohio but 

widespread use of ORVR has not yet 

occurred. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittal? 

EPA’s primary consideration for 

determining the approvability of Ohio’s 

request is whether this requested action 

complies with section 110(l) of the 

CAA.2

Section 110(l) requires that a revision 

to the SIP not interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in section 171), or 

any other applicable requirement of the 

Act. EPA evaluates each section 110(l) 

noninterference demonstration on a 

case-by-case basis considering the 

circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA 

interprets 110(l) as applying to all 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) that are in effect, including 

those that have been promulgated but 

for which EPA has not yet made 

designations. The degree of the analysis 

focused on any particular NAAQS in a 

noninterference demonstration varies 

depending on the nature of the 

emissions associated with the proposed 

SIP revision. 

In its July 15, 2015, and February 29, 

2016, SIP revision, the Ohio EPA used 

EPA’s guidance to conduct a series of 

calculations to determine the potential 

impact of removing the Stage II program 

on air quality.3 Ohio EPA’s analysis 

focused on VOC emissions because, as 

mentioned previously, Stage II 

requirements affect VOC emissions and 

because VOCs are a precursor for 

ground-level ozone formation.4

Ohio EPA has calculated that 

beginning in 2017, ORVR will be in 

widespread use in all three program 

areas and the absence of the Ohio Stage 

II program starting in 2017 would not 

result in a net VOC emissions increase 

compared to the continued utilization of 

this emissions control technology. The 

emission reduction losses resulting from 

removing Stage II before 2017 are 

transitional and relatively small since 

ORVR-equipped vehicles will continue 

to phase into the fleet over the coming 

years. Ohio EPA’s calculation indicates 

a maximum potential loss of 1.858 tons 

per summer day (tpsd) in Cleveland, 

0.914 tpsd in Cincinnati, and 0.655 tpsd 

in Dayton from 2013 through 2016. In 

2013, the year with the highest level of 

emission increases, these summer day 

emissions increases are only 0.21 

percent to 0.26 percent of the typical 

summer day VOC emissions rate in the 

three areas. These emissions increases 


sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2016 / Proposed Rules 42599 

are insignificant with respect to the total 

summer day VOC emission rates of all 

sectors in these areas. Also it is 

important to note that the minimal 

emissions increase significantly 

decreases over the next two years (2014 

and 2015) and becomes an emissions 

decrease in 2017 and all years 

thereafter. 

To help offset the initial emissions 

increases during the Stage II phase out 

period, Ohio EPA is requiring the 

installation of low permeation hoses at 

GDFs. Ohio EPA has calculated that low 

permeation hoses will provide 42.9 tons 

of VOC emission reductions each year 

during the ozone seasons (21.4 tons for 

Cleveland area, 13.6 tons for Cincinnati 

area, and 7.9 for Dayton area) starting in 

2013. Table 1 shows the increase of 

emissions associated with the phase out 

of State II systems at facilities in all 

program areas in Ohio starting in 2013, 

as well as offset emissions associated 

with the requirement of low permeation 

hoses at GDFs. 

TABLE 1—VOC EMISSIONS DURING OZONE SEASON

[Tons per day] 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 

Cleveland Area 

Stage II Phase-out ............................................................... 0.910 0.580 0.300 0.068 ¥0.116 

Low Permeation Hoses ........................................................ ¥0.14 ¥0.14 ¥0.14 ¥0.14 ¥0.14 

Daily Total ............................................................................ 0.77 0.44 0.16 ¥0.072 ¥0.26 

Typical Summer Day ........................................................... 367.17 367.17 367.17 367.17 367.17 

% of Summer Day ............................................................... 0.21% 0.12% 0.043% ¥0.019% ¥0.26% 

Cincinnati Area 

Stage II Phase-out ............................................................... 0.440 0.284 0.151 0.039 ¥0.053 

Low Permeation Hoses ........................................................ ¥0.089 ¥0.089 ¥0.089 ¥0.089 ¥0.089 

Daily Total ............................................................................ 0.35 0.20 0.062 ¥0.050 ¥0.14 

Typical Summer Day ........................................................... 147.05 147.05 147.05 147.05 147.05 

% of Summer Day ............................................................... 0.24% 0.13% 0.042% ¥0.034% ¥0.096% 

Dayton Area 

2013 ..................................................................................... 2014 2015 2016 2017 

Stage II Phase-out ............................................................... 0.310 0.201 0.110 0.034 ¥0.027 

Low Permeation Hoses ........................................................ ¥0.052 ¥0.052 ¥0.052 ¥0.052 ¥0.052 

Daily Total ............................................................................ 0.26 0.15 0.058 ¥0.018 ¥0.079 

Typical Summer Day ........................................................... 99.66 99.66 99.66 99.66 99.66 

% of Summer Day ............................................................... 0.26% 0.15% 0.058% ¥0.018% ¥0.079% 

As illustrated in Table 1, and 

documented in Ohio’s SIP revision, for 

each year prior to the widespread use of 

ORVR in Ohio (2017) starting in 2013, 

the VOC emissions increase associated 

with the removal of Stage II systems is 

eventually offset by the VOC emission 

reductions attributed to ORVR being in 

widespread use in Ohio and the 

requirement of low permeation hoses at 

GDFs. 

EPA believes that the removal of the 

Ohio Stage II program does not interfere 

with Ohio’s ability to demonstrate 

compliance with the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in all three areas. This is based 

on the use of permanent, enforceable, 

contemporaneous, surplus emissions 

reductions achieved through the 

requirement of low permeation hoses at 

GDFs, and the fact that the small 

emissions increase is both temporary 

and insignificant with respect to the 

total summer day emission rates for 

sectors in these areas. 

EPA also examined whether the 

removal of Stage II program 

requirements in all three areas will 

interfere with attainment of other air 

quality standards. All the counties in 

the Dayton area are designated 

attainment for all standards, including 

sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. 

Cincinnati is designated attainment for 

all standards other than ozone and 

sulfur dioxide. The Cleveland area is 

designated attainment for all standards 

other than ozone, lead (Cuyahoga Co.), 

sulfur dioxide (Lake Co.) and particulate 

matter (Cuyahoga and Lorain Counties). 

Based on Ohio EPA’s 110(l) analysis, 

EPA has no reason to believe that the 

removal of the Stage II program in Ohio 

will cause the areas to become 

nonattainment for any of these 

pollutants. In addition, EPA believes 

that removing the Stage II program 

requirements in Ohio will not interfere 

with the areas’ ability to meet any other 

CAA requirement. 

Based on the above discussion and 

the state’s section 110(l) demonstration, 

EPA believes that removal of the Stage 

II program would not interfere with 

attainment or maintenance of any of the 

NAAQS in the Cleveland, Cincinnati, 

and Dayton areas and would not 

interfere with any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA, and thus, are 

approvable under CAA section 110(l). 

IV. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

revision to the Ohio ozone SIP 

submitted by Ohio EPA on July 15, 

2015, and February 26, 2016, because 

we find that the revision meets all 

applicable requirements and it would 

not interfere with reasonable further 

progress or attainment of any of the 

NAAQS. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

Ohio rule 3745–21–09 ‘‘Control of 

emissions of volatile organic 


sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
42600 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

compounds from stationary sources and 

perchloroethylene from dry cleaning 

facilities.’’ effective January 17, 2014. 

EPA has made, and will continue to 

make, these documents generally 

available through www.regulations.gov 

and/or at the EPA Region 5 Office 

(please contact the person identified in 

the ‘‘For Further Information Contact’’ 

section of this preamble for more 

information). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: June 27, 2016. 

Robert Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–15617 Filed 6–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0846; FRL–9948–39– 

Region 9] 

Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Arizona; 

Regional Haze Federal Implementation 

Plan; Reconsideration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to revise 

provisions of the Arizona Regional Haze 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) 

applicable to the Phoenix Cement 

Company (PCC) Clarkdale Plant and the 

CalPortland Cement (CPC) Rillito Plant. 

In response to requests for 

reconsideration from the plants’ owners, 

we propose to replace the control 

technology optimization requirements 

for nitrogen oxides (NOX) applicable to 

Kiln 4 at the Clarkdale Plant and Kiln 

4 at the Rillito Plant with a series of 

revised recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements. We are seeking comment 

on this proposed action. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before August 15, 2016. 

Requests for a public hearing must be 

received on or before July 15, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2015–0846 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

limaye.vijay@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

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

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vijay Limaye, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 

Planning Office, Air Division, AIR–2, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105. Vijay Limaye can be reached at 

telephone number (415) 972–3086 and 

via electronic mail at limaye.vijay@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. Background 

III. Proposed FIP Revision for the PCC 

Clarkdale Plant and the CPC Rillito Plant 

IV. The EPA’s Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. General Information 

A. Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

• The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 

• The initials ADEQ mean or refer to 

the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality. 

• The words Arizona and State mean 

the State of Arizona. 

• The initials BART mean or refer to 

Best Available Retrofit Technology. 


sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS