66422 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1The Phoenix metropolitan area is also a 

nonattainment area for respirable particulate matter 

(PM10); however, the VEI program plays a very 

minor role in the control strategy for this pollutant. 

There is no CAA requirement for I/M programs in 

PM10 nonattainment areas and no PM10 reduction 

credited from EPA’s emission models, MOBILE 6.2 

or MOVES. 

2 VOC and NOX are precursors to ozone formation 

in the atmosphere under the influence of sunlight 

and meteorology. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: October 19, 2012. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 2012–26756 Filed 11–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0552; FRL–9748–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Arizona; Motor 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Programs 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

three revisions to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan submitted by the 

Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality. Two of these revisions relate to 

an amendment to Arizona’s Basic and 

Enhanced Vehicle Emissions Inspection 

Programs that would exempt 

motorcycles in the Phoenix 

metropolitan area from emissions 

testing requirements. The third revision 

would expand the geographic area in 

which various air quality control 

measures, including the vehicle 

emissions inspection program but also 

including other control measures, apply 

in the Phoenix metropolitan area. EPA 

is proposing approval of these SIP 

revisions because we have found that 

they meet all applicable requirements 

and would not interfere with reasonable 

further progress or attainment of any of 

the national ambient air quality 

standards. EPA is proposing this action 

under the Clean Air Act obligation to 

take action on State submittals of 

revisions to state implementation plans. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 5, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2011–0552, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: Jeffrey Buss at 

buss.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning 

Office (AIR–2), at fax number 415–947– 

3579. 

4. Mail: Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning 

Office (AIR–2), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne, San Francisco, California 

94105. 

5. Hand or Courier Delivery: Jeffrey 

Buss, Air Planning Section (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne, San 

Francisco, California 94105. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. Special arrangements should 

be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR–2011– 

0552. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information 

through www.regulations.gov or email 

that you consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected from disclosure. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

anonymous access system, which means 

EPA will not know your identity or 

contact information unless you provide 

it in the body of your comment. If you 

send an email comment directly to EPA 

without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Office (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, California 94105. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection during normal 

business hours. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Buss, Office of Air Planning, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, (415) 947–4152, email: 

buss.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction and Background 

II. Summary of Arizona’s SIP Submittals 

III. EPA Review of the SIP Revisions 

A. CAA Procedural Provisions 

B. I/M Program Requirements 

1. Geographic Coverage 

2. Vehicle Coverage and Exemptions 

3. Compliance Enforcement 

4. Performance Evaluation 

C. Demonstrating Noninterference With 

Attainment and Maintenance Under 

CAA Section 110(l) 

1. Ozone 

2. Carbon Monoxide 

3. Particulate Matter 

4. Air Toxics 

5. Conclusion 

IV. EPA’s Proposed Action and Request for 

Public Comment 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Introduction and Background 

In May 1995, EPA approved Arizona’s 

Basic and Enhanced Vehicle Emissions 

Inspection/Maintenance (VEI) Programs 

as a revision to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) under the 

Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 

(CAA or ‘‘Act’’) and EPA’s motor 

vehicle inspection and maintenance 

rule (‘‘EPA’s I/M rule’’ or ‘‘federal I/M 

rule’’) as amended. See 60 FR 22518 

(May 8, 1995). A ‘‘basic’’ I/M program 

was required in the Phoenix 

metropolitan area (referred to as ‘‘Area 

A’’) due to the area’s designation as a 

‘‘moderate’’ nonattainment area for the 

carbon monoxide (CO) and the 1-hour 

ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS or ‘‘standard’’).1 The 

VEI program was designed to reduce 

emissions of CO, volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) and oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX).2 At that time, although 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 66423 

3 In 1997, EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone 

standard [0.08 parts per million (ppm)] to replace 

the 1-hour ozone standard. The 1-hour ozone 

standard was revoked effective June 15, 2005. 

4See page ES–6 of the Maricopa Association of 

Government’s (MAG’s) Carbon Monoxide 

Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for 

the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (May 

2003) and page ES–9 of MAG’s One-Hour Ozone 

Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for 

the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (March 

2004). 

5See pages V–20 and V–21 of exhibit 2 

(‘‘Technical Support Document for Ozone Modeling 

in Support of the Eight-Hour Ozone Plan for the 

Maricopa Nonattainment Area’’) of appendix A to 

the Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment 

Plan. 

it was not required to have an 

‘‘enhanced’’ I/M program, Arizona was 

implementing most elements of an 

enhanced program in Phoenix. 

Arizona’s program, as implemented in 

Phoenix, however, was not approved as 

an enhanced program, because the 

program did not satisfy all the 

requirements in EPA’s I/M rule for 

enhanced programs. An enhanced I/M 

program became a requirement for the 

Phoenix area when the area was 

reclassified from ‘‘moderate’’ 

nonattainment to ‘‘serious’’ 

nonattainment for the CO NAAQS 

effective August 28, 1996 (61 FR 39343, 

July 29, 1996), and when the area was 

reclassified from ‘‘moderate’’ 

nonattainment to ‘‘serious’’ 

nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS effective February 13, 1998 (63 

FR 7290 February 13, 1998). 

Since the Arizona VEI programs were 

originally approved in May 1995, EPA 

has amended the federal I/M rule 

several times to provide states with 

more flexibility in designing their 

programs but also to require testing of 

the on-board diagnostic (OBD) system. 

Since that time, Arizona has also made 

a number of changes to its enhanced 

and basic VEI programs. 

In January 2003, we approved changes 

to the Arizona VEI programs submitted 

to us on July 6, 2001 and April 10, 2002, 

including the incorporation of OBD 

testing, an exemption for the first five 

model year vehicles from the programs 

on a rolling basis, replacement of the 

previously-approved remote sensing 

program in Phoenix with an on-road 

testing study, and legislative changes to 

the waiver provisions. See 68 FR 2912 

(January 22, 2003). In our January 2003 

final rule, we also approved the VEI 

program in the Phoenix area as meeting 

the enhanced I/M program performance 

standard. 

In our January 2003 final rule, we also 

approved an expansion of the 

geographic area in which the VEI 

program in the Phoenix area applies, an 

area referred to as ‘‘Area A.’’ Area A, as 

approved in 2003, includes all of the 

metropolitan Phoenix carbon monoxide 

and 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas 

plus additional areas in Maricopa 

County to the north, east, and west, as 

well as a small portion of Yavapai 

County and the western portions of 

Pinal County. ‘‘Area A’’ is also used by 

the State of Arizona to identify the 

applicable area for implementation of a 

number of other air pollution control 

measures, including but not limited to 

the EPA-approved cleaner burning 

gasoline (CBG) and stage II vapor 

recovery programs. See, e.g., 69 FR 

10161 (March 4, 2004) (approval of CBG 

program), and 77 FR 35279 (June 13, 

2012) (approval of revised Stage II vapor 

recovery program). ‘‘Area A’’ is defined 

at Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 

section 49–541, subsection (1). 

In April 2004, we published a final 

rule governing the transition from the 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS to the 8-hour ozone 

standard that we promulgated in 1997. 

See 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).3

Under our April 2004 final rule, we 

established certain ‘‘anti-backsliding 

requirements’’ that would continue to 

apply to 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas based on an area’s designation and 

classification for the 1-hour ozone 

standard at the time of designation for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, even 

after revocation of the 1-hour ozone 

standard. The I/M program requirement 

was included in the list of such ‘‘antibacksliding’’ requirements. See 40 CFR 

51.900(f)(2) and 51.905(a)(1)(i). 

In April 2004, we published a second 

final rule related to ozone, and in this 

other rule, we designated the PhoenixMesa area as a nonattainment area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, 69 FR 

23858, at 23878 (April 30, 2004), and, 

later, classified the area as ‘‘Subpart 2/ 

Marginal’’ for that standard, 77 FR 

28424 (May 14, 2012). Thus, the 

requirement to continue to implement 

an enhanced I/M program continues to 

apply in the Phoenix metropolitan area 

based the area’s designation and 

classification for the 1-hour ozone 

standard notwithstanding revocation of 

the 1-hour ozone standard in June 2005. 

In 2005, we approved maintenance 

plans and redesignation requests for 

both the carbon monoxide and 1-hour 

ozone standards in the Phoenix area. 

See 70 FR 11553 (March 9, 2005) 

(carbon monoxide redesignation request 

and maintenance plan approval), and 70 

FR 34362 (June 14, 2005) (1-hour ozone 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan approval). Both approved 

maintenance plans include ‘‘Expansion 

of Area A Boundaries’’ as a contingency 

measure.4 In these plans, ‘‘Expansion of 

Area A Boundaries’’ refers to an 

amendment to the definition of Area A 

in ARS 49–541 that was made by the 

Arizona Legislature in 2001 to expand 

the boundaries of this area beyond the 

boundaries approved by EPA in 2003 to 

add portions of Maricopa County west 

of Goodyear and Peoria and a small 

piece of land on the north side of Lake 

Pleasant in Yavapai County. In light of 

the fact that the Legislature had already 

acted, the two maintenance plans noted 

that ‘‘Expansion of Area A’’ was an 

example of ‘‘early implementation’’ of a 

contingency measure. 

In March 2007, we approved changes 

to the Arizona VEI programs submitted 

to us on December 23, 2005 and October 

3, 2006, including an exemption for 

collectible vehicles from VEI testing in 

the Phoenix metropolitan area, and 

collectible vehicles and motorcycles 

from VEI testing in the Tucson 

metropolitan area. See 72 FR 15046 

(March 30, 2007). In our March 2007 

rule, we also approved an updated 

performance evaluation standard for the 

VEI program in the Phoenix area; and 

new contingency measures. 

On June 13, 2007, ADEQ submitted 

the Eight-Hour Ozone Plan for the 

Maricopa Nonattainment Area (June 

2007) (‘‘Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour 

Ozone Attainment Plan’’) to 

demonstrate attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard in the PhoenixMesa nonattainment area by June 2009. 

Similar to the carbon monoxide and 1- 

hour ozone maintenance plans, the 

Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour Ozone 

Attainment Plan does not take 

emissions reduction credit for 

‘‘Expansion of Area A Boundaries’’ to 

demonstrate attainment or maintenance 

but lists ‘‘Expansion of Area A 

Boundaries’’ as a contingency measure. 

We approved the plan at 77 FR 35285 

(June 13, 2012). As a contingency 

measure, ADEQ estimated that 

‘‘Expansion of Area A Boundaries’’ 

would reduce VOC emissions by 

approximately 1.3 metric tons per day 

by increasing the number of vehicles 

subject to the VEI program.5

In March 2009, ADEQ submitted the 

MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan for the 

Maricopa Nonattainment Area 

(February 2009) (‘‘Phoenix-Mesa EightHour Ozone Maintenance Plan’’) to 

demonstrate the criteria for 

redesignation to ‘‘attainment’’ have been 

satisfied and to demonstrate 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard through year 2025. Unlike the 

previous plans, the Phoenix-Mesa EightHour Ozone Maintenance Plan includes 

‘‘Expansion of Area A Boundaries’’ as a 

measure for which credit is taken to 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

66424 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

6See page ES–4 of the Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour 

Ozone Maintenance Plan. 

7See page 3–12 of the Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour 

Ozone Maintenance Plan. 

8Through House Bill 2073 in 2012, the Arizona 

Legislature has further extended the date 

authorizing the motorcycle exemption to July 2014. 

9See exhibit 1 in Appendix C to the 2012 PM– 

10 Five Percent Plan. 

demonstrate maintenance of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard through 2025.6 The 

maintenance demonstration in the 

Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance Plan specifically excludes 

motorcycles from the calculated 

emissions reductions from the VEI.7

We have not yet taken action on the 

Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance Plan and do not propose 

action related to that plan herein. 

However, today’s proposed approval of 

the expansion of Area A boundaries, as 

codified in amended ARS 49–541(1) and 

submitted on May 25, 2012 in 

connection with the 2012 Phoenix Area 

PM–10 Five Percent Plan (discussed in 

the following section of this document), 

provides support for the Phoenix-Mesa 

Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan 

given its reliance on the expansion of 

Area A boundaries in maintaining the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard once the 

area is redesignated. EPA will take 

action on the Phoenix-Mesa Eight-Hour 

Ozone Maintenance Plan in one or more 

future rulemakings. 

Lastly, in March 2008, EPA revised 

the 8-hour ozone standard to 0.075 parts 

per million (ppm). See 73 FR 16436 

(March 27, 2008). More recently, we 

designated the Phoenix-Mesa area as a 

‘‘Marginal’’ nonattainment area for the 

2008 ozone standard, effective July 20, 

2012. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). 

Such ‘‘Marginal’’ nonattainment areas 

must attain the standard as 

expeditiously as practicable but not 

later than July 20, 2015 (i.e., 3 years 

from July 20, 2012, the effective date of 

the nonattainment designation). 

II. Summary of Arizona’s SIP 

Submittals 

The Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) 

submitted the most recent statutory 

changes to its Basic and Enhanced VEI 

Programs as a revision to the Arizona 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) on 

November 6, 2009 (‘‘2009 VEI SIP 

Revision’’). The 2009 VEI SIP Revision 

submittal includes the SIP revision 

itself, divided into a non-regulatory 

portion, ‘‘Final Arizona State 

Implementation Plan Revision, 

Exemption of Motorcycles from Vehicle 

Emissions Inspection/Maintenance 

Requirements in Area A’’ (October 

2009), and a regulatory portion, House 

Bill (HB) 2280, as well as supporting 

materials related to legal authority, 

adoption, public process and technical 

analysis. 

HB 2280 amends the Arizona Revised 

Statutes (ARS) Section 49–542 by 

exempting motorcycles from emissions 

testing in Area A (i.e., the Phoenix area). 

Specifically, the amendments to ARS 

49–542 are found in paragraphs or 

subparagraphs (F)(2)(e), (F)(3), (J)(2)(l), 

and (K) of that section of code. The 

changes to ARS Section 49–542 are selfimplementing, which means that they 

become effective upon EPA approval as 

a revision to the Arizona SIP. Section 2 

of HB 2280 provides that the exemption 

becomes effective upon EPA approval of 

a SIP revision on or before July 10, 2010. 

In consultation with EPA concerning 

the VEI SIP Revision, ADEQ prepared 

additional information regarding the 

impacts of the motorcycle exemption on 

attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS and the 1987 PM10 NAAQS. On 

January 11, 2011, ADEQ adopted and 

submitted the additional information 

and a replacement measure in a 

supplemental SIP revision, entitled, 

‘‘Addendum to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan Revision, 

Exemption of Motorcycles from Vehicle 

Emissions Inspections and Maintenance 

Program Requirements in Area A, 

October 2009’’ (December 2010) (‘‘2011 

VEI SIP Addendum’’). In the cover letter 

to the 2011 VEI SIP Addendum, ADEQ 

indicated that, through House Bill 2033 

adopted in April 2010, the Arizona 

Legislature had extended the date 

authorizing the motorcycle exemption 

to July 2012.8 Also, as part of the 

submittal of the 2011 VEI SIP 

Addendum, ADEQ documented the 

public participation process that was 

conducted by ADEQ prior to adoption 

and submittal of the Addendum to EPA. 

On May 25, 2012, ADEQ submitted 

the MAG 2012 Five Percent Plan for 

PM–10 for the Maricopa County 

Nonattainment Area (May 2012) (‘‘2012 

Phoenix Area PM–10 Five Percent 

Plan’’). The 2012 PM–10 Phoenix Area 

Five Percent Plan was submitted to 

provide for attainment of the PM10

standard and an annual reduction in 

PM10 emissions within the area of not 

less than five percent until attainment of 

the standard. Among the statutes 

submitted as part of the 2012 Phoenix 

Area PM–10 Five Percent Plan for 

approval as part of the Arizona SIP is 

ARS 49–541(1), which establishes the 

boundaries of Area A as expanded by 

the Arizona Legislature in 2001.9 As 

noted, several previous plans for the 

Phoenix area had included ‘‘Expansion 

of Area A Boundaries’’ as a contingency 

measure, but the more recent submitted 

plans, including the Phoenix-Mesa 

Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan 

and the 2012 Phoenix Area PM–10 Five 

Percent Plan, rely on it as part of the 

long-term control or maintenance 

strategy. With respect to ADEQ’s May 

25, 2012 SIP revision submittal of the 

2012 Phoenix Area PM–10 Five Percent 

Plan, EPA is proposing action only on 

the amended statutory provision that 

expands the boundaries of Area A [i.e., 

amended ARS 49–541(1)]. EPA will take 

action on the rest of the 2012 Phoenix 

Area PM–10 Five Percent Plan in one or 

more future rulemakings. 

III. EPA Review of the SIP Revisions 

A. CAA Procedural Provisions 

CAA section 110(l) requires revisions 

to a SIP to be adopted by the state after 

reasonable notice and public hearing. 

EPA has promulgated specific 

requirements for SIP revisions in 40 

CFR part 51, subpart F. 

On September 14 and 15, 2009, ADEQ 

published notices in newspapers of 

general circulation in the Phoenix area 

of public hearings on proposed 

revisions to the Arizona SIP to exempt 

motorcycles in Phoenix from emissions 

testing requirements under the Arizona 

VEI programs (i.e., a draft VEI SIP 

Revision). Public hearings were held on 

October 15, 2009 in Phoenix. On 

November 6, 2009, in accordance with 

Arizona law, ADEQ adopted these 

exemptions as set forth in ‘‘Final 

Arizona State Implementation Plan 

Revision, Exemption of Motorcycles 

from Vehicle Emissions Inspection/ 

Maintenance Requirements in Area A’’ 

(October 2009) as a revision to the 

Arizona SIP and submitted the revision 

to EPA for approval. 

ADEQ followed a similar process in 

adopting and submitting the 2011 VEI 

SIP Addendum. ADEQ held a public 

hearing on December 15, 2010 in 

Phoenix on a draft VEI SIP Addendum 

and adopted the VEI SIP Addendum on 

January 11, 2011 in accordance with 

Arizona law prior to submittal to EPA 

as a revision to the Arizona SIP. 

ADEQ also provided for public 

comment and hearing of the 2012 

Phoenix Area PM–10 Five Percent Plan. 

Specifically, ADEQ published notice of 

the start of a 30-day comment period on 

March 12, 2012. In this notice, ADEQ 

also provided notice of a public hearing 

that was, as scheduled, held on April 

12, 2012. See exhibit 1 (‘‘Public Hearing 

Process Documentation’’) to appendix E 

to the 2012 Phoenix Area PM–10 Five 

Percent Plan. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 66425 

10ADEQ submitted the 2009 VEI SIP Revision 

prior to the availability and requirement to use 

EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator model 

‘‘MOVES2010’’. While ADEQ’s 2011 VEI SIP 

Addendum was submitted after the availability of 

MOVES2010, we did not require the use of the new 

MOVES2010 model because significant work had 

already begun on the SIP revision. See 75 FR 9411 

(March 2, 2010). 

ADEQ’s 2009 VEI SIP Revision, 2011 

VEI SIP Addendum, and 2012 Phoenix 

Area PM–10 Five Percent Plan submittal 

packages include evidence of public 

notice and hearing, ADEQ responses to 

public comments, and ADEQ adoption 

as described above, and, based on 

review of these materials, we find that 

ADEQ has met the procedural 

requirements of CAA section 110(l) and 

40 CFR part 51, subpart F. 

B. I/M Program Requirements 

As noted in Section I, Introduction 

and Background, herein, Arizona’s VEI 

programs were most recently approved 

as meeting federal I/M program 

requirements on March 30, 2007 (72 FR 

15046). Although the Phoenix and 

Tucson areas have been redesignated to 

‘‘attainment’’ for the CO NAAQS, the 

VEI programs continue to be relied upon 

to maintain the CO standard in those 

areas. Moreover, ‘‘enhanced’’ I/M 

remains an ‘‘applicable requirement’’ for 

the Phoenix area under our final rule 

implementing the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

(see 40 CFR 51.900(f) and 51.905(a)(1)) 

based on the designation of that area as 

a nonattainment area for the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS (and designation as 

nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS at the time of designation for 

the 8-hour standard). Thus, to be 

approved, the VEI programs, as 

amended and evaluated herein, must 

continue to meet the relevant 

enforceability requirements for I/M 

programs in subpart S of 40 CFR part 51 

and, for the Phoenix area with respect 

to ozone, the enhanced performance 

standard in 40 CFR 51.351. In the 

following paragraphs, we review 

ADEQ’s 2009 VEI SIP Revision and 2011 

VEI SIP Addendum to determine 

whether the amended VEI programs 

continue to meet federal I/M program 

requirements. 

The aspects of I/M affected by the 

submitted revisions to the VEI programs 

and the expansion of Area A boundaries 

include geographic coverage, vehicle 

coverage and exemptions, compliance 

enforcement, and the performance 

standard evaluation. 

1. Geographic Coverage 

EPA’s I/M regulations require that 

state I/M programs be implemented in 

the entire urbanized area, based on the 

1990 census. See 40 CFR 51.350. We 

have found in our approvals of the 

Arizona VEI program in 1995 and 2003 

that the geographic coverage of the VEI 

program in the Phoenix area meets the 

minimum requirements of EPA’s I/M 

regulations. Since then, no regulatory 

changes or new designations have 

changed the minimum requirements 

with respect to the geographic coverage 

of the I/M program in the Phoenix area, 

and thus, the expansion of the 

boundaries of Area A, which define the 

area in which the VEI program is 

implemented, is also acceptable. 

2. Vehicle Coverage and Exemptions 

The performance standard for 

enhanced I/M programs (including 

alternate low enhanced programs) 

assumes coverage of all 1968 and later 

model year light duty vehicles and 

trucks. Light duty trucks are not 

included in the performance standard 

for basic I/M programs. Other levels of 

coverage may be approved if the 

necessary emission reductions are 

achieved. See 40 CFR 51.356. 

The Arizona VEI programs approved 

by EPA in 1995 exempt several 

categories of vehicles from the 

emissions testing requirements. Such 

vehicle categories included, among 

others, vehicles manufactured in or 

before the 1966 model year and vehicles 

being sold between motor vehicle 

dealers. See 60 FR 22518, 22521 (May 

8, 1995). In 2003, we approved revisions 

to the VEI programs including an 

exemption for the first five model year 

vehicles on a rolling basis. See 68 FR 

2912 (January 22, 2003). In 2007, we 

exempted collectible vehicles from the 

Phoenix and Tucson areas and 

motorcycles from the Tucson area. The 

SIP revision we are acting on today 

would establish an additional vehicle 

category that would be exempt from 

emissions testing requirements: 

Motorcycles from the Phoenix area. 

Based on data for calendar year 2008, 

motorcycles make up approximately 

38,100 (or 3.7 percent) of the 1,027,600 

total number of vehicles subject to VEI 

in the Phoenix area. See table 9 on page 

17 of the 2009 VEI SIP Revision. 

Basic and enhanced I/M programs are 

not required to test any particular 

category of motor vehicles so long as the 

performance standard is met, and thus 

I/M programs are not required to test 

motorcycles. The effect of the new 

exemption for motorcycles on the 

continued ability of the VEI program in 

the Phoenix area to meet the enhanced 

I/M program performance standard is 

discussed below in Section III.B.3, 

‘‘Performance Evaluation,’’ and the 

effect of the new exemptions on 

emissions and ambient air quality in 

Phoenix is discussed herein in Section 

III.C, ‘‘Demonstrating Noninterference 

With Attainment And Maintenance 

Under CAA Section 110(l).’’ 

3. Compliance Enforcement 

Section 51.361 of title 40 of the CFR 

requires that denial of motor vehicle 

registration be the method used to 

ensure compliance with enhanced I/M 

programs. ARS Section 49–542(D) and 

Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) 

R18–2–1007 requires that all vehicles 

must complete a vehicle emissions 

inspection to obtain a vehicle 

registration. 

Exemption of motorcycles in the 

Phoenix area from emissions testing 

would be straightforward from the 

standpoint of compliance enforcement 

and would not undermine compliance 

enforcement for other types of vehicles 

that continue to be subject to the 

emissions testing requirements under 

the VEI program in the Phoenix area. 

Owners of motorcycles registered in the 

Phoenix area will simply receive a 

registration or re-registration form from 

the Arizona Department of 

Transportation, Motor Vehicle Division 

that indicates ‘‘emissions test not 

required.’’ 

Therefore, we find that the Arizona 

VEI programs, as amended to exempt 

motorcycles in the Phoenix area, would 

continue to meet the compliance 

enforcement requirements of 40 CFR 

51.361. 

4. Performance Evaluation 

As part of the 2009 VEI SIP Revision 

submittal, ADEQ provided an updated 

performance evaluation using the EPA’s 

motor vehicle emissions model, 

MOBILE6.2.10 The updated performance 

evaluation included a summary report 

and paper copies of MOBILE6.2 input 

and output files. The purpose of the 

updated performance evaluation is to 

determine whether the VEI program, as 

amended to exempt motorcycles, would 

continue to meet the federal enhanced 

I/M performance standard (codified at 

40 CFR 51.351) in the Phoenix area. The 

need for an updated performance 

evaluation follows from the fact that the 

Phoenix area, which was designated as 

nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS (at the time of designation for 

the 8-hour ozone nonattainment), is 

designated as nonattainment for the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS and that enhanced 

I/M remains an ‘‘applicable 

requirement’’ for such areas under our 

final rule implementing the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS [see 40 CFR 51.900(f) 

and 51.905(a)(1)]. 

For the updated evaluation, ADEQ 

developed and applied reduction factors 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

66426 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

to exclude motorcycles from the fleet 

tested under the VEI program as 

provided for in HB 2280. ADEQ then 

compared the emissions reduction 

benefits from the revised VEI program 

with the corresponding benefits that 

would be achieved under EPA’s 

alternate low enhanced I/M 

performance standard. 

The results of ADEQ’s analysis are 

summarized in Table 1 below, which 

shows that the emissions reduction 

benefits achieved by the Phoenix VEI 

program as amended are higher than 

those achieved under the performance 

standard. The amended Phoenix VEI 

program thus continues to achieve 

greater emissions reductions than the 

federal model program because the VEI 

program includes elements that go 

beyond federal I/M requirements. These 

include a requirement for a one-time 

only waiver, an implementation area 

beyond the nonattainment area 

boundaries, and denial of waivers for 

grossly-emitting vehicles. 

TABLE 1—RESULTS OF ADEQ’S ALTERNATE LOW ENHANCED PERFORMANCE STANDARD MODELING a

2002 2008 

VOC NOX CO VOC NOX CO 

I/M Benefits in Area A (grams/mile) ........ 0.201 0.109 2.938 0.088 0.101 1.579 

I/M Performance Standard benefits 

(grams/mile) .......................................... 0.152 0.026 2.262 0.056 0.006 1.160 

aThe emission rates in this table represent the difference between the fleet-wide emission rate under the applicable program (i.e., amended 

Arizona VEI program or EPA’s I/M model program) and the corresponding emission rate under the no-I/M scenario. See Table 8 on page 16 of 

the 2009 VEI SIP Revision. 

Based on our review of the 2009 VEI 

SIP Revision, we find ADEQ’s methods 

used to update the performance 

standard evaluation and use of the 

alternate low enhanced I/M 

performance standard to be acceptable, 

and we find that the VEI program, as 

amended to exempt motorcycles in the 

Phoenix area from the emissions testing 

requirements, exceeds the alternate low 

enhanced I/M performance standard in 

the Phoenix area as required under 40 

CFR 51.351 and 51.905(a)(1). 

C. Demonstrating Noninterference With 

Attainment and Maintenance Under 

CAA Section 110(l) 

Revisions to SIP-approved control 

measures must meet the requirements of 

Clean Air Act section 110(l) to be 

approved by EPA. Section 110(l) states 

in relevant part: ‘‘The Administrator 

shall not approve a revision of a plan if 

the revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in section 171), or 

any other applicable requirement of this 

Act.’’ 

We interpret section 110(l) to apply to 

all requirements of the CAA and to all 

areas of the country, whether 

attainment, nonattainment, 

unclassifiable, or maintenance for one 

or more of the six criteria pollutants. We 

also interpret section 110(l) to require a 

demonstration addressing all pollutants 

whose emissions and/or ambient 

concentrations may change as a result of 

the SIP revision. Thus, for example, 

modification of a SIP-approved measure 

may impact NOX emissions, which may 

impact ozone and PM2.5. The scope and 

rigor of an adequate section 110(l) 

demonstration of noninterference 

depends on the air quality status of the 

area, the potential impact of the revision 

on air quality, the pollutant(s) affected, 

and the nature of the applicable CAA 

requirements. 

The 2009 VEI SIP Revision submittal 

that seeks exemption of motorcycles 

from the Phoenix enhanced I/M 

program includes an evaluation of the 

effects of the revision to the VEI 

programs on ozone, carbon monoxide, 

PM2.5, and PM10 within the Phoenix 

metropolitan area. The details of 

ADEQ’s evaluation of the emissions 

effects and related ambient air quality 

impacts of the new exemptions are 

contained in ‘‘Technical Support 

Document for Evaluating Emissions 

Impacts of Exempting Motorcycles from 

Vehicle Emissions Inspections and 

Comparing Inspection and Maintenance 

(I/M) Emission Reduction Benefits in 

Area A with the EPA Enhanced I/M 

Performance Standard (August 19, 

2009)’’ (‘‘2009 Report’’), which was 

included as Appendix B to the 2009 VEI 

SIP Revision. 

The 2009 report indicates that ADEQ 

used the EPA’s motor vehicle emissions 

model program, MOBILE6.2, to estimate 

the emissions effects of the new 

exemptions. The methods used to gather 

data included acquisition of data from 

the State vehicle emissions inspections 

programs, other state agencies, air 

quality planning agencies and relevant 

air quality plans. We find that ADEQ 

used reasonable methods and 

appropriate models in estimating the 

emissions effects of the new 

exemptions. Table 2 below summarizes 

ADEQ’s estimates by pollutant in units 

of metric tons per day (mtpd). Table 2 

also shows the emissions impact as a 

percentage of the overall pollutantspecific inventory in the applicable 

area. 

TABLE 2—VOC AND CO EMISSIONS INCREASES ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2009 VEI SIP REVISION a

Pollutant 

Area-wide total 

emissions 

(mtpd) 

I/M benefit 

from motorcycle test and 

repair (mtpd) 

Percent of 

areawide total 

emissions 

inventory 

Volatile Organic Compounds ....................................................................................................... 606.7 0.056 0.009 

Carbon Monoxide ........................................................................................................................ 912.3 0.246 0.027 

a I/M Benefit = the reduction in on-road emissions due to the motorcycle exemption in Area A. See pages 7 and 12 of 2009 VEI SIP Revision. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 66427 

11See page 5–16 of the approved Phoenix-Mesa 

Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan, and footnote #5 

included in this action. 

12On page ES–8 of MAG’s Carbon Monoxide 

Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for 

the Maricopa County Nonattainment Area (May 

2003), MAG estimates that Area A Expansion would 

reduce area-wide CO emissions by 0.1%. 

13See MAG’s Carbon Monoxide Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa 

County Nonattainment Area (May 2003), page 3–10. 

14See page 13 of the 2009 VEI SIP Revision. 

15 ‘‘PM–10 Source Apportionment and Deposition 

Study Prepared for Maricopa Association of 

Governments by Sierra Research, Inc.’’, 2008, p. 2. 

1. Ozone 

Ozone is formed by the interaction of 

directly-emitted precursor emissions, 

volatile organic compounds (VOC) and 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), as influenced 

by the meteorological and topographical 

features of an area. 

As noted above, in 2004, EPA 

designated the Phoenix area as a 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard, 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 

2004), and in 2012, designated the 

Phoenix area as a nonattainment area for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard, 77 FR 

30088 (May 21, 2012). 

As indicated in Table 2 above, based 

on ADEQ’s estimates, the revision to the 

2009 VEI program in Phoenix would 

increase VOC emissions by 

approximately 0.056 metric tons per 

day, which represents approximately 

0.009% of the overall VOC emissions 

inventory in this area under existing 

conditions. ADEQ did not estimate NOX

emissions, but we agree with ADEQ’s 

assertion that repairs to vehicles to 

reduce VOC and CO emissions often 

result in an incremental increase in NOX

emissions and, thus, discontinuance of 

such repairs (e.g., through an 

exemption) could result in an 

incremental decrease in such emissions. 

While minor, the incremental increase 

in VOC emissions due to the motorcycle 

exemption would occur in an area that 

is violating the 2008 ozone standard 

based on the design value for 2008– 

2010. 

ADEQ’s 2011 VEI SIP Addendum 

includes a measure that is intended to 

substitute for the foregone VOC 

emissions reductions from the 

motorcycle exemption and to thereby 

provide a basis to find that the 2009 VEI 

SIP Revision would not interfere with 

attainment of the 2008 ozone standard. 

The measure identified as the substitute 

is a 2008 EPA rule for aerosol coatings 

(spray paints and coatings) (‘‘coatings 

rule’’). See 73 FR 15604 (March 24, 

2008) 74 FR 29595 (June 23, 2009). The 

compliance date for the 2008 EPA 

coatings rule was July 1, 2009. The 

designation of the Phoenix-Mesa area as 

a ‘‘marginal’’ nonattainment for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS reflects ambient 

data from calendar years 2008–2010, 

and thus reflects in part the VOC 

emission reduction benefit from the 

2008 EPA coatings rule and still the 

Phoenix area appears to be violating the 

2008 ozone standard. Thus, with the 

information available at the present 

time, we cannot conclude that the 

coatings rule would offset the VOC 

emissions increases estimated to occur 

due to the motorcycle exemption. 

However, we find that the expansion of 

the boundaries of Area A, as submitted 

in regulatory form in ADEQ’s submittal 

dated May 25, 2012, would more than 

offset the incremental increase in VOC 

emissions. 

As noted above, the estimated benefit 

of ‘‘Expansion of Area A Boundaries’’ 

would be approximately 1.3 metric tons 

per day of VOC due to the extension of 

the applicability of the VEI program to 

areas not otherwise subject to the 

program.11 In contrast, the incremental 

increase in VOC emissions due to the 

motorcycle exemption is estimated by 

ADEQ to be less than 0.1 metric tons per 

day (or more specifically, 0.056 mtpd). 

Thus, we find that exempting 

motorcycles from emissions testing 

under the VEI program, together with 

expanding the boundaries of Area A, 

would not interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of the ozone NAAQS in 

the Phoenix area. 

2. Carbon Monoxide 

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a product of 

incomplete combustion of fuels. In most 

urban areas, most of the CO comes from 

motor vehicle exhaust. 

In 2005, EPA redesignated the 

Phoenix area for CO, and approved a 

maintenance plan that provides for 

maintenance of the CO NAAQS in that 

area through 2015. See 70 FR 11553 

(March 9, 2005) and 70 FR 52926 

(September 6, 2005). 

As indicated in Table 2 above, based 

on ADEQ’s estimates, the motorcycle 

exemption would increase CO 

emissions by approximately 0.246 

metric tons per day, which represents 

approximately 0.027% of the overall CO 

emissions inventory in this area under 

existing conditions. This incremental 

increase would be more than offset by 

the expansion of Area A boundaries.12

Moreover, the net reduction in CO 

emissions due to these SIP revisions 

would occur in an area where overall 

CO emissions are expected to remain 

relatively constant over the next 10 

years and where ambient CO levels are 

well below the NAAQS. 

Specifically, overall CO emissions are 

expected to decrease by only 1% 

between 2006 and 2015,13 and the 

highest second-highest value (i.e., the 

basis for the NAAQS) collected among 

the 14 stations comprising the CO 

monitoring network in the Phoenix area 

is 4.6 ppm, eight-hour average, or less 

than 55% of the 8-hour CO NAAQS 

(based on 2006–2007 data).14

Therefore, based on the net reduction 

in CO emissions due to the VEI SIP 

Revision and expansion of Area A 

boundaries, the relatively constant level 

of overall CO emissions, and monitoring 

data that shows that ambient CO levels 

remain well below the CO NAAQS, we 

find that exempting motorcycles from 

emissions testing under the VEI 

program, together with expanding the 

boundaries of Area A, would not 

interfere with continued attainment of 

the CO NAAQS in the Phoenix area. 

3. Particulate Matter 

EPA has promulgated different 

NAAQS for particles with a nominal 

aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or 

less (PM10) and for particles with a 

nominal aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 

micrometers (microns) or less (PM2.5). 

Ambient PM10 and PM2.5 levels consist 

of directly-emitted particles as well as 

secondary particles formed through 

atmospheric reactions involving such 

precursors as NOX and sulfur dioxide 

(SO2). 

In 1990, the Phoenix area was 

designated as a ‘‘moderate’’ 

nonattainment for the PM10 NAAQS by 

operation of law under the CAA 

Amendments of 1990. EPA reclassified 

the area as ‘‘serious’’ in 1996. See 61 FR 

21372 (May 10, 1996). In 2002, EPA 

approved the ‘‘serious area’’ PM10 plan, 

which was intended to provide for 

attainment of the PM10 NAAQS in the 

Phoenix area by 2006. See 67 FR 48718 

(July 25, 2002); certain plan elements reapproved at 71 FR 43979 (August 3, 

2006). In 2007, EPA finalized its finding 

that the Phoenix area had failed to attain 

the PM10 NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date. See 72 FR 31183 (June 

6, 2007). Finally, on February 14, 2011, 

EPA finalized its finding that the 

Phoenix area had failed to submit an 

attainment demonstration SIP for its 

PM10 nonattainment area. See 76 FR 

8300 (February 14, 2011). PM10

emissions in the Phoenix area are 

largely attributable to coarse particles, 

composed primarily of geologic 

material.15

In 2005, EPA designated Maricopa 

County as ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 

944, at 954 (January 5, 2005). More 

recently, EPA designated Maricopa 

County as ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

66428 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

16See pages 11–13 of the 2011 VEI SIP 

Addendum. 17See page 19 of the 2009 VEI SIP Revision. 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 

6056 (February 3, 2011). Local 

monitoring by co-located PM10 and 

PM2.5 monitors confirms that PM2.5 on 

high PM10 days is a small fraction of the 

PM10 concentrations. 

PM10 emissions are emitted as a 

product of incomplete combustion along 

with such other pollutants as CO and 

VOC, and because the exemption of 

motorcycles from emissions testing 

requirements of the VEI program in the 

Phoenix area would incrementally 

increase emissions of the latter 

pollutants, it would also likely result in 

the incremental increase of the former 

as well. 

Neither the MOBILE6.2 nor the 

MOVES2010 emissions models provide 

any PM10 emission reduction credit for 

the I/M program. In light of its failure 

to attain the PM10 NAAQS, however, 

EPA requested ADEQ to attempt to 

quantify the PM10 emissions impact of 

this new exemption. ADEQ used the 

MOBILE6.2 model to estimate the I/M 

impact on PM10 emissions from 

motorcycles based on the gaseous 

hydrocarbon emissions. ADEQ’s 

estimated PM10 emissions in Area A due 

to the exemption of motorcycles from 

the VEI program is equivalent to 

approximately 0.000361% of the total 

PM10 emissions in Area A.16 However, 

similar to our evaluation for ozone, we 

find that the expansion of the 

boundaries of Area A would more than 

offset the minimal estimated increase in 

PM10 emissions due to the motorcycle 

exemption. As a result, we conclude 

that the motorcycle exemption, 

combined with the expansion of the 

boundaries in Area A, would be 

consistent with attainment of the PM10

standard in the Phoenix area. 

With respect to the PM2.5 standard, all 

of the PM10 from exhaust can be 

assumed to be PM2.5. We believe that the 

motorcycle exemption, considered 

together with the expansion of Area A 

boundaries, would not interfere with 

attainment or maintenance of the PM2.5

standard because there would be a net 

decrease in emissions and because the 

area is currently attaining the standard. 

4. Air Toxics 

Since the CAA does not have ambient 

air quality standards for air toxics, the 

EPA’s interpretation of section 110(l) is 

that an area’s compliance with any 

applicable Maximum Achievable 

Control Technology (MACT) standards, 

as well as any Federal Motor Vehicle 

Control Programs (FMVCP) under 

sections 112 or 202(l) of the CAA 

constitutes an acceptable demonstration 

of noninterference for air toxics. Motor 

vehicles are not subject to MACT 

standards, and the VEI SIP Revision, 

together with the expansion of Area A 

boundaries, will not interfere with any 

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs 

that apply in the area. For these reasons, 

the State thus concludes, and EPA 

concurs, that the VEI SIP Revision and 

expansion of Area A boundaries would 

not interfere with any applicable CAA 

requirements relative to air toxics. 

5. Conclusion 

Based on the evaluation presented 

above, we find that the exemption of 

motorcycles in the Phoenix area from 

the VEI program, coupled with the 

expansion of the boundaries of Area A 

would not interfere with reasonable 

further progress or attainment of any of 

the NAAQS, and thus, we propose to 

approve the 2009 VEI SIP Revision, 

2011 VEI SIP Addendum, and the 

expansion of the boundaries of Area A 

[i.e., amended ARS section 49–541(1)] 

as consistent with the requirements for 

SIP revisions under CAA section 110(l). 

D. Contingency Provisions of CAA 

Section 175A(d) 

In 2005, EPA redesignated the 

Phoenix area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the CO NAAQS and 

approved a maintenance plan. See 70 

FR 11553 (March 9, 2005) and 70 FR 

52926 (September 6, 2005). The CO 

maintenance plan includes contingency 

elements or plans that we approved as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A(d). 

The contingency plan establishes an 

action (or trigger) level protective of the 

NAAQS and identifies several measures, 

including expansion of ‘‘Area A’’ (the 

area in which certain control measures 

apply), for early implementation as well 

as consideration of additional measures 

on a set schedule following the 

triggering event. At the time of 

redesignation of the Phoenix area to 

attainment for the CO NAAQS, the VEI 

programs were adopted and approved 

into the Arizona SIP and were assumed 

to continue in effect throughout the 

maintenance periods. Moreover, the VEI 

programs at the time of redesignation of 

these areas did not exempt motorcycles 

from the emissions testing requirements. 

Generally, contingency plans should 

clearly identify the measures to be 

adopted, a schedule and procedure for 

adoption and implementation, and a 

specific time limit for action by the 

State and should also identify specific 

indicators, or triggers, which will be 

used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

implemented. See EPA Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, 

entitled ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ dated September 4, 1992. 

At a minimum, CAA section 175A(d) 

requires that the State adopt as 

contingency measures all control 

measures that had been approved in the 

SIP for the area prior to redesignation 

but that the State subsequently repeals 

or relaxes. In this instance, because the 

EPA-approved VEI emissions testing 

requirements applied to motorcycles at 

the time of redesignation for the 

Phoenix area, reinstatement of 

emissions testing for this newly-exempt 

vehicle category must be adopted as 

contingency measures for the Phoenix 

CO maintenance areas to comply with 

CAA section 175A(d). 

ADEQ’s 2009 VEI SIP Revision 

includes a new contingency measure 

establishing a binding commitment on 

ADEQ to request Legislative action to 

reinstate emissions testing for 

motorcycles in the Phoenix area should 

the applicable area experience a 

violation of the CO standards.17

Specifically, ADEQ’s contingency 

measure involves notification to the 

Legislature by the October following a 

violation of the CO standard in the 

Phoenix area. After notifying the 

Legislature, ADEQ will request that the 

Arizona Legislature enact new 

legislation to reinstate the motorcycle 

exemption during the General 

Legislative Session that begins in 

January. ADEQ’s request to the 

Legislature will call for testing to be 

renewed for the newly exempt vehicle 

category in the Phoenix testing area 

beginning the January following the 

General Legislative Session. 

We view ADEQ’s contingency 

measure in the context of the existing 

EPA-approved CO contingency plans for 

the Phoenix area, and as such, we find 

that the plans, as amended to include 

these new contingency measures, 

continue to meet the requirements of 

CAA section 175A(d), and that the new 

contingency measure itself is consistent 

with all applicable requirements. 

IV. EPA’s Proposed Action and Request 

for Public Comment 

Under section 110(k) of the CAA, EPA 

is proposing to approve the revisions to 

the Arizona SIP submitted by ADEQ on 

November 6, 2009 and January 11, 2011 

concerning the exemption of 

motorcycles from the Arizona VEI 

program in the Phoenix area, because 

we find that the revisions meet all 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 214 / Monday, November 5, 2012 / Proposed Rules 66429 

18Final approval of the amendment to ARS 49– 

541(1) that expands the boundaries of ‘‘Area A’’ to 

those promulgated by the Arizona Legislature in 

2001 would supersede the previous versions of ARS 

49–541(1) approved into the Arizona SIP and would 

expand the applicability under the Arizona SIP of 

the VEI program, the CBG program, the Stage II 

vapor recovery program and any other Arizona SIP 

control measure that relies on the definition of 

‘‘Area A’’ in ARS 49–541(1). 

applicable requirements, and together 

with the expansion of the geographic 

area to which the VEI and other air 

pollution control measures apply, 

would not interfere with reasonable 

further progress or attainment of any of 

the national ambient air quality 

standards. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the revised statutory provision 

[amended Arizona Revised Statutes 

(ARS) section 49–541(1)], submitted by 

ADEQ on May 25, 2012,18 that expands 

the boundaries of Area A, i.e., the area 

in which the various air pollution 

control measures (including the VEI, 

and cleaner burning gasoline and stage 

II vapor recovery programs) in the 

Phoenix area apply. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 Clean Air Act; 

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, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: October 22, 2012. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2012–26977 Filed 11–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0614; FRL–9749–1] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, San Joaquin 

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control 

District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District 

(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide 

(CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides 

of sulfur (SOX), and particulate matter 

(PM) emissions from glass melting 

furnaces. We are approving a local rule 

that regulates these emission sources 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the 

Act). We are taking comments on this 

proposal and plan to follow with a final 

action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

December 5, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2012–0614, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS