--PROPOSED--

1

PART 71 FEDERAL OPERATING PERMIT

STATEMENT OF BASIS

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community

Tri-Cities Landfill 

Permit No. SR-ROP-11-01

1. Facility Information

a. Permittee

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (SRPMIC)

10,005 East Osborn Rd.

Scottsdale, AZ 85256

b. Facility location

Section 24, T2N, R5E

The Tri-Cities Landfill (TCL) site is located approximately 2.5 miles east and 1 

mile south of the SRPMIC museum at 10,005 East Osborn Rd. The site is 

bounded by State Highway 87 on the north and the Salt River on the south. 

c. Contact information

Facility Contact: Daniel Daggett, (480) 362-7628

Responsible Official: Diane Enos (President), (480) 850-8000

d. Description of operations, products

The facility is a closed, municipal solid waste solid waste treatment and disposal 

facility. The facility operates a landfill gas (LFG) collection system that routes 

captured vapors either to an onsite flare for destruction, or to the nearby Tri-Cities 

Landfill Energy Facility for use as fuel in stationary internal combustion engines. 

e. Permitting and construction history

The facility is a closed landfill that accepted residential and commercial wastes 

from 1972 until October 9, 1993. The initial Part 71 permit (Permit No. SR-OP05-04) for this facility was issued on May 25, 2006. 
--PROPOSED--

2

f. Emission-generating units and activities

Table 1. Emission Unit Summary

Emission 

Unit I.D. No

Unit Description Associated Control 

Equipment

FL-1 Landfill Gas Flare (2,500 cfm

John Zink candlestick flare)

n/a

LF-1 Landfill Gas Surface Emissions open candlestick flare (FL-1)

2. Tribe Information

General

The reservation of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community is located in 

Maricopa County, AZ and borders the cities of Mesa, Tempe, Scottsdale, 

Fountain Hills and metropolitan Phoenix. The Community consists of 52,600 

acres, comprised mostly of agricultural lands. The Community is comprised of 

two Indian tribes, the Onk Akimel Au-Authm (Pima) and the Xalchidom Pii-pash 

(Maricopa). 

Local air quality and attainment status

This facility is located in Maricopa County, which is currently designated as in 

attainment or unclassifiable for CO, NO2, SO2, PM2.5, and Pb. Maricopa County 

is part of the Phoenix planning area, which has been designated as serious 

nonattainment for PM10.

1

 In addition, the facility is located in a portion of 

Maricopa County that is part of the Phoenix-Mesa planning area, which has been 

designated as marginal nonattainment for the 2008 8-hr ozone standard.2

 

3. Emissions

Potential to emit (PTE) means the maximum capacity to emit any air pollutant (criteria or 

HAPs) under its physical and operational design. Any physical or operational limitation 

on the maximum capacity of TCL to emit an air pollutant, including air pollution control 

equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material 

combusted, stored, or processed, may be treated as part of its design if the limitation is 

enforceable by U.S. EPA. PTE is meant to be a worst case emissions calculation and is 

 1 http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/hnp.html#6200

2 http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/pnp.html#6201
--PROPOSED--

3

used in many, though not all, cases to determine the applicability of federal requirements. 

Actual emissions may be much lower than PTE. 

The uncontrolled PTE of TCL is summarized in Table 6, and is below the Part 71 major 

source thresholds for all criteria pollutants. TCL is still required to obtain a Part 71 

permit per 40 CFR 60.752(b), as it is a municipal solid waste landfill (MSWL) with a 

design capacity greater than 2.5 million megagrams (Mg) and 2.5 million cubic meters

(m3). 

Landfill Gas Surface Emissions (LF-1)

Non-methane organic compound (NMOC) emission rates from the landfill were 

calculated using U.S. EPA’s Landfill Gas Estimation Model (LandGEM), which uses the 

first-order decay rate equation found in §60.754(a)(l)(i) to calculate NMOC emission 

rates. Because the landfill has been a closed site since 1993, and because landfill gas 

generation rates decline with no new waste acceptances, the peak year used for PTE was 

2004, the most recent year at the time of the original permit application. Based on the 

values summarized below, the LandGEM model estimated a total LFG generation rate of 

1,921 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) and a total NMOC emission rate of 60 Mg/yr

(66 tons per year (tpy)).

Table 2. LandGEM Summary

Variable Value Units Notes

k 0.02 year-1 Methane generation constant (AP-42 default 

for dry climates)

L0 100 m3/Mg 

(solid waste)

Methane generation potential (AP-42 default 

for dry climates)

CNMOC 595 ppmv Concentration of NMOC as hexane 3

M 10.4 x106 Mg Mass of solid waste in-place (2004)

MNMOC 60 Mg/yr Total (uncontrolled) NMOC emission rate 

66 tpy from the landfill (calculated per LandGEM)

Landfill gas surface emissions of VOC represent uncaptured VOC emissions (captured 

VOC emissions destroyed by the flare are included in FL-1 emissions below). The 

uncontrolled VOC emission rate is based on MNMOC as calculated by LandGEM and a 

VOC content of 39 wt% of total NMOC emissions.

4

Table 3. LF-1 Uncontrolled VOC Emissions

Uncontrolled 

NMOC 

Generation Rate

VOC 

Content 

of NMOC

Uncontrolled 

VOC 

Emissions

 3 AP-42 (11/98), Table 2.4-2 

4 Default VOC content per AP-42 (11/98), Table 2.4-2, footnote C
--PROPOSED--

4

(tpy) (wt%) (tpy)

66.10 39% 25.78

Based on a vapor collection system capture efficiency of 53% (i.e., an “uncaptured” 

fraction of 47%), VOC emissions from the landfill are estimated to be 12.01 tpy, as seen 

below.

5

Table 4. VOC flowrate summary

Uncontrolled 

VOC Emissions Fraction

VOC 

Flowrate Description

(tpy) wt% (tpy)

25.78

0.18 4.64 Captured – vented to flare

0.35 9.13 Captured – vented to TCLEF engines

0.47 12.01 Uncaptured emissions (LF-1)

Total 1.00 25.78

Landfill Gas Flare Emissions (FL-1)

FL-1 VOC emissions represent the fraction of VOC emissions from the landfill that are 

captured and vented to the flare. VOC emission estimates are based on a default AP-42 

flare destruction efficiency of 99.2% and the captured VOC flowrate to the flare 

described noted in Table 4 .

6

 

Table 5. FL-1 VOC Emissions

VOC flowrate to 

flare

Flare destruction 

efficiency

VOC 

Emissions

(tpy) (%) (tpy)

4.64 99.2% 0.04

FL-1 emissions of other criteria pollutants are based on an LFG flowrate to flare of 347 

scfm.7 NOx and CO emissions are based on John Zink manufacturer emission factors of 

0.06 lb/million British thermal units (MMBtu) and 0.20 lb/MMBtu, respectively.

8

 PM10

and SO2 emissions are based on AP-42 emission factor data and default values.9 A 

summary of criteria pollutant emissions is included below.

 5 Capture efficiency based on ratio of total actual LFG recovery (2004) to estimated LFG generation.

6 AP-42 (11/98), Table 2.4-3, NMOC typical flare control efficiency. 7 Based on a total LFG generation rate of 1921 scfm and 18% capture rate to the flare 8 LFG heat value of 1012 Btu/scf (as methane). 

9 AP-42 (11/98), Table 2.4-5 (PM), and AP-42 (11/98), Section 2.4-8 (SO2 concentration). 
--PROPOSED--

5

Table 6. FL-1 Criteria Pollutant Summary

Pollutant Emission Factor Emissions

Value Units (tpy)

NOx 0.06 lb/MMBtu 2.77

CO 0.20 lb/MMBtu 9.23

PM10 17 lb/MMSCF 0.77

SO2 46.9 ppmv 0.70

VOC 99.2% Control efficiency 0.04

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In 2009, U.S EPA determined greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to be a regulated 

pollutant. Under the GHG Tailoring Rule, effective January 2, 2011, new facilities with 

PTE GHG emissions of at least 100,000 tpy carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) and 

existing facilities with at least 100,000 tpy CO2e making changes that would increase 

GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tpy CO2e are required to obtain PSD permits, provided 

that the GHG emissions equal or exceed the mass-based statutory threshold of 100 tpy or 

250 tpy as applicable. Facilities that must obtain a PSD permit anyway, to cover other

regulated pollutants, must also address GHG emissions increases of 75,000 tpy CO2e or 

more. New and existing sources with GHG emissions above 100,000 tpy CO2e, and 

have GHG emissions of at least 100 tpy on a mass basis, must also obtain Part 70/71 

operating permits. In addition, the Tailoring Rule requires that Part 70/71 permit 

applicants calculate GHG PTE in order to determine which requirements may apply to 

the facility. 

TCL calculated its GHG PTE using the calculation methodology established in the GHG 

Mandatory Reporting Rule for landfills (40 CFR 98, Subpart HH). Using this 

methodology, TCL estimated a fugitive (uncaptured) emission rate of 5,590 metric tons 

of methane (CH4) and a captured flowrate of 2,544 metric tons CH4 vented to the 

flare/engine.10 Based on a methane global warming potential of 21 metric tons 

CO2e/metric ton CH4, this represents a fugitive emission rate of 117,390 metric tons 

CO2e, and a flowrate of 53,424 metric tons CO2e to the flare/engines. 

Landfills do not belong to any of the listed 28 source categories, and are not subject to 

any of the NSPS/NESHAP regulations in place on August 7, 1980, which would require 

fugitive emissions to be considered when determining whether the source is a major 

 10 CY2008 estimate. Since the landfill no longer accepts waste, emissions will only decline over time, making the 

use of any year as the basis for GHG PTE a reasonable estimate. 
--PROPOSED--

6

stationary source. Fugitive emissions of GHG from the landfill are therefore excluded 

from the estimate of PTE. As a result, TCL has a GHG PTE of 53,424 metric tons CO2e 

(58,766 tpy CO2e).11

Based on this information, TCL at this time is an existing minor source for GHGs for the 

purposes of Part 70/71 Title V and Part 51/52 PSD permitting. TCL is closed and has not 

commenced any major modifications. At this time, there are no GHG-related Title V or 

PSD permitting requirements applicable to TCL. TCL is still, however, subject to GHG 

Mandatory Reporting Rule requirements, 40 CFR 98, which are not included in this 

permit, since they are not “applicable requirements” as defined in 40 CFR 70.2 and 71.2.

The PTE for TCL is presented below.

Table 7. Facility-wide Emission Summary

Pollutant

Unit NOx VOC SO2 PM10 CO HAP

FL-1 2.77 0.04 0.70 0.77 9.23 0.37

LF-1 0 12.01 0 0 0 4.23

Total 2.77 12.05 0.70 0.77 9.23 4.60

4. Non-Applicable Requirements

a. 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart Cc, Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for 

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

Subpart Cc applies to existing MSW landfills for which construction, 

reconstruction or modification was commenced before May 30, 1991. Subpart Cc 

requirements are implemented through EPA-approved State Plans in accordance 

with section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. While Subpart Cc requirements for the 

State of Arizona are contained in Title 18 of the Arizona Administrative Code, the 

Tri-Cities Landfill is located on tribal land which is not subject to the authority of 

AAC, Title 18. As a result, Subpart Cc does not apply.

b. 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart M, National Emission Standard for Asbestos

Subpart M section 61.151 (standard for inactive waste disposal sites), requires 

each owner or operator of an inactive waste disposal site that receives asbestoscontaining waste material from a source covered under §61.149, 61.150, or 

 11 Based on the very conservative assumption that the entire portion of captured landfill gases are vented to the flare, 

and not sent offsite to the engines.
--PROPOSED--

7

61.155 to meet the requirements of this section. The Tri-Cities Landfill ceased 

accepting waste in October 1993 and is not an active waste disposal site. Waste 

types that were accepted consisted of residential and commercial wastes, and did 

not include asbestos-containing material. As a result, Subpart M does not apply.

c. 40 C.F.R. Part 64, Compliance Assurance Monitoring

Part 64 applies to any pollutant-specific emission unit at a major source that is 

required to obtain an operating permit, for any application for an initial operating 

permit submitted after April 18, 1998, that addresses “large emissions units,” or 

any application that addresses “large emissions units” as a significant 

modification to an operating permit, or for any application for renewal of an 

operating permit, if it meets all of the following criteria:

• It is subject to an emission limit or standard for an applicable regulated air 

pollutant

• It uses a control device to achieve compliance with the applicable emission 

limit or standard

• It has potential emissions, prior to the control device, of the applicable 

regulated air pollutant of 100 TPY or 10/25 TPY of HAP.

The Tri-Cities Landfill is subject to the VOC emission standards in NSPS Subpart 

WWW, and uses an active landfill gas collection system and control device to 

comply with these standards. As noted in Table 3, however, its uncontrolled 

VOC PTE is 25.78 tpy, which is below the Part 71 major source threshold of 100 

tpy. As a result, CAM does not apply. 

d. 40 C.F.R. Part 82, Stratospheric Ozone Protection 

Part 82 contains multiple subparts that requires phase out of Class I & II 

substances, reductions of emissions of Class I & II substances to the lowest 

achievable level in all use sectors, and banning use of nonessential products 

containing ozone-depleting substances (Subparts A & C); control servicing of 

motor vehicle air conditioners (Subpart B); require Federal agencies to adopt 

procurement regulations which meet phase out requirements and which maximize 

the substitution of safe alternatives to Class I and Class II substances (Subpart D); 

require warning labels on products made with or containing Class I or II 

substances (Subpart E); maximize the use of recycling and recovery upon disposal 

(Subpart F); require producers to identify substitutes for ozone-depleting 

compounds under the Significant New Alternatives Program (Subpart G); and 

reduce the emissions of halons (Subpart H).
--PROPOSED--

8

Although TCL is a closed landfill, a generic condition requiring compliance with 

the program is included in the permit so a permit modification would not be 

required if any on-site maintenance required handling of ozone depleting 

substances. 

5. Applicable Requirements

a. 40 C.F.R. Part 62, Subpart GGG, Federal Plan Requirements for Municipal Solid 

Waste Landfills That Commenced Construction Prior to May 30, 1991 and Have 

Not Been Modified or Reconstructed Since May 30, 1991.

Subpart GGG applies to landfills that are located in a State or portion of Indian 

country that does not have an EPA-approved State or Tribal plan to implement 

and enforce U.S. EPA’s landfill Emission Guidelines codified in 40 CFR Part 60, 

Subpart Cc. Since there is no EPA-approved Tribal plan for the Salt River PimaMaricopa Indian Community, Subpart GGG fills the regulatory gap by applying

the emission standards, procedures, test methods, monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping requirements of the Subpart WWW (discussed below) to landfills 

in the area.

The Federal Plan requires landfill owners and operators to submit a report 

identifying the landfill design capacity. Large landfills with a design capacity of 

2.5 million Mg (megagrams) and 2.5 million m3 or more of waste were required 

to submit a nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC) emission rate report within 

90 days of publication of Subpart GGG in the Federal Register. Landfills with 

this design capacity and which emit NMOC at a rate of 50 Mg per year or more 

are required to install a gas collection and control system within 30 months after 

the NMOC emission rate report first shows emissions of 50 Mg per year or more. 

The TCL emission rate exceeds these design capacity and emission rate 

thresholds, and it has installed a landfill gas collection and control system.

b. 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart A, General Provisions

The provisions of Subpart A apply to any “affected source”, defined as any group 

of equipment that emits or may emit any air pollutant and is subject to a standard 

in 40 CFR part 60. The affected sources at the Tri-Cities Landfill include the 

municipal solid waste landfill (LF-1) and the landfill gas flare (FL-1)

c. 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart WWW, Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid 

Waste Landfills
--PROPOSED--

9

The provisions of Subpart WWW apply to each municipal solid waste landfill that 

commenced construction, reconstruction or modification on or after May 30, 

1991. TCL was constructed prior to this date. However, the Subpart GGG

Requirements for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills described above incorporates 

the emission standards, procedures, test methods, monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping requirements of Subpart WWW.

Controlling NMOC emissions involves drilling collection wells into the landfill 

and routing the gas to a suitable energy recovery system or combustion device. A 

combustion device the controls landfill gas emissions may be a flare or a device 

which utilizes the energy content of the gas, such as an internal combustion 

engine. TCL has installed such a landfill gas collection and control system. 

Subpart WWW requires that the collected landfill gas be vented to a control 

device at all times.

A portion of the landfill gas collected by TCL is routed to a candlestick flare at 

the facility that is operated continuously. Pursuant to Subpart WWW, the flaring 

activity is regulated under the Standards of Performance for New Stationary 

Sources General Provisions, 40 C.F.R. Part 60 Subpart A. Among other 

requirements, those provisions require that the flare be operating at all times that 

gases are being vented to the flare.

In addition, the remainder of the collected landfill gas is piped to the Tri-Cities 

Landfill Energy Facility, a facility under separate ownership that is located on a 

contiguous property and has a Part 71 permit issued by EPA Region 9. The 

Energy Facility combusts the landfill gas it receives from TCL in five internal 

combustion engines and an enclosed flare (thermal oxidizer). EPA considers each 

of the engines and the thermal oxidizer to be an “enclosed combustion device” for 

Subpart WWW regulatory purposes. Enclosed combustion devices must meet 

reduce NMOC by 98% or reduce the NMOC outlet emissions to 20 ppm. 

In such cases where landfill gas is combusted for electricity generation by a 

separate stationary source, EPA has determined that landfill owners and/or 

operators cannot avoid liability for compliance with Subpart WWW, regardless of 

the specifics of their contractual relationship with the source that is receiving the 

landfill gas.12 The landfill owners and/or operators are ultimately responsible for 

compliance with the control requirements of Subpart WWW, along with the 

associated testing, monitoring, record-keeping, and reporting requirements in the 

regulation. Therefore this Part 71 permit for TCL incorporates all applicable 

requirements from Subpart WWW, including the 98 weight percent NMOC 

 12 EPA Applicability Determination Index, Control Number 0300062. 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/programs/caa/adi.html
--PROPOSED--

10

reduction (or 20 ppm outlet concentration) emission limit and associated 

performance testing that apply to the engines and thermal oxidizer at the Energy 

Facility. TCL has the responsibility to ensure compliance with the Subpart 

WWW requirements at both its facility and at the Energy Facility.

e. 40 C.F.R. Part 63, Subpart AAAA, National Emission Standards for Hazardous 

Air Pollutants: Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

TCL is subject to Subpart AAAA because it accepted waste after November 8, 

1987, has a design capacity greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3

, and 

an annual uncontrolled NMOC emission rate that exceeds 50 Mg. This regulation 

requires landfill operators to continuously monitor control devices to ensure 

compliance with the operating conditions for landfill gas control systems. 

Subpart AAAA also adds reporting requirements to ensure that any deviations 

will be corrected in a timely fashion. Finally, the regulation requires municipal 

solid waste landfills to prepare and implement a plan to control toxic air 

emissions during startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM)of their landfill gas 

collection and control systems and to report when this plan is not followed.

f. Incorporation of Applicable Requirements into Part 71 Permit

Applicable Requirement Condition & Page 

in Permit

Description/Notes

40 C.F.R. 60, NSPS, Subpart A (General Provisions)

40 C.F.R. 60.4(a) II.D.1., page 16 submit reports to EPA Regional office

40 C.F.R. 60.7(a) II.D.2., page 16 notification of reconstruction or 

modification

40 C.F.R. 60.7(b) II.D.3., page 16 records of startup, shutdown, 

malfunction

40 C.F.R. 60.7(f) II.D.4., page 16 maintain monitoring records

40 C.F.R. 60.9 II.D.5., page 16 availability of information

40 C.F.R. 60.11(a) II.D.6., page 17 compliance with non-opacity standards

40 C.F.R. 60.11(d) II.D.7., page 16 good practice to minimize emissions

40 C.F.R. 60.11(g) II.D.8., page 16 credible evidence

40 C.F.R. 60.12 & 63.4(b) II.D.9., page 16 circumvention

40 C.F.R. 60.18 & 

63.11(b)

II.A.2., page 5 requirements for flares

40 C.F.R. 60.19 II.D.10., page 17 general notification and reporting

40 C.F.R. 63, NESHAP, Subpart A (General Provisions)

40 C.F.R. 63.9 II.D.11., page 17 notification requirements

40 C.F.R. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)] II.D.12, pages 17-18 SSM recordkeeping

40 C.F.R. 63.6(e)(3)(iv)] II.D.13, page18 SSM deviation reporting
--PROPOSED--

11

40 C.F.R. 63.10(d)(5) II.C.6., page 16 periodic startup, shutdown and 

malfunction reports

40 C.F.R. 63.10(d)(5) II.C.6., page 16 reporting actions not consistent with the 

SSM Plan

40 C.F.R. 60, NSPS, Subpart WWW

40 C.F.R. 60.752(b) II.A.1 & 2., page 5 collection of landfill gas

40 C.F.R. 60.753(b) II.B.3, page 5 operate collection system with negative 

pressure

40 C.F.R. 60.753(c) II.B.4, page 6 temperature, nitrogen and oxygen levels

40 C.F.R. 60.753(c)(1) II.B.5, page 6 nitrogen test method

40 C.F.R. 60.753(c)(2) II.B.6, page 6 oxygen test method

40 C.F.R. 60.753(e) & (f) II.B.1 & 2., page 5 operational standards for collection and 

control systems

40 C.F.R. 60.755(e) II.C.1., page 6 times when WWW provisions apply

40 C.F.R. 60.755(c) II.C.2., page 6 determination of compliance with 

surface methane operational standard

40 C.F.R. 60.755(c) II.C.3., page 7 cover integrity monitoring

40 C.F.R. 60.756(a) II.E.1., pages 7-8 active gas collection system monitoring

40 C.F.R. 60.758(a) II.F.1., page 8 recordkeeping

40 C.F.R. 60.758(b)(1) II.F.2., page 8-9 recordkeeping 

40 C.F.R. 60.758(b)(2) II.F.3., page 9 recordkeeping 

40 C.F.R. 60.758(b)(4) II.F.4., page 9 recordkeeping 

40 C.F.R. 60.757(f) II.C.5., pages 14-5 annual reports

40 C.F.R. 63, NESHAP, Subpart AAAA

40 C.F.R. 63.1960 II.D.1., page 7 SSM plan

40 C.F.R. 63.1955(c); 40 

C.F.R. 63.1965(a), (b), 

and (c)

II.E.2., page 8 deviation reporting

6. Periodic Monitoring

NSPS Subpart WWW requires that facilities that route landfill gas to enclosed 

combustion devices comply with an NMOC emission limit of 98 weight percent NMOC 

reduction or an outlet NMOC concentration of less than 20 parts per million. Since the 

Tri-Cities Landfill pipes a portion of the landfill gas it collects to the contiguous TriCities Landfill Energy Facility, where the gas is combusted in internal combustion 

engines and a thermal oxidizer, the Tri-Cities Landfill must demonstrate compliance with 

this limit. Subpart WWW requires an initial performance test within 180 days of startup 

to determine compliance with this limit, but no additional testing beyond this one-time 

test is required by the regulation. Since Subpart WWW does not require on-going 
--PROPOSED--

12

testing, EPA has determined that additional testing is necessary in order to assure 

compliance with the NMOC limit. This is consistent with Part 71, which requires that 

when an underlying applicable requirement does not require periodic testing or 

monitoring, title V permits must contain “periodic monitoring sufficient to yield reliable 

data from the relevant time period that are representative of the source’s compliance with 

the permit” (40 C.F.R. 71.6(a)(3)(i)(B)). Therefore EPA has added an annual 

performance testing requirement to the permit (condition II.E.3) which we believe 

satisfies the timeliness, reliability, and representativeness requirements of Part 71.

7. Use of All Credible Evidence

Determinations of deviations, continuous or intermittent compliance status, or violations 

of the permit are not limited to the testing or monitoring methods required by the 

underlying regulations or this permit; other credible evidence (including any evidence 

admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence) must be considered by the source and 

EPA in such determinations. 

8. EPA Authority

Title V of the CAA requires that EPA promulgate, administer, and enforce a Federal 

operating permits program when a State, local, or Tribal agency does not submit an 

approvable program within the time frame set by title V or does not adequately 

administer and enforce its EPA-approved program. On July 1, 1996 (61 Fed. Reg.

34202), EPA adopted regulations codified at 40 C.F.R. Part 71 setting forth the 

procedures and terms under which the Agency would administer a Federal operating 

permits program. These regulations were updated on February 19, 1999 (64 Fed. Reg.

8247) to incorporate EPA's approach for issuing Federal operating permits to stationary 

sources in Indian country.

As described in 40 C.F.R. 71.4(a), EPA will implement a part 71 program in areas where 

a State, local, or Tribal agency has not developed an approved part 70 program. Unlike 

States, Indian Tribes are not required to develop operating permits programs, though EPA 

encourages Tribes to do so. See, e.g., Indian Tribes: Air Quality Planning and 

Management (63 FR 7253, February 12, 1998) (also known as the Tribal Authority Rule). 

See 40 C.F.R. § 49.4. Therefore, within Indian country, it is appropriate that EPA 

administer and enforce a part 71 Federal operating permits program for stationary sources 

until Tribes receive approval to administer their own operating permits programs.

The Tri-Cities Landfill is located within the boundaries of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa 

Indian Community Reservation. Consequently, jurisdiction over the source lies with the 

Pima and Maricopa Tribes and with EPA. Since neither of these Tribes has an approved 
--PROPOSED--

13

Part 70 program, EPA is issuing the permit under its Part 71 authority.

9. Endangered Species Act

Pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. § 1536, and its 

implementing regulations at 50 C.F.R. Part 402, EPA is required to ensure that any action 

authorized, funded, or carried out by EPA is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any Federally-listed endangered species or threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of such species’ designated critical habitat. The title 

V permit EPA is issuing to Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community for the TriCities Landfill (TCL) does not authorize the construction of new emission units, or 

emission increases from existing units, nor does it otherwise authorize any other physical 

modifications to the facility or its operations. Therefore, EPA has concluded that the 

issuance of this permit will have no effect on listed species or their critical habitat.

10. Environmental Justice

Environmental Justice (“EJ”) is one factor that U.S. EPA considers when taking an 

action, such as making an Approval decision. This is done in accordance with 

Presidential Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, which was issued on February 11, 

1994. The main goal of the Executive Order is to ensure that federal agencies identify and 

address, as appropriate, any disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority or lowincome populations. In order to evaluate and address possible EJ concerns during the 

permit application process,[1] U.S. EPA considers whether the facility pursuing an 

Approval may be located in an overburdened community.[2] In overburdened 

communities, U.S. EPA promotes the consideration of environmental justice concerns by 

enhancing the community’s ability to participate fully and meaningfully in the permitting 

process.

In accordance with US EPA Region 9’s Regional Implementation Plan to Promote 

Meaningful Engagement of Overburdened Communities in Permitting Activities, Region 

 [1] An “environmental justice concern” is the actual or potential lack of fair treatment or meaningful involvement 

of people, including minority populations, low-income populations, and indigenous populations, in the development, 

implementation, or enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

[2] The term “overburdened” describes the minority, low-income, tribal, and indigenous populations or communities 

in the United States that potentially experience disproportionate environmental harms and risks as a result of greater 

vulnerability to environmental hazards. This increased vulnerability may be attributable to an accumulation of both 

negative and lack of positive environmental, health, economic, or social conditions within these populations or 

communities.
--PROPOSED--

14

9 has reviewed demographic and environmental information about the community 

surrounding the facility, and other readily available information such as additional 

information about the facility and community, including any community concerns 

previously raised to Region 9.

However, this permit renewal does not allow or authorize additional air pollution from 

existing units, and will not result in additional health impacts. In addition, as a closed 

landfill that no longer actively accepts solid waste, air pollutant emissions have been 

consistently declining since 1994 and will continue to decline, resulting in lower impacts. 

11. Public Participation

a. Public Notice.

As described in 40 C.F.R. § 71.11(a)(5), all Part 71 draft operating permits shall 

be publicly noticed and made available for public comment. The public notice of 

permit actions and public comment period is described in 40 C.F.R. § 71(d).

There is a 30-day public comment period for actions pertaining to a draft permit. 

Public notice will be given for this draft permit by mailing a copy of the notice to 

the permit applicant, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, the 

affected state (Arizona) and local air pollution control agencies. A copy of the 

notice will also be provided to all persons who have submitted a written request to 

be included on the mailing list. Public notice will also be published in the AuAuthm Action News and the Arizona Republic newspapers. 

b. Opportunity for Comment

Members of the public may review a copy of the draft permit prepared by EPA, 

this statement of basis for the draft permit, the application, and all supporting 

materials submitted by the source at the address listed in Section 11.e, below. 

Copies of the draft permit and statement of basis can also be obtained from EPA’s 

website (http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/permit/r9-permits-issued.html), or by 

contacting Eugene Chen at the EPA address, phone number, or email address 

listed in Section 11.e, below. All documents will be available for review at the 

EPA Region 9 office indicated in Section 8.e. below, during regular business 

hours.

If you believe that any condition of the draft permit is inappropriate, you must 

raise all reasonably ascertainable issues and submit all arguments supporting your 

position during the 30-day public comment period. Any supporting documents 

must be included in full and may not be incorporated by reference, unless they are 

already part of the administrative record for this permit or consist of tribal, state 
--PROPOSED--

15

or federal statutes or regulations, or other generally available referenced materials.

All comments received during the public comment period and all comments made 

during any public hearing will be considered in arriving at a final decision on the 

permit. The final permit is a public record that can be obtained by request. A 

statement of reasons for changes made to the draft permits and responses to 

comments received will be sent to all persons who commented on the draft 

permit.

c. Opportunity to Request a Hearing

Any person may submit a written request for a public hearing to Eugene Chen, at 

the address listed in Section 11.e below, by stating the nature of the issues to be 

raised at the public hearing. EPA shall hold a public hearing if EPA finds, on the 

basis of requests, a significant amount of public interest in the draft permit. If a 

public hearing is held, EPA will provide public notice of the hearing and any 

person may submit oral or written statements and data concerning the draft 

permit.

d. Mailing List

If you would like to be added to our mailing list to be informed of future actions 

on this or other CAA permits issued in Indian Country, please send your name 

and address to Eugene Chen at the address listed below.

e. Contact Information

Eugene Chen

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX

75 Hawthorne St (AIR-3)

San Francisco, CA 94105

telephone: (415) 947-4304

e-mail: chen.eugene@epa.gov