R18-2-502. General Permit Development

A. The Director may issue a general permit on the Director’s own initiative or in response to a 

petition.

B. Any person may submit a petition to the Director requesting the issuance of a general permit 

for a defined class of facilities. The petition shall propose a particular class of facilities, and 

list the approximate number of facilities in the proposed class along with their size, processes, 

and operating conditions, and demonstrate how the class meets the criteria for a general permit 

as specified in R18-2-501 and A.R.S. § 49-426(H). The Director shall provide a written 

response to the petition within 120 days of receipt.

C. General permits shall be issued for classes of facilities using the same engineering principles 

that applies to permits for individual sources and following the public notice requirements of 

R18-2-504.

D. General permits shall include all of the following:

1. All elements contained in R18-2-306(A) except R18-2-306(A)(2)(b) and (6).

2. The process for individual sources to apply for coverage under the general permit.

E. General permits developed by the Director shall require sources that are covered under the 

general permit to install and operate reasonably available control technology for any regulated 

Minor NSR pollutants allowed under the general permit at an amount equal to or greater than 

the permitting exemption threshold. This requirement shall not apply to any pollutants subject 

to an emissions standard established or revised by the Administrator under section 111 or 112 

of the Act after November 15, 1990.

Historical Note

Former Section R9-3-501 repealed, new Section R9-3-501 adopted effective May 14, 1979 

(Supp. 79-1). Amended effective October 2, 1979 (Supp. 79-5). Amended effective July 

9, 1980 (Supp. 80-4). Amended subsection (D) effective June 19, 1981 (Supp. 81-3). 

Amended subsections (C) and (D) effective February 2, 1982 (Supp. 82-1). Amended 

subsection (D) effective May 25, 1982 (Supp. 82-3). Former Section R9-3-501 

renumbered without change as Section R18-2-501 (Supp. 87-3). Former Section R18-2-

502 repealed, new Section R18-2-502 renumbered from R18-2-501 and amended 

effective September 26, 1990 (Supp. 90-3). Former Section R18-2-502 renumbered to 

R18-2-702; new Section R18-2-502 adopted effective November 15, 1993 (Supp. 93-4). 

Amended by final rulemaking at 18 A.A.R. 1542, effective August 7, 2012 (Supp. 12-2).
R18-2-702. General Provisions

A. The provisions of this Article shall only apply to a source that is all of the following:

1. An existing source, as defined in R18-2-101;

2. A point source. For the purposes of this Section, “point source” means a source of air contaminants that has an identifiable plume or emissions point;

and

3. A stationary source, as defined in R18-2-101.

B. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter relating to specific types of sources, the opacity of any plume or effluent, from a source described in

subsection (A), as determined by Reference Method 9 in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, shall not be:

1. Greater than 20% in an area that is nonattainment or maintenance for any particulate matter standard, unless an alternative opacity limit is approved by

the Director and the Administrator as provided in subsections (D) and (E), after February 2, 2004;

2. Greater than 40% in an area that is attainment or unclassifiable for each particulate matter standard; and

3. After April 23, 2006, greater than 20% in any area that is attainment or unclassifiable for each particulate matter standard except as provided in

subsections (D) and (E).

C. If the presence of uncombined water is the only reason for an exceedance of any visible emissions requirement in this Article, the exceedance shall not

constitute a violation of the applicable opacity limit.

D. A person owning or operating a source may petition the Director for an alternative applicable opacity limit. The petition shall be submitted to ADEQ by

May 15, 2004.

1. The petition shall contain:

a. Documentation that the affected facility and any associated air pollution control equipment are incapable of being adjusted or operated to meet the

applicable opacity standard. This includes:

i. Relevant information on the process operating conditions and the control devices operating conditions during the opacity or stack tests;

ii. A detailed statement or report demonstrating that the source investigated all practicable means of reducing opacity and utilized control

technology that is reasonably available considering technical and economic feasibility; and

iii. An explanation why the source cannot meet the present opacity limit although it is in compliance with the applicable particulate mass

emission rule.

b. If there is an opacity monitor, any certification and audit reports required by all applicable subparts in 40 CFR 60 and in Appendix B,

Performance Specification 1.

c. A verification by a responsible official of the source of the truth, accuracy, and completeness of the petition. This certification shall state that,

based on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the statements and information in the document are true, accurate, and

complete.

2. If the unit for which the alternative opacity standard is being applied is subject to a stack test, the petition shall also include:

a. Documentation that the source conducted concurrent EPA Reference Method stack testing and visible emissions readings or is utilizing a

continuous opacity monitor. The particulate mass emission test results shall clearly demonstrate compliance with the applicable particulate mass

emission limitation by being at least 10% below that limit. For multiple units that are normally operated together and whose emissions vent

through a single stack, the source shall conduct simultaneous particulate testing of each unit. Each control device shall be in good operating

condition and operated consistent with good practices for minimizing emissions.

b. Evidence that the source conducted the stack tests according to R18-2-312, and that they were witnessed by the Director or the Director’s agent or

representative.

c. Evidence that the affected facility and any associated air pollution control equipment were operated and maintained to the maximum extent

practicable to minimize the opacity of emissions during the stack tests.

3. If the source for which the alternative opacity standard is being applied is located in a nonattainment area, the petitioner shall include all the

information listed in subsections (D)(1) and (D)(2), and in addition:

a. In subsection (D)(1)(a)(ii), the detailed statement or report shall demonstrate that the alternative opacity limit fulfills the Clean Air Act requirement

for reasonably available control technology; and

b. In subsection (D)(2)(b), the stack tests shall be conducted with an opportunity for the Administrator or the Administrator’s agent or representative

to be present.

E. If the Director receives a petition under subsection (D) the Director shall approve or deny the petition as provided below by October 15, 2004:

1. If the petition is approved under subsection (D)(1) or (D)(2), the Director shall include an alternative opacity limit in a proposed significant permit

revision for the source under R18-2-320 and R18-2-330. The proposed alternative opacity limit shall be set at a value that has been demonstrated

during, and not extrapolated from, testing, except that an alternative opacity limit under this Section shall not be greater than 40%. For multiple

units that are normally operated together and whose emissions vent through a single stack, any new alternative opacity limit shall reflect the opacity

level at the common stack exit, and not individual in-duct opacity levels.

2. If the petition is approved under subsection (D)(3), the Director shall include an alternative opacity limit in a proposed revision to the applicable

implementation plan, and submit the proposed revision to EPA for review and approval. The proposed alternative opacity limit shall be set at a value

that has been demonstrated during, and not extrapolated from, testing, except that the alternative opacity limit shall not be greater than 40%.

3. If the petition is denied, the source shall either comply with the 20% opacity limit or apply for a significant permit revision to incorporate a compliance

schedule under R18-2-309(5)(c)(iii) by April 23, 2006.

4. A source does not have to petition for an alternative opacity limit under subsection (D) to enter into a revised compliance schedule under R18-2-

309(5)(c).

F. The Director, Administrator, source owner or operator, inspector or other interested party shall determine the process weight rate, as used in this Article, as

follows:

1. For continuous or long run, steady-state process sources, the process weight rate is the total process weight for the entire period of continuous

operation, or for a typical portion of that period, divided by the number of hours of the period, or portion of hours of that period.

2. For cyclical or batch process sources, the process weight rate is the total process weight for a period which covers a complete operation or an integral
number of cycles, divided by the hours of actual process operation during the period.

Historical Note

Former Section R18-2-702 repealed effective September 26, 1990 (Supp. 90-3). New Section R18-2-702 renumbered from R18-2-502 and amended

effective November 15, 1993 (Supp. 93-4). Amended by exempt rulemaking at 9 A.A.R. 5550, effective February 3, 2004 (Supp. 03-4).