```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21911-21913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8837]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0244; FRL-9657-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Arizona; Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of Arizona to address the 
requirements regarding air pollution emergency episodes in Clean Air 
Act (CAA or Act) section 110(a)(2)(G). Section 110(a)(2)(G) of the Act 
requires that each SIP provide for authority comparable to that in 
section 303 of the Act and adequate contingency plans to implement such 
authority. EPA is proposing to approve Arizona's SIP revision as 
meeting the authority and contingency plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standards).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 14, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R09-OAR-2012-0244, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: 415-947-3579.
    4. Mail or deliver: Jeffrey Buss (AIR-2), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901. Deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's 
normal hours of operation.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or email. http://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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Buss, Air Planning Office 
(AIR-2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 947-
4152, buss.jeffrey@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,'' 
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background

[[Page 21912]]

II. EPA's Evaluation of the SIP Revision
    A. SIP Procedural Requirements
    B. Substantive Emergency Episode Plan Requirements
    C. Sections 110(l) and 193 of the Act
III. EPA's Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated revised primary and secondary 
NAAQS for ozone which set the acceptable level of ozone in the ambient 
air at 0.08 parts per million (ppm), averaged over an 8-hour period. 62 
FR 38856; 40 CFR 50.10. This proposed action is in response to the 
promulgation of these ozone standards.
    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to 
address a new or revised NAAQS within three years after promulgation of 
such standards, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. 
Section 110(a)(2) lists the elements that these SIPs must address, as 
applicable, including section 110(a)(2)(G) regarding authority to 
address air pollution emergency episodes and adequate contingency plans 
to implement such authority (Emergency Episode Plans). EPA last 
approved an Emergency Episode Plan requirement into the Arizona SIP on 
September 28, 1982 (47 FR 42572).
    On October 2, 2007, EPA issued a guidance memorandum that provides 
recommendations to states for making submissions to meet, among other 
things, the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-Hour 
ozone standards. See Memorandum from William T. Harnett, EPA Air 
Quality Policy Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions I-X, 
``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 
for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards,'' October 2, 2007 (2007 Guidance).
    This proposed action addresses only Arizona's submittal to satisfy 
the Emergency Episode Plan requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) and 
does not apply to the remaining ``infrastructure'' SIP elements of CAA 
section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We intend to 
evaluate and act upon Arizona's SIP submittal addressing these 
additional requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS in separate actions.

II. EPA's Evaluation of the SIP Revision

A. SIP Procedural Requirements

    CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and section 110(l) require that each 
revision to a SIP be adopted by the state after reasonable notice and 
public hearing. EPA has promulgated specific procedural requirements 
for SIP revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F. These requirements 
include publication of notices, by prominent advertisement in the 
relevant geographic area, of a public hearing on the proposed 
revisions, a public comment period of at least 30 days, and an 
opportunity for a public hearing.
    On August 15, 1994, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 
(ADEQ) submitted section 220 of Chapter 2, Title 18 of the Arizona 
Administrative Code (R18-2-220), ``Air pollution emergency episodes'' 
(hereafter referred to as ``Arizona Emergency Episode Plan'') to EPA 
for approval as part of the Arizona SIP.\1\ ADEQ's August 15, 1994 
submittal includes public process documentation for the Arizona 
Emergency Episode Plan, among other regulations. In addition, the SIP 
revision includes documentation of a duly noticed public hearing held 
on August 9, 1994 on the proposed version of the Arizona Emergency 
Episode Plan. We find that the process followed by ADEQ in adopting the 
Arizona Emergency Episode Plan complies with the procedural 
requirements for SIP revisions under CAA section 110 and EPA's 
implementing regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See transmittal letter dated August 15, 1994, from Edward Z. 
Fox, Director, ADEQ, to Felicia Marcus, Regional Administrator, U.S. 
EPA Region IX, with attachments. We note that although the subject 
line of the transmittal letter identifies this SIP submittal as 
related to ``New Source Review and Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (NSR/PSD) Program for Major Sources and Major 
Modifications and New Source Review (NSR) for Minor Sources,'' 
Attachment 6 of this submittal includes the Arizona Emergency 
Episode Plan, which is not related to NSR or PSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Substantive Emergency Episode Plan Requirements

    Section 110(a)(2)(G) of the CAA requires that each SIP provide for 
authority comparable to that in CAA section 303 (``Emergency Powers'') 
and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. EPA's 
implementing regulations in 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (``Prevention of 
Air Pollution Emergency Episodes''), establish a ``priority'' 
classification system under which each region in a state is classified 
separately for each of the following criteria pollutants, based on 
ambient concentrations of the pollutant: sulfur dioxide 
(SO2), particulate matter of 10 microns or less 
(PM10), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide 
(NO2), and ozone. Subpart H specifies the requirements that 
each contingency plan must meet, based on the priority classification 
of the area in which it applies. See 40 CFR 51.152. Subpart H also 
requires that each contingency plan for a ``priority I'' area provide, 
at a minimum, for taking action necessary to prevent ambient pollutant 
concentrations at any location in such region from reaching specified 
``significant harm levels'' (SHL). 40 CFR 51.151. The SHL for ozone is 
1,200 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) or 0.6 ppm over a 2-hour 
average. Id.
    EPA's 2007 Guidance addressed, among other things, the CAA section 
110(a)(2)(G) requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 2007 
Guidance stated that the SHL for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS would 
remain unchanged as 0.60 ppm over a 2-hour average, as indicated in 40 
CFR section 51.151, and that the existing ozone-related provisions of 
40 CFR part 51, subpart H remained appropriate for purposes of 
implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. See 2007 Guidance at 5. We 
have evaluated the Arizona Emergency Episode Plan in accordance with 
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H, as applicable for ozone 
purposes, consistent with EPA's recommendations in the 2007 Guidance. 
Based on this evaluation, we propose to fully approve the Arizona 
Emergency Episode Plan as satisfying the requirements of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(G) and 40 CFR part 51, subpart H, for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. Our technical support document (TSD), which is available in the 
docket for today's proposed rule, contains a more detailed discussion 
of our evaluation.

C. Sections 110(l) and 193 of the Act

    Section 110(l) of the Act prohibits EPA from approving any SIP 
revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement 
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any 
other applicable requirement of the Act. Section 193 of the Act 
prohibits the modification, in a nonattainment area, of any SIP-
approved control requirement in effect before November 15, 1990, unless 
the modification ``insures equivalent or greater emissions reductions 
of such air pollutant.''
    The Arizona Emergency Episode Plan is substantively identical to 
the CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) rule currently approved into Arizona's SIP 
(R9-3-219, ``Air pollution emergency episodes''), which EPA approved in 
1982 (47 FR 42572, September 28, 1982), with one exception which makes 
it more stringent than the SIP program. We propose to determine that 
our approval of this submittal would comply with CAA section 110(l), 
because the proposed SIP revision would not interfere with the ongoing 
process for

[[Page 21913]]

ensuring that requirements for RFP and attainment of the NAAQS are met, 
and the submitted SIP revision is more stringent than the rule 
previously approved into the SIP. We also propose to determine that our 
approval of the submittal would comply with CAA section 193, to the 
extent it applies, because the SIP revision would insure equivalent or 
greater emission reductions of ozone precursors compared to the SIP-
approved rule. Our TSD contains a more detailed discussion of our 
evaluation.

III. EPA's Proposed Action

    Under section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is proposing to 
approve the SIP revision submitted by ADEQ on August 15, 1994, as 
meeting all applicable requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on this proposal and will accept 
comments until the date noted in the DATES section above.

IV. 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

    Air pollution control, Environmental protection, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 29, 2012.
Keith Takata,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-8837 Filed 4-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```