```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16734-16749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06661]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0686; FRL-9908-69-Region-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation 
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Arizona; 
Redesignation of the Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment Area to Attainment for 
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) is proposing to approve, as a revision of the Arizona State 
Implementation Plan, the State's plan for maintaining the 1997 National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone averaged over eight hours (8-
hour ozone standard) in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area for ten 
years beyond redesignation, and the related motor vehicle emission 
budgets, because they meet the applicable requirements for such plans 
and budgets. EPA is also proposing to approve a request from the 
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality to redesignate the Phoenix-
Mesa nonattainment area to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 
because the request meets the statutory requirements for redesignation 
under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 25, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-
R09-OAR-2013-0686, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: vagenas.ginger@epa.gov.
    3. Postal Mail or Delivery: Ginger Vagenas (AIR-2), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 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. The online docket system at 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 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 http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 
at the EPA Region 9 office. While all documents in the docket are 
listed at http://www.regulations.gov, some information may not be 
specifically listed in the index to the docket or may be publicly 
available only in hard copy at the EPA Region 9 office (e.g., 
copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume reports, or otherwise 
voluminous materials), and some may not be publicly available in 
electronic or

[[Page 16735]]

hard copy form (e.g., confidential business information). To view the 
hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal 
business hours with the contact person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ginger Vagenas, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 
Hawthorne Street (AIR-2), San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. Ginger Vagenas 
can also be reached at (415) 972-3964, or via electronic mail at 
vagenas.ginger@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we'', ``us'', 
and ``our'' refer to the United States Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA).

Table of Contents

I. Summary of Today's Proposed Action
II. Background
III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submittal of SIP 
Revisions
IV. Substantive Requirements for Redesignation
V. Evaluation of the State's Redesignation Request for the Phoenix-
Mesa Ozone Nonattainment Area
    A. Determination That the Area Has Attained the Applicable NAAQS
    B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting Requirements 
Applicable for Purposes of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part 
D
    1. Basic SIP Requirements Under CAA Section 110
    2. Part D Requirements
    a. Introduction
    b. Permits for New and Modified Major Sources
    c. Conformity Requirements
    C. The Area Must Show the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 
Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
    D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under 
CAA Section 175A
    1. Attainment Inventories and Projected Future Inventories
    2. Maintenance Demonstration
    3. Monitoring Network
    4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    5. Contingency Provisions
    6. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
    7. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Summary of Today's Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to take several related actions. First, under 
section 110(k)(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''), EPA is 
proposing to approve, as a revision to the Arizona State Implementation 
Plan (SIP), a plan developed by the Maricopa Association of Governments 
(MAG),\1\ entitled MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and 
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area, dated February 
2009 (``Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan''), and submitted by the 
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to EPA on March 23, 
2009.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The MAG membership currently consists of the 27 incorporated 
cities and towns within Maricopa County and the contiguous urbanized 
area, the Gila River Indian Community, the Salt River Pima Maricopa 
Indian Community, Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, Maricopa and Pinal 
Counties. Representatives of the Arizona Department of 
Transportation (ADOT) and the Citizens Transportation Oversight 
Committee (CTOC) also serve on the Regional Council for 
transportation-related issues.
    \2\ See letter from Patrick J. Cunningham, Acting Director, 
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Laura Yoshii, Acting 
Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, March 23, 2009. This letter 
included three enclosures, one of which is the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan, including appendices A and B organized into 
volumes 1, 2, and 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA is 
proposing to find that the maintenance demonstration shows that the 
Phoenix-Mesa area will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or ``standard'') for 10 
years beyond redesignation and that the contingency provisions, which 
include already implemented measures as well as a process for 
identifying new or more stringent measures in the event of a future 
monitored violation, meet all applicable requirements for maintenance 
plans and the related contingency provisions of CAA section 175A. EPA 
is also proposing to approve motor vehicle emission budgets in the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan because we find they meet the 
applicable transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR 
93.118(e).
    Second, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), EPA is proposing to approve 
ADEQ's request to redesignate the Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We 
are doing so based on our conclusion that the area has met the five 
criteria for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). This 
conclusion is based on our proposed determination that: The area has 
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS; relevant portions of the Arizona 
SIP are fully approved; improvement in air quality in the area is due 
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions; Arizona has met 
all requirements applicable to the Phoenix-Mesa 1997 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area with respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA; 
and, as part of this action, our proposed approval of the Eight-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan.

II. Background

    Ground-level ozone is an oxidant that is formed from photochemical 
reactions in the atmosphere between volatile organic compounds (VOC) 
and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in the presence of sunlight. 
These two pollutants, referred to as ozone precursors, are emitted by 
many types of pollution sources including on-road motor vehicles (cars, 
trucks, and buses), nonroad vehicles and engines, power plants and 
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden 
equipment and paints.
    In 1971, under section 109 of the Act, as amended in 1970, EPA 
promulgated the original NAAQS for pervasive air pollutants, including 
photochemical oxidants.\3\ The NAAQS are concentration levels that, the 
attainment and maintenance of which, EPA has determined to be requisite 
to protect public health (i.e., the ``primary'' NAAQS) and welfare 
(i.e., the ``secondary'' NAAQS). In 1979, EPA revised the chemical 
designation of the NAAQS from ``photochemical oxidants'' to ``ozone,'' 
and established a 1-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.12 parts per million 
(ppm).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
    \4\ See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In March of 1978, Maricopa County was designated as a 1-hour 
oxidant nonattainment area (43 FR 8962). In 1979, EPA revised Maricopa 
County's designation to refer to ozone (rather than oxidant) and 
reduced the geographic extent of the nonattainment area to reflect 
MAG's Urban Planning Area (``Phoenix metropolitan area'') rather than 
the entire county. See 44 FR 16388 (March 19, 1979). Under the CAA, 
states with nonattainment areas are required to submit revisions to 
their SIPs that include a control strategy necessary to demonstrate how 
the area will attain the NAAQS, and EPA took action on a number of 
related SIP revisions submitted by Arizona in the late 1970s and 1980s 
for the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area. However, 
by 1990, the area still had not attained the standard, and under the 
CAA Amendments of 1990, the Phoenix metropolitan area was classified as 
a ``moderate'' nonattainment area with an attainment deadline of 
November 15, 1996 (56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). The area was later 
reclassified as a ``serious'' nonattainment area with a deadline of 
November 15, 1999 (62 FR 60001, November 6, 1997).

[[Page 16736]]

    In 1997, EPA revised the NAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.08 ppm 
averaged over an 8-hour timeframe (referred to herein as the ``1997 8-
hour ozone standard'') to replace the existing 1-hour ozone standard of 
0.12 ppm.5 6 In 2004, EPA designated the Phoenix-Mesa area 
as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and established 
June 15, 2005 as the date when the 1-hour ozone standard would be 
revoked. The Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone nonattainment area covers a much 
larger portion of Maricopa County than the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour 
ozone area and also includes the Apache Junction portion of Pinal 
County.\7\ Just prior to revocation of the 1-hour ozone standard, EPA 
redesignated the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area 
to attainment (70 FR 34362, June 14, 2005).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 62 FR 33856 (July 18, 1997).
    \6\ On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA lowered the 8-hour 
ozone standard to 0.075 ppm (the 2008 8-hour ozone standard), and on 
May 21, 2012, EPA designated the Phoenix-Mesa area as marginal 
nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard (77 FR 30088). 
Today's proposed action relates to a maintenance plan and 
redesignation request for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, not the 
more stringent 2008 8-hour ozone standard.
    \7\ The precise boundaries of the Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area and the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone 
nonattainment are found in 40 CFR 81.303.
    \8\ A more detailed description of the history of 1-hour ozone 
planning in the Phoenix metropolitan area is presented in section II 
of EPA's proposed redesignation for the 1-hour ozone standard. See 
70 FR 13425 at 13426-13428 (March 21, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 15, 2004, EPA designated Phoenix-Mesa as Subpart 1 
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard under CAA section 172 
with an attainment deadline no later than June 15, 2009.\9\ The 
designation became effective on June 15, 2004. The Phoenix-Mesa 
nonattainment area is located in the central portion of Arizona and 
encompasses 4,880 square miles, including the urban portions of 
Maricopa and Pinal Counties, and areas of Indian country of the Fort 
McDowell Yavapai Nation, the Salt River-Pima Maricopa Indian Community, 
and the Tohono O'odham Nation. For a precise description of the 
geographic boundaries of the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area, see 40 
CFR 81.303 and figure 1-1 of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. MAG 
is the agency with primary responsibility for developing air quality 
plans related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Phoenix-Mesa 
nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 69 FR 23858 (April 30, 2004) and 40 CFR 81.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under part D, subpart 1 of the Act, states must submit plans to 
come into attainment within 3 years of the effective date of the 
nonattainment designation and must attain the standard as expeditiously 
as practicable, but no later than 5 years after the effective date of 
the designation. Later, in the wake of a court decision partially 
vacating EPA's regulations implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard,\10\ EPA classified the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area 
as ``marginal'' under subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 
F3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006).
    \11\ See 77 FR 28424 (May 14, 2012). June 13, 2012 is the 
effective date for the ``marginal'' classification of the Phoenix-
Mesa 8-hour ozone nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 13, 2007, ADEQ submitted a SIP revision demonstrating 
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard in the Phoenix-Mesa 
nonattainment area by the attainment date of June 15, 2009 (``Eight-
Hour Ozone Attainment Plan''). In June 2012, EPA approved the Eight-
Hour Ozone Attainment Plan.\12\ On March 23, 2009, ADEQ submitted the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan as a revision to the Arizona SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 77 FR 21690 (April 11, 2012) and 77 FR 35285 (June 13, 
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, the Phoenix metropolitan area was originally designated 
as nonattainment for the photochemical oxidant, later 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS, but was later redesignated as attainment for the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS prior to the revocation of that standard. With respect to the 
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA designated a larger geographic area, the 
Phoenix-Mesa area, as nonattainment, later classified as ``marginal,'' 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. ADEQ's request to redesignate the 
Phoenix Mesa area as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is the 
subject of today's proposed action. Lastly, EPA has also designated the 
Phoenix Mesa area as ``marginal'' nonattainment for the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS. Today's proposed action does not affect the designation of the 
Phoenix-Mesa area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption and Submittal of SIP 
Revisions

    Section 110(l) of the Act requires States to provide reasonable 
notice and public hearing prior to adoption of SIP revisions. Appendix 
B, Exhibit 1 of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan documents the 
public review process followed by MAG in adopting the plan prior to 
transmittal to ADEQ for subsequent submittal to EPA as a revision to 
the Arizona SIP. The documentation in Exhibit 1 also provides evidence 
that reasonable notice of a public hearing was provided to the public 
and that a public hearing was conducted prior to adoption.
    Specifically, notice of the availability of, and opening of a 30-
day comment period on, the public-draft Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan was published on December 23, 2008, in a newspaper of general 
circulation within the Phoenix area. The public hearing was held on 
January 22, 2009. One individual commented on the draft maintenance 
plan during the public hearing. No written comments were received 
during the public comment period. MAG provided responses to comments in 
Exhibit 1 of Appendix B.
    On February 25, 2009, the MAG Regional Council adopted the Eight-
Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, as certified in Appendix B, Exhibit 2 of 
the plan. Following adoption, MAG provided the maintenance plan to 
ADEQ, and ADEQ adopted the plan and submitted it to EPA for approval on 
March 23, 2009.
    Based on the documentation provided in Appendix B, we find that the 
submittal of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan as a SIP revision 
satisfies the procedural requirements of section 110(l) of the Act.

IV. Substantive Requirements for Redesignation

    The CAA establishes the requirements for redesignation of a 
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) 
allows for redesignation provided that the following criteria are met: 
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) 
EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area 
under 110(k); (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is 
due to permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) EPA has fully approved 
a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of CAA 
175A; and (5) the State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA. Section 
110 identifies a comprehensive list of elements that SIPs must include, 
and part D establishes the SIP requirements for nonattainment areas. 
Part D is divided into six subparts. The generally-applicable 
nonattainment SIP requirements are found in part D, subpart 1, and the 
ozone-specific SIP requirements are found in part D, subpart 2.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignations in a document entitled 
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation 
of

[[Page 16737]]

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'', published in the 
Federal Register on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented on 
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070) (referred to herein as the ``General 
Preamble''). Additional guidance was issued in a September 4, 1992 
memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management 
Division, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, entitled 
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment'' (referred to herein as the ``Calcagni memo''). Maintenance 
plan submittals are SIP revisions, and as such, EPA is obligated, under 
CAA section 110(k), to approve them or disapprove them depending upon 
whether they meet the applicable CAA requirements for such plans.
    For reasons set forth below in section V of this document, we 
propose to approve ADEQ's request for redesignation of the Phoenix-Mesa 
ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
based on our conclusion that all the criteria under CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E) have been satisfied.

V. Evaluation of the State's Redesignation Request for the Phoenix-Mesa 
Ozone Nonattainment Area

A. Determination That the Area Has Attained the Applicable NAAQS

    CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) requires that we determine that the 
area has attained the NAAQS. EPA generally makes the determination of 
whether an area's air quality meets the ozone NAAQS based upon the most 
recent three years of complete, quality-assured data gathered at 
established State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in the 
nonattainment area and entered into the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) 
database. Data from air monitors operated by state or local agencies in 
compliance with EPA monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS. 
Heads of monitoring agencies annually certify that these data are 
accurate to the best of their knowledge. Accordingly, EPA relies 
primarily on data in AQS when determining the attainment status of 
areas.\13\ All data are reviewed to determine the area's air quality 
status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 40 CFR 50.10; 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I; 40 CFR part 
53; 40 CFR part 58, Appendices A, C, D, and E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 ozone standard is 
met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year average 
of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm.\14\ This 3-year 
average is referred to as the design value. When the design value is 
less than or equal to 0.084 ppm (based on the rounding convention in 40 
CFR part 50, Appendix I) at each monitoring site within the area, the 
area is meeting the NAAQS. The data completeness requirement is met 
with the 3-year average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring 
data is at least 90 percent of the days during the designated ozone 
monitoring season, and no single year has less than 75 percent data 
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See 40 CFR 50.10 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Three state or local agencies are responsible for monitoring 
ambient air quality data in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area: The 
Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD), the Pinal County Air 
Quality Control District (PCAQCD), and ADEQ. These agencies submit 
monitoring network plan reports to EPA on an annual basis. These 
reports discuss the status of the air monitoring network, as required 
under 40 CFR part 58. Beginning in 2007, EPA has reviewed these annual 
plans for compliance with the applicable reporting requirements in 40 
CFR 58.10. With respect to ozone, we have found that MCAQD's, PCAQCD's, 
and ADEQ's annual network plans meet the applicable reporting 
requirements under 40 CFR part 58.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See EPA letters to MCAQCD, PCAQCD, and ADEQ concerning 
annual network plan reports, which are included in the docket for 
this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA conducts periodic technical system audits of the state and 
local ambient air monitoring networks, and has done so for ADEQ, MCAQD, 
and PCAQCD. For the purposes of this action, EPA has reviewed the 
findings in EPA's technical system audits of the networks operated by 
the three relevant agencies and notes that none of the findings in 
these reports cast doubt on the reliability of the ozone data collected 
at the various monitoring sites in these networks.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For the most recent technical system audits (TSAs), see 
EPA's report on the Agency's September 2008 audit of MCAQCD's 
network, EPA's final TSA report for ADEQ's network dated January 
2013, and EPA's final TSA report for PCAQCD's network dated June 
2013, which are included in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the relevant time period, the ozone monitoring network in 
the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area comprised 20 ozone monitors: MCAQD 
operated 18 monitors,\17\ ADEQ operated one monitor, and PCAQCD 
operated one monitor. Please see Figure 2-1 in the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan for a map showing the locations of the monitors 
constituting the State and local agency regional ozone monitoring 
network. Based on population and ambient ozone, EPA regulations 
required only three ozone monitoring sites in the Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale 
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) during the 2010-2012 period. Thus, 
the ozone monitoring network in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area 
exceeds the requirements for the minimum number of monitoring sites 
designated as SLAMS for that pollutant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The Mesa ozone monitor, operated by MCAQD, began operation 
on November 1, 2012 and therefore only gathered data for two months 
during the 2010-2012 design value period. As a result, this monitor 
is not appropriate to consider in determining whether the area has 
attained the 1997 ozone standard. In the future, as complete data 
become available, the monitor will be eligible for use in 
determining continued attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MCAQD, PCAQCD, and ADEQ annually certify that the data they submit 
to AQS are complete and quality-assured.\18\ All 20 sites monitored 
ozone concentrations on a continuous basis using Federal Equivalent 
Method (FEM) analyzers. The spatial scale and site type (monitoring 
objective type) of most of the ozone monitoring sites in the 
nonattainment area are ``neighborhood'' and ``population exposure,'' 
respectively. The Blue Point, Cave Creek, Pinnacle Peak, and Rio Verde 
sites are classified as ``urban'' scale with site types of ``maximum 
ozone concentrations,'' while the Humboldt Mountain site is classified 
as ``regional scale'' with a site type of ``maximum ozone 
concentrations.'' The Fountain Hills and JLG Supersite sites are also 
sited to measure ``maximum ozone concentrations'' but are located at 
the ``neighborhood'' scale.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ For the most recent data certification submittals, see 
MCAQCD, PCAQCD, and ADEQ letters concerning data certification for 
2010, 2011, and 2012, which are included in the docket for this 
rulemaking.
    \19\ The sources of information for this paragraph include 
ADEQ's ``State of Arizona Air Monitoring Network Plan for the Year 
2013,'' dated October 29, 2013; MCAQD's ``2012 Air Monitoring 
Network Review,'' undated; and PCAQCD's ``2013 Ambient Monitoring 
Network Plan and 2012 Data Summary,'' dated July 1, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the SLAMS ozone network maintained by MCAQD, PCAQCD, 
and ADEQ, there are five tribal monitors located within the 
nonattainment area. The Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (Salt 
River) operates four ozone monitors and the Fort McDowell Yavapai 
Nation (Fort McDowell) operates one monitor on

[[Page 16738]]

tribal lands located in the eastern portion of the nonattainment area. 
The ozone monitoring data from Fort McDowell is characterized as 
``informational'' and therefore not suitable for comparison against the 
1997 ozone standard. Conversely, the Salt River ozone monitors have the 
basic monitoring objective of ``NAAQS comparison'' and the data should 
be considered ``regulatory'' and appropriate for use when determining 
if the nonattainment area is attaining the 1997 ozone standard.
    Consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, EPA 
has reviewed the ozone ambient air monitoring data as recorded in AQS 
for the monitoring period from 2010 through 2012 collected at the 
monitoring sites discussed above and found that the data meet our 
completeness criteria (see table 1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The Pinnacle Peak site was temporarily shut down on 
November 16, 2011 and relocated to a nearby location on July 1, 
2012. See Letter from Ben Davis, Air Monitoring Manager, MCAQD, to 
Michael Flagg, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region 9, dated 
January 31, 2012.

  Table 1--Summary of Ambient Data for Ozone Collected Within Phoenix-Mesa Ozone Nonattainment Area, 2010-2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               2010-2012  Design
               Site                     Site ID           Agency              Parameter         value (DV) and %
                                                                                                    complete
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Junction..................       04-013-3001  PCAQCD..........  DV (ppm)..............              0.074
                                   ................                    % complete............             98
Blue Point.......................       04-013-9702  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.075
                                   ................                    % complete............             99
Buckeye..........................       04-013-4011  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.066
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
Cave Creek.......................       04-013-4008  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.077
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
Central Phoenix..................       04-013-3002  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.074
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
Dysart...........................       04-013-4010  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.071
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
Falcon Field.....................       04-013-1010  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.069
                                   ................                    % complete............             99
Fountain Hills...................       04-013-9704  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.076
                                   ................                    % complete............             99
Glendale.........................       04-013-2001  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.076
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
High School......................       04-013-7024  SRPMIC..........  DV (ppm)..............              0.074
                                   ................                    % complete............             99
Humboldt Mountain................       04-013-9508  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.075
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
JLG Supersite....................       04-013-9997  ADEQ............  DV (ppm)..............              0.076
                                   ................                    % complete............             98
Lehi.............................       04-013-7022  SRPMIC..........  DV (ppm)..............              0.073
                                   ................                    % complete............             98
North Phoenix....................       04-013-1004  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.081
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
Pinnacle Peak....................       04-013-2005  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.077
                                   ................                    % complete............        \20\ 78
Red Mountain.....................       04-013-7021  SRPMIC..........  DV (ppm)..............              0.077
                                   ................                    % complete............             93
Rio Verde........................       04-013-9706  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.074
                                   ................                    % complete............             98
Senior Center....................       04-013-7020  SRPMIC..........  DV (ppm)..............              0.074
                                   ................                    % complete............             95
South Phoenix....................       04-013-4003  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.076
                                   ................                    % complete............             98
South Scottsdale.................       04-013-3003  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.077
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
Tempe............................       04-013-4005  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.070
                                   ................                    % complete............             99
West Chandler....................       04-013-4004  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.074
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
West Phoenix.....................       04-013-0019  MCAQD...........  DV (ppm)..............              0.078
                                   ................                    % complete............            100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 1 summarizes the site-specific 3-year ozone design values for 
all monitoring sites within the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area for the 
period of 2010-2012. As shown in table 1, the design value for the 
2010-2012 period was less than 0.084 ppm at all of the monitors in the 
Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area. Therefore, we are proposing to 
determine, based on complete quality-assured data for the 2010-2012 
period, that the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area has attained the 
1997 8-hour ozone standard. Preliminary data for 2013 are also 
consistent with continued

[[Page 16739]]

attainment.\21\ Given the timing of this proposed action after the end 
of 2013 but before the monitoring agencies must enter data collected 
during the final quarter of the 2013 into AQS, we will be updating this 
determination based on design values calculated for 2011-2013, and 
preliminary review of available 2014 data, for the purposes of the 
final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See the AQS Preliminary Design Value Report for 2013 dated 
March 6, 2014, included in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Meeting the Requirements 
Applicable for Purposes of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part D

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) require EPA to determine that the 
area has a fully approved applicable SIP under section 110(k) that 
meets all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D for the 
purposes of redesignation.
1. Basic SIP Requirements Under CAA Section 110
    Section 110(a)(2) sets forth the general elements that a SIP must 
contain in order to be fully approved. EPA has analyzed the Arizona SIP 
and determined that it is consistent with the requirements of section 
110(a)(2). The Phoenix-Mesa portion of the approved Arizona SIP, which 
includes rules pertaining to areas and sources under the jurisdiction 
of ADEQ, MCAQD, and PCAQCD, contains enforceable emission limitations; 
requires monitoring, compiling, and analyzing of ambient air quality 
data; requires preconstruction review of new or modified stationary 
sources; provides adequate funding, staff, and associated resources 
necessary to implement its requirements; and provides the necessary 
assurances that the State of Arizona maintains responsibility for 
ensuring adequate implementation of the SIP where the State is relying 
on local or regional governments or agencies for implementation of the 
SIP.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect 
to the applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation in 
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). Thus, for example, CAA 
section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another state (transport SIP). However, the 
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a 
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in 
that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a 
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification are 
the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 
request. The transport SIP requirements, where applicable, continue 
to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one 
particular area in the state. Thus, we do not believe that these 
requirements should be construed to be applicable requirements for 
the purposes of redesignation. In addition, EPA believes that the 
other section 110 elements that are not connected with nonattainment 
plan submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status are 
not applicable requirements for the purposes of redesignation. The 
State will still be subject to these requirements after the Phoenix-
Mesa nonattainment area is redesignated.
    This policy is consistent with EPA's existing policy on 
applicability of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and 
oxygenated fuels requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed 
and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174 dated October 10, 1996 and 62 FR 
24816 dated May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final 
rulemaking (61 FR 20458 dated May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, 
final rulemaking (60 FR 62748 dated December 7, 1995). See also the 
discussion of this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR 
37879 at 37890 dated June 19, 2000), in the Pittsburgh redesignation 
(66 FR 53094 dated October 19, 2001), and in the South Coast 
redesignation (72 FR 6986 dated February 14, 2007 and 72 FR 26718 
dated May 11, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On numerous occasions, we have approved Arizona submittals 
addressing the basic CAA section 110 provisions. There are no 
outstanding or disapproved applicable SIP submittals with respect to 
the Phoenix-Mesa portion of the SIP that prevent redesignation of the 
Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.\23\ 
Therefore, we propose to find that Arizona has met all SIP requirements 
for the Phoenix-Mesa ozone area applicable for the purposes of 
redesignation under section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ On November 5, 2012 (77 FR 66398) EPA issued a partial 
approval and partial disapproval of Arizona's ``infrastructure'' SIP 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. While this final rule was not a 
full approval, it does not represent an obstacle to redesignation of 
the Phoenix-Mesa 1997 ozone nonattainment area because the 
infrastructure elements effective in the Phoenix-Mesa area that EPA 
disapproved (i.e., certain PSD program elements, composition of air 
quality hearing boards) are not related to the nonattainment SIP 
requirements for the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area and thus 
are not relevant for the purposes of redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Part D Requirements
a. Introduction
    The CAA contains two sets of provisions, subparts 1 and 2, that 
address planning and emission control requirements for ozone 
nonattainment areas. Both of these subparts are found in title I, part 
D of the CAA; sections 171-179 and sections 181-185, respectively. 
Subpart 1 contains general, less prescriptive requirements for all 
nonattainment areas of any pollutant, including ozone, governed by a 
NAAQS. Subpart 2 contains additional, more specific requirements for 
ozone nonattainment areas classified under subpart 2.
    The applicable subpart 1 requirements are contained in sections 
172(c)(1)-(9) and 176 of the CAA. Under subpart 1, with respect to the 
Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the state of Arizona is 
required to submit SIP revisions that provide for:
     Implementation of all reasonably available control 
measures (RACM), including, at a minimum, reasonable available control 
technology for existing sources and attainment of the standard (section 
172(c)(1));
     Reasonable further progress (RFP) (section 172(c)(2));
     A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual 
emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in 
the area (section 172(c)(3));
     Identification and quantification of the emissions, if 
any, of any such pollutant which will be allowed in accordance with 
section 173(a)(1)(B) (i.e., new or modified stationary sources located 
in established economic development zones) (section 172(c)(4));
     Permits for the construction of new and modified major 
stationary sources in the nonattainment area (section 
172(c)(5))(herein, referred to as ``nonattainment NSR'' or ``NSR'');
     Enforceable emission limitations as may be necessary or 
appropriate to provide for attainment of such standard in such area by 
the applicable attainment date (section 172(c)(6));
     Compliance with section 110(a)(2) of the Act (section 
172(c)(7));
     Use of equivalent modeling emission inventory, and 
planning procedures if approved by EPA (section 172(c)(8));
     Contingency measures (section 172(c)(9)); and
     Interagency consultation and enforceability for the 
purposes of transportation conformity (section 176(c)(4) and 40 CFR 
51.390).
    On June 13, 2012 (77 FR 35285), EPA approved the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Attainment Plan for the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area based on the 
determination that it met all applicable requirements for such plans 
under subpart 1 of part D, title 1 of the CAA for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. Specifically, we approved the following SIP elements:
     The RACM demonstration and attainment demonstration as 
meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(1), 40 CFR 51.912(d), and 40 
CFR 51.908;
     The RFP demonstration as meeting the requirements of CAA 
section 172(c)(2) and 40 CFR 51.910;
     The 2002 base year emission inventory as meeting the 
requirements of section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR 51.915; and
     The contingency measures for failure to make RFP or to 
attain as

[[Page 16740]]

meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(9).

In addition, we note that the approved Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan 
relied on enforceable emission limitations necessary to attain the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date in compliance with 
section 172(c)(6) and the plan was adopted and submitted in compliance 
with section 110(a)(2) as required under section 172(c)(7). 
Furthermore, the State of Arizona did not rely on sections 172(c)(4) 
(i.e., identification and quantification of certain emission increases) 
or 172(c)(8) (equivalent techniques) in connection with the Eight-Hour 
Ozone Attainment Plan. The approved Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan 
did not address the following SIP elements: (1) NSR permit requirements 
in the nonattainment area (section 172(c)(5)) and (2) transportation 
conformity provisions related to interagency consultation and 
enforceability (section 176(c)(4) and 40 CFR 51.390). We address these 
two remaining part D SIP elements later in this subsection.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The requirements for SIP revisions to demonstrate RACM, 
RFP, attainment, and contingencies (for failure to meet RFP or 
attainment) in subpart 1 are not applicable for the purposes of 
evaluating a redesignation request. Such requirements are directed 
at ensuring attainment by the applicable attainment date, and since, 
as discussed in section V.A., the area is showing attainment, the 
requirements have no meaning at this point. See the General 
Preamble, 74 FR 13498, at 13564 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area was initially 
designated nonattainment under subpart 1 of the CAA, but was 
subsequently classified as marginal nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone standard under subpart 2 of the CAA (77 FR 28424, May 14, 2012). 
The effective date of the classification of the Phoenix-Mesa 
nonattainment area as marginal was June 13, 2012, and under our subpart 
2 classifications rule, states had one year from the effective date of 
that final rule (i.e., until June 13, 2013) to submit SIP revisions.
    ADEQ has not submitted any SIP revisions for the Phoenix-Mesa 
nonattainment area in response to the area's classification to 
marginal.\25\ However, EPA believes that this does not preclude this 
redesignation from being approved, based on (1) EPA's longstanding 
policy of evaluating requirements in accordance with the requirements 
due at the time the redesignation request is submitted; and (2) 
consideration of the inequity of retroactively applying any 
requirements that might be applied in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ In any event, the State of Arizona is not required to 
submit further SIP revisions to satisfy additional requirements 
under section 182(a)(2)(A) to correct RACT rules for the Phoenix-
Mesa 8-hour ozone nonattainment area because we already determined 
that the State had met the VOC RACT requirements under section 
182(a)(2)(A). See our proposed rule (70 FR 13425, at 13435, March 
21, 2005) and final rule (70 FR 34362, at 34363, June 14, 2005) 
redesignating the Phoenix metropolitan area as attainment for the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS. We also note that the State of Arizona previously 
submitted, and EPA approved, an ``enhanced'' vehicle inspection and 
maintenance (I/M) program that exceeds the requirements of section 
182(a)(2)(B) for the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area, if those 
requirements were applicable for the purposes of redesignation. See 
69 FR 2912 (January 22, 2003). Lastly, the State of Arizona 
previously submitted, and EPA approved Maricopa County's emissions 
statement rule and thereby has complied with section 182(a)(3)(B), 
if that requirement were applicable for the purposes of 
redesignation for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 70 FR 7038 
(February 10, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of section 170(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA, to qualify for redesignation, states requesting redesignation 
to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP requirements that came 
due prior to the submittal of a complete redesignation request.\26\ At 
the time the redesignation request was submitted (i.e., March 23, 
2009), the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area was not classified under 
subpart 2, and thus, subpart 2 requirements were not yet due for this 
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See the Calcagni memo; see also Memorandum entitled ``State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests 
for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 
(CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after 
November 15, 1992,'' from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation dated September 17, 1993; 
Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan, 60 FR 12459 (March 7, 
1995); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004), upholding 
this interpretation; and Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri, 68 FR 
25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new 
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was 
submitted. The D.C. Circuit Court has recognized the inequity in such 
retroactive rulemakings. See Sierra Club v. Whitman 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. 
Cir. 2002), in which the court upheld a district court's ruling 
refusing to make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that 
was past the statutory due date. Such a determination would have 
resulted in the imposition of additional requirements on the area. The 
court stated, ``[a]lthough EPA failed to make the nonattainment 
determination within the statutory frame, Sierra Club's proposed 
solution only makes the situation worse. Retroactive relief would 
likely impose large costs on the states, which would face fines and 
suits for not implementing air pollution prevention plans in 1997, even 
though they were not on notice at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly 
here, it would be unfair to penalize the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment 
area by applying to it, for purposes of redesignation, additional SIP 
requirements under subpart 2 that were not in effect or yet due at the 
time it submitted its redesignation request, or the time that the 
Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
    In the following subsection, we address the following SIP elements: 
(1) NSR permit requirements in the nonattainment area (section 
172(c)(5)) and (2) transportation conformity provisions related to 
interagency consultation and enforceability (section 176(c)(4) and 40 
CFR 51.390).
b. Permits for New and Modified Major Sources
    To meet the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5), states must 
submit SIP revisions that meet the requirements under 40 CFR 51.165 
(``Permit requirements''), and EPA regulations at 40 CFR 51.914, which 
extend the SIP requirements of 40 CFR 51.165 to areas designated as 
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    Under 40 CFR 51.165, states are required to submit SIP revisions 
that establish certain requirements for new or modified stationary 
sources in nonattainment areas, including provisions to ensure that 
major new sources or major modifications of existing sources of 
nonattainment pollutants incorporate the highest level of control, 
referred to as the lowest achievable emission rate (LAER), and that 
increases in emissions from such stationary sources are offset so as to 
provide for reasonable further progress towards attainment.
    The process for reviewing permit applications and issuing permits 
for new or modified stationary sources of air pollution is referred to 
as new source review. With respect to new major sources or major 
modifications at existing major sources of nonattainment pollutants in 
nonattainment areas, this process is referred to as nonattainment NSR 
or simply NSR. With respect to new major sources or major modifications 
at existing major sources of pollutants for which as area is designated 
attainment or unclassifiable, states are required to submit SIP 
revisions that ensure that major new stationary sources and major 
modifications of existing stationary sources meet the federal 
requirements for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), 
including

[[Page 16741]]

application of the best available control technology (BACT) for each 
applicable pollutant emitted in significant amounts, among other 
requirements.
    In the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area, EPA, MCAQD, PCAQCD, and 
ADEQ share responsibility for issuing permits. EPA has the 
responsibility for permit application review and permit issuance for 
new or modified stationary sources in Indian country of the Fort 
McDowell Yavapai Nation, the Salt River-Pima Maricopa Indian Community, 
and the Tohono O'odham Nation. MCAQD and PCAQCD are responsible for 
permitting for most stationary sources located within their respective 
counties and to portable sources that operate solely within the 
boundaries of the counties. ADEQ has jurisdiction over refineries, 
copper smelters, coal-fired power plants, Portland cement plants 
throughout the State and over sources that operate in multiple counties 
or outside the boundaries of Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties.
    EPA has promulgated nonattainment NSR rules at 40 CFR 49.166 
through 49.175 that establish the necessary permitting requirements for 
new or modified major stationary sources in the areas of Indian country 
located within the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area. With respect to 
PCAQCD, the existing Arizona SIP does not include rules that meet 
nonattainment NSR requirements for Pinal County; however, because the 
Pinal County portion of the nonattainment area was newly designated as 
nonattainment for ozone in 2004, i.e., had not previously been part of 
the Phoenix metropolitan 1-hour ozone nonattainment area, EPA's 
regulations in appendix S to 40 CFR part 51 apply until such time as 
nonattainment NSR rules meeting the applicable requirements are 
approved by EPA as a revision to the Arizona SIP. See 40 CFR 52.24(k).
    EPA has not approved nonattainment NSR rules for ADEQ and MCAQD 
since the 1980s, and the existing SIP-approved NSR rules do not comply 
with all of the current SIP NSR requirements under the CAA, as amended 
in 1990, and under 40 CFR 51.165 for ozone nonattainment areas. 
However, the existing SIP-approved NSR rules for both ADEQ and MCAQD 
meet the basic requirements of a nonattainment NSR program, including 
the definition of ``major stationary source'' as any stationary source 
in a nonattainment area with a potential to emit 100 tons per year or 
more, emissions limitations that constitute LAER, and emissions 
reductions to offset emissions increases that would otherwise occur. 
See Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) section R9-3-101 
(``Definitions'') and section R9-3-302 (``Installation permits for 
sources in nonattainment areas''); and Maricopa County Rule 21.0 
(``Procedures for Obtaining an Installation Permit''). Also, because 
the SIP-approved NSR rules apply ``in any nonattainment area for the 
pollutant(s) for which the source is classified as a major source,'' 
AAC R9-3-302(A), the requirements apply throughout the Phoenix-Mesa 
1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, except for Indian country and for 
sources subject to Pinal County jurisdiction, as discussed above.
    Moreover, ADEQ's and MCAQD's SIP-approved NSR rules have served as 
a federally-enforceable constraint on the growth of stationary source 
emissions, and thus have supported the region's efforts to lower 
ambient ozone concentrations in the Phoenix-Mesa area. Those efforts 
have resulted in attainment of the standard since 2007 (see table 2, 
below) and thus we find that ADEQ's and MCAQD's SIP-approved NSR rules 
are likely to continue to support continued attainment of the standard 
during the maintenance phase after redesignation.
    Therefore, given that a portion of the nonattainment area is 
subject to federal rules implementing the nonattainment NSR 
requirements (Indian country and the Pinal County portion of the 
nonattainment area) and given that the fundamental nonattainment NSR 
requirements are approved into the SIP for the other portions of the 
nonattainment area, we conclude that the State has met the applicable 
NSR requirements for the Phoenix-Mesa eight-hour ozone nonattainment 
area for the purposes of redesignation of the area for the 1997 eight-
hour ozone standard.
c. Conformity Requirements
    Under section 176(c) of the 1990 CAA Amendments, States are 
required to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federally-
supported or funded projects conform to the air quality planning goals 
in the applicable SIP. Section 176(c) further provides that state 
conformity provisions must be consistent with federal conformity 
regulations that the CAA required EPA to promulgate. EPA's conformity 
regulations are codified at 40 CFR Part 93, subparts A (referred to 
herein as transportation conformity) and B (referred herein as general 
conformity). Transportation conformity applies to transportation plans, 
program, and projects developed, funded, and approved under title 23 
U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act. General Conformity applies to all 
other federally-supported or funded projects. SIP revisions intended to 
address conformity requirements are referred to herein as conformity 
SIPs.
    The State of Arizona has adopted general conformity procedures, 
approved by EPA on April 23, 1999 (65 FR 19916).\27\ The State-adopted 
transportation conformity procedures, found at Arizona Revised Statutes 
(ARS), Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 14, have not yet been approved by 
EPA. EPA, however, believes it is reasonable to interpret the 
conformity SIP requirements as not applying for the purposes of a 
redesignation request under section 107(d)(3)(E) because state 
conformity rules are still required after redesignation and federal 
conformity rules apply where state rules have not been approved. \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ In August 2005, Congress passed the Safe, Accountable, 
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 
(SAFETEA-LU), which eliminated the requirement for States to adopt 
and submit conformity SIPs addressing general conformity 
requirements. See 75 FR 17254 (April 5, 2010) for conforming changes 
to EPA's general conformity regulations.
    \28\ See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426, 439 (6th Cir. 2001) 
upholding this interpretation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. The Area Must Show the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 
Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions

    Section 107(d)(E)(iii) precludes redesignation of a nonattainment 
area to attainment unless EPA determines that the improvement in air 
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions 
resulting from the implementation of the applicable SIP, applicable 
federal air pollution control regulations, and other permanent and 
enforceable regulations. Under this criterion, the State must be able 
to reasonably attribute the improvement in air quality to emissions 
reductions that are permanent and enforceable. Attainment resulting 
from temporary reductions in emission rates (e.g., reduced production 
or shutdown due to temporary adverse economic conditions) or unusually 
favorable meteorology would not qualify as an air quality improvement 
due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
    In our proposed (70 FR 13425, March 21, 2005) and final (70 FR 
34362, June 14, 2005) redesignation rules for the Phoenix metropolitan 
1-hour ozone nonattainment area, we described the numerous stationary 
source and mobile source control measures that were approved as part of 
the Arizona SIP and that, together with certain federal measures, had 
provided for attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard through permanent 
and enforceable emissions

[[Page 16742]]

reductions. See, e.g., the table of VOC RACT rules on page 13433 of our 
proposed 1-hour ozone redesignation rule at 13425. Significant mobile 
source control measures that contributed to attainment and provide for 
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone standard included low volatility 
cleaner burning gasoline, the federal motor vehicle and nonroad control 
programs, and implementation of an enhanced vehicle emissions 
inspection (VEI) program. See 70 FR 13425 at page 13430.
    The State of Arizona has relied on these same permanent and 
enforceable measures to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard but added 
an additional stationary source rule to the control strategy, Maricopa 
County rule 358 (``Polystyrene Foam Operations''), which EPA approved 
at 70 FR 30370 (May 26, 2005). In the approved Eight-Hour Ozone 
Attainment Plan, MAG quantified the emissions reduction from certain 
specific State and local measures, including VEI enhancements, local 
transportation improvements, summer gasoline formulation, and a rule 
governing polystyrene foam operation, as totaling 6.0 mtpd of VOC in 
2008 (a 2.4 percent reduction compared to the 2002 base case) and 13.4 
mtpd of NOX (a 4.6 percent reduction compared to the 2002 
base case). These reductions have contributed to the overall reduction 
in emissions that have provided for attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard in the Phoenix-Mesa area.
    The Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan relies on monitoring data 
(see figure 2-2 in the plan) showing a general downward trend in 8-hour 
ozone concentrations in the Phoenix-Mesa area from 2000 through 2008 
despite increases of more than 15 percent in population, employment and 
vehicle travel, as evidence that the improvement in air quality can 
reasonably be attributed to the permanent and enforceable emissions 
reductions from the measures described above.
    In addition, we reviewed temperature data for Phoenix over this 
time period to determine if unusual meteorological conditions could 
have played a significant role in attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard in the Phoenix-Mesa area. However, we did not observe any 
anomaly over this period relative to long-term averages.\29\ The period 
from 2002 to 2008 did not show a trend in declining air temperatures 
that would suggest that the observed trend in ozone concentrations was 
a result of favorable meteorology. We do recognize that a significant 
economic slowdown occurred nationally starting in 2008, and that the 
Phoenix-Mesa area was affected, but we note that the downward trend in 
ozone concentrations had already been established well before that 
time.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See memorandum from Rynda Kay, Air Quality Analysis Office, 
Air Division, EPA Region IX, entitled ``Meteorological Trend 
Analysis for Phoenix-Mesa Area,'' dated November 22, 2013, included 
in the docket for this rulemaking.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the evidence discussed above, EPA finds that the 
improvement in air quality in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area is 
the result of permanent and enforceable emission reductions from 
implementation of a combination of control measures. As such, we 
propose to find that the criterion for redesignation set forth at CAA 
section 107(d)(e)(E)(iii) is satisfied.

D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under CAA 
Section 175A

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
We interpret this section of the Act to require, in general, the 
following core elements: Attainment inventory, maintenance 
demonstration, monitoring network, verification of continued 
attainment, and contingency plan. See Calcagni memo, pages 8 through 
13.
    Under CAA section 175A, a maintenance plan must demonstrate 
continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years 
after EPA approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after 
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan that 
demonstrates continued attainment for the subsequent ten-year period 
following the initial ten-year maintenance period. To address the 
possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must 
contain such contingency provisions that EPA deems necessary to 
promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after 
redesignation of the area. Based on our review and evaluation of the 
plan, as detailed below, we are proposing to approve the Eight-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan because we believe that it meets the 
requirements of CAA section 175A.
1. Attainment Inventories and Projected Future Inventories
    A maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard must include 
an inventory of emissions of ozone precursors (VOC and NOX) 
in the area in order to identify a level of emissions that are 
sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This inventory must 
be consistent with EPA's most recent guidance on emissions inventories 
for nonattainment areas available at the time of plan submittal and 
should represent emissions during the time period associated with the 
monitoring data showing attainment. The inventory must also be 
comprehensive, including emissions from stationary point sources, area 
sources, nonroad mobile sources, and on-road motor vehicle sources, and 
must be based on actual ``ozone season data,'' i.e., summertime 
emissions.
    MAG selected year 2005 as the year for the attainment inventory in 
the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. As shown in table 2, the area 
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard at the end of 2007 based on 
monitoring data collected over the course of the previous three-year 
period (2005-2007) during which the calculated design value was less 
than the standard. The attainment inventory will generally be the 
actual inventory during the time period the area attained the standard, 
and year 2005 was one of the years from the three-year period for which 
the area first attained the standard. Thus, MAG's selection of 2005 for 
the attainment inventory is acceptable.

                                     Table 2--Eight-Hour Ozone Design Values in the Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Design value * (parts per million)
                      Site                                    Agency             -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    2005-07     2006-08     2007-09     2008-10     2009-11     2010-12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Junction................................  PCAQCD.........................       0.076       0.080       0.075       0.073       0.072       0.074
Blue Point.....................................  MCAQD..........................       0.067       0.064       0.067       0.070       0.072       0.075
Buckeye........................................  MCAQD..........................       0.065       0.066       0.064       0.064       0.064       0.066
Cave Creek.....................................  MCAQD..........................       0.079       0.078       0.075       0.074       0.075       0.077

[[Page 16743]]

 
Central Phoenix................................  MCAQD..........................       0.075       0.074       0.070       0.071       0.071       0.074
Dysart.........................................  MCAQD..........................       0.067       0.067       0.066       0.068       0.070       0.071
Falcon Field...................................  MCAQD..........................       0.076       0.075       0.071       0.070       0.068       0.069
Fountain Hills.................................  MCAQD..........................       0.082       0.079       0.074       0.074       0.073       0.076
Glendale.......................................  MCAQD..........................       0.075       0.074       0.071       0.072       0.072       0.076
High School....................................  SRPMIC.........................    ** 0.077    ** 0.076       0.073       0.072       0.072       0.074
Humboldt Mountain..............................  MCAQD..........................       0.081       0.078       0.074       0.071       0.071       0.075
JLG Supersite..................................  ADEQ...........................       0.076       0.076       0.075       0.075       0.075       0.076
Lehi...........................................  SRPMIC.........................    ** 0.079       0.074       0.074       0.073       0.072       0.073
North Phoenix..................................  MCAQD..........................       0.082       0.081       0.076       0.077       0.077       0.081
Pinnacle Peak..................................  MCAQD..........................       0.078       0.074       0.072       0.073       0.074       0.077
Red Mountain...................................  SRPMIC.........................       0.083       0.080       0.076       0.076       0.076       0.077
Rio Verde......................................  MCAQD..........................       0.083       0.080       0.075       0.072       0.073       0.074
Senior Center..................................  SRPMIC.........................       0.076       0.075       0.072       0.072       0.072       0.074
South Phoenix..................................  MCAQD..........................       0.072       0.072       0.071       0.072       0.072       0.076
South Scottsdale...............................  MCAQD..........................       0.078       0.077       0.075       0.074       0.074       0.077
Tempe..........................................  MCAQD..........................       0.077       0.077       0.073       0.071       0.068       0.070
West Chandler..................................  MCAQD..........................       0.076       0.076       0.073       0.073       0.072       0.074
West Phoenix...................................  MCAQD..........................       0.074       0.078       0.073       0.073       0.073       0.078
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The design value is the three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration.
** Design values do not meet the completeness requirements of 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.

    The attainment year emission inventory for 2005 in the Eight-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan is generally consistent with the 2005 Periodic 
Emission Inventory (PEI) emissions estimates for Maricopa County and 
the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area. The PEI was calculated in terms of 
annual emissions and ozone season-day emissions.
    Emissions from point sources were estimated from each identified 
facility through permit system databases and annual emissions reports 
submitted to the facility's permitting authority. Emissions from area 
sources were estimated by source category using information from permit 
databases and previous SIP inventories. MAG estimated nonroad mobile 
source emissions using EPA's NONROAD2005 model, and estimated on-road 
motor vehicle source emissions using EPA's MOBILE6.2 model. On-road 
vehicle emissions estimates reflect estimates of vehicle miles traveled 
(VMT) using data from U.S. Department of Transportation's 2005 Highway 
Performance and Monitoring System. Biogenic emissions of NOX 
and VOC were calculated using the Model of Emissions of Gases and 
Aerosols from Nature (MEGAN) with input including emissions rates 
developed from measurements made of the dominant plant species in 
Maricopa County, locations and biomass densities of the dominant plant 
species, and surface temperature data. See 2005 Periodic Emissions 
Inventory for ozone precursors in volume 1 of the appendices to the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan.
    For the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, MAG adjusted and 
supplemented the 2005 PEI ozone precursor emissions estimates developed 
using the methods described above to develop emissions estimates for an 
area referred to as the inner modeling domain (``modeling domain''), a 
rectangular area encompassing all of the nonattainment area and largely 
defined by the boundaries of the irregularly-shaped nonattainment area. 
See figure II-1 of MAG's technical support document (TSD) for the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for an illustration of the modeling 
domain. The modeling domain defines the area for which MAG modeled 
ozone concentrations.
    MAG developed modeling-domain emissions estimates for 2005 for the 
June, July, and August episodes that were modeled for the approved 
Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan. See table 3 below for a summary of 
modeling domain emissions estimates by source category for year 2005 
for the June modeling episode. The 2005 attainment year inventory 
includes credit for committed control measures that were in place 
during the summer of 2005. See table 3-5 of the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan.

[[Page 16744]]

               Table 3--2005 and Projected 2019 and 2025 VOC and NOX Emissions for the Phoenix-Mesa Modeling Domain for June Ozone Episode
                                                                [Metric tons per day] \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                NOX                                             VOC
                     Source category                     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2005            2019            2025            2005            2019            2025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................            10.9            58.6            59.1            11.1            16.7            18.7
Area....................................................            19.6            27.7            31.1            79.2           111.4           124.8
Nonroad Mobile..........................................            77.7            43.9            37.9            40.3            48.7            31.8
On-road Motor Vehicles..................................           154.3           125.8           109.8            72.1            30.9            47.9
Biogenics...............................................             8.6             8.6             8.6           451.3           451.3           451.3
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................           271.1           264.4           246.4           653.9           659.0           674.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Emissions reflect a specific day of the week (Thursday) during the June ozone episode.
Sources: Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan at tables 3-6 and 3-7; table 1 of the Maintenance Plan Supplement.

    As shown in table 3, in the 2005 attainment year inventory for the 
modeling domain, biogenic sources contributed approximately 70 percent 
to total VOC emissions. In contrast, on-road motor vehicles dominated 
the total NOX emissions and accounted for 60 percent of 
total NOX.
    In addition to 2005 values, table 3 above also summarizes MAG's VOC 
and NOX emissions estimates for an interim year (2019) and 
the maintenance plan's horizon year (2025). The projected emission 
inventories for 2019 and 2025 were based on the use of growth factors, 
on-going emissions control programs, and retirement rates for obsolete 
sources. The Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan includes MAG's 2025 
emissions estimates and related documentation, while MAG's 2019 
interim-year emissions estimates and documentation are found in a 
separate MAG document, entitled ``Analysis of the Interim Year 2019 as 
a Supplement to the 2009 MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and 
Maintenance Plan for the Maricopa Nonattainment Area,'' dated June 17, 
2013 (``Maintenance Plan Supplement'').
    MAG used growth factors to project emissions in 2019 and 2025 for 
point and area sources based on population and employment projections 
approved by the MAG Regional Council in May 2007. MAG included 
population and employment growth projections for 2016 and 2021 in the 
Maintenance Plan Supplement and projected emissions for 2019 from 
interpolation of the projected emissions for 2016 and 2021. MAG used a 
compound annual growth rate for population of 2.6 percent between 2005 
and 2016. The actual compound annual growth rate between 2005 and 2011, 
based on the 2005 Special Census for Maricopa County and the 2010 
Census, was 0.8 percent. Because the population of Maricopa County grew 
more slowly than projected, MAG expects the emission inventories 
related to the socioeconomic projections for the interim and horizon 
years to be conservatively overestimated.
    MAG used different growth factors for different source types within 
each source category (e.g., specific stationary point sources excluding 
power plants, specific categories of area sources such as dry 
cleaners). For nonroad mobile sources, MAG derived growth factors from 
the EPA NONROAD2005 model defaults for Maricopa County. The growth 
factors are listed in Appendix IV-vii to Appendix A, Exhibit 2 of the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and generally range from 1 to 1.8. 
For power plants, MAG estimated future emissions based on the 
facility's potential to emit (PTE), i.e., the maximum levels allowed 
under existing permits. MAG estimated on-road motor vehicle emissions 
based on the same population and employment projections used to 
estimate point and area sources, but increased on-road source emissions 
of VOC and NOX by 10 percent to provide safety margins for 
the motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity.
    For biogenic emissions, the 2005 inventory was held constant for 
2019 and 2025. In the approved Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan, MAG 
similarly held biogenic emissions constant, compared to the 2002 base 
year inventory, when demonstrating attainment with the standard by 2008 
(see tables 5-3 and 5-4 in the Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan). In 
additional information provided to EPA during our review of the Eight-
Hour Ozone Attainment Plan, MAG explained that no projected land use or 
land cover data was available for the 2008 attainment year, therefore 
biogenic emissions in the ozone modeling domain were held constant. As 
discussed in greater detail in our proposed rulemaking to approve the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan, MAG expected that the trend of 
increasing urbanization in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area would be 
expected to decrease biogenic VOC emissions in Maricopa County. Because 
MAG did not have 2008 land use data available, it determined that 
maintaining constant biogenic emissions of the ozone precursors would 
be more conservative than attempting to estimate the anticipated 
decrease in biogenic VOC emissions. See 77 FR 21690 at 21694 (April 11, 
2012). This rationale similarly applies to the use of a constant 
biogenic emissions value for each ozone episode in the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan.
    The Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan builds upon the control 
strategy developed for attainment and maintenance of the 1-hour ozone 
standard and the control strategy developed for attainment of the 1997 
8-hour ozone standard. The plan specifically cites and quantifies the 
emissions reductions from seven control measures for maintenance 
demonstration purposes in the Phoenix-Mesa area through year 2025. 
These measures include one federal control measure, a measure referred 
to as ``Federal Nonroad Equipment Emission Standards,'' and six State 
or local control measures. All of these measures have been approved 
into the Arizona SIP, or, in the case of the federal nonroad equipment 
emission standards, have been promulgated by EPA as regulations 
published in the CFR:
     Summer fuel reformulation, approved as part of Arizona's 
cleaner burning gasoline regulations at 69 FR 10161 (March 4, 2004);
     Phased-In emission test cutpoints and one-time waiver from 
vehicle emissions test, approved as part of the Arizona vehicle 
emissions inspection and maintenance program at 69 FR 2912 (January 22, 
2003);

[[Page 16745]]

     Tougher enforcement of vehicle registration and emission 
test compliance, as set forth in ARS 49-552 (``Enforcement on city, 
town, county, school district or special district property''), approved 
at 70 FR 11553 (March 9, 2005); and 49-541.01 (paragraphs D and E) \31\ 
(``Vehicle emissions inspection program; constant four wheel drive 
vehicles; requirements; location; violation; classification; penalties; 
new program termination''), approved at 70 FR 11553 (March 9, 2005);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ These provisions are now codified in ARS 49-550 
(``Violation; Classification; Civil Penalty'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Federal (tier 4) nonroad equipment emissions standards, 
promulgated in 40 CFR part 1039 at 69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004);
     Expansion of Area A boundaries, as set forth in ARS 49-541 
(``Definitions''), approved at 78 FR 30209 (May 22, 2013); and
     Ban open burning during the ozone season, as set forth in 
ARS 49-501 (``Unlawful open burning; exceptions; fine; definition''), 
approved in a final rule signed by the EPA Region IX Regional 
Administrator on December 16, 2013 (not yet published in the Federal 
Register).
    Table 4 shows the projected emission reductions developed by MAG 
from the seven maintenance measures during the June ozone episode. Of 
the seven maintenance measures in the Phoenix-Mesa Maintenance Plan, 
the federal nonroad equipment emission standards represents the largest 
reduction in VOC and NOX emissions from an individual 
maintenance measure.

Table 4--2025 Emission Reductions From Individual Maintenance Measures in the Phoenix-Mesa 8-Hour Ozone Modeling
                                                     Domain
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       VOC                                   NOX
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Maintenance measure                             Percent reduction                     Percent reduction
                                      Reduction (metric  in  anthropogenic  Reduction (metric  in  anthropogenic
                                        tons  per day)        emissions       tons  per day)        emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summer Fuel Reformulation                           1.3                0.5     0.4 (increase)    0.1 (increase).
Phased-In Emission Test Cutpoints                 X emissions from point sources is 
projected to increase dramatically between 2005 and the interim and 
horizon years of 2019 and 2025, primarily due to MAG's conservative 
assumption that power plants in the future would operate at their PTE. 
Emissions of NOX from area sources are also estimated to be 
higher in the interim and horizon years. MAG projected that emissions 
from nonroad sources would decrease due to the implementation of 
federal emission standards for nonroad equipment (see Table 4). 
Emissions of NOX from on-road motor vehicles are also 
projected to decrease notwithstanding the 10% increase added to the 
2025 motor vehicle emissions estimates (to provide for a safety margin 
for transportation conformity purposes), due to the continuing benefit 
of the federal motor vehicle control program and the turnover of older 
model cars to newer models designed to meet more stringent EPA 
emissions standards. Overall, between 2005 and 2025, MAG projected 
total emissions of NOX to decrease by nearly 25 mtpd for the 
June ozone episode.
    As shown in table 3, MAG projected that VOC emissions from point 
and area sources will increase over the 2005 to 2025 time frame. 
Emissions from VOC from nonroad and on-road mobile sources are 
projected to decrease between 2005 and 2025, notwithstanding the 10% 
safety margin added to 2025 motor vehicle emissions estimates for the 
same reasons given above for NOX. Emissions of biogenic VOC 
are projected to remain constant, as discussed above. Overall, MAG 
projected total emissions of VOC in 2025 to increase by approximately 
20 mtpd for the June ozone episode as compared to 2005.
    Based on our review of the emission inventories (and related 
documentation) from the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, we find that 
the inventory for 2005 is comprehensive, that the methods and 
assumptions used by MAG to develop the 2005 emission inventory are 
reasonable, and that the inventory reasonably estimates actual ozone 
season emissions in an attainment year. Moreover, we find that the 2005 
emission inventory reflects the latest planning assumptions and 
emission models available at the time the plan was developed, and 
provide a comprehensive and reasonably accurate basis upon which to 
forecast ozone precursor emissions for years 2019 and 2025.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
    CAA section 175A(a) requires that the maintenance plan ``provide 
for the maintenance of the national primary ambient air quality 
standard for such air pollutant in the area concerned for at least 10 
years after the redesignation.'' Generally, a state may demonstrate 
maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard by either showing that future 
emissions will not exceed the level of the attainment year inventory or 
by modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emissions rates 
will not cause a violation of the NAAQS. For areas that are required 
under the Act to submit modeled attainment demonstrations, the 
maintenance demonstration should generally use the same type of 
modeling as used for the attainment demonstration. See Calcagni memo, 
page 9.
    On June 13, 2012 (77 FR 35286), EPA published a final approval of 
the Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan, which demonstrated attainment of 
the 1997 8-

[[Page 16746]]

hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area by June 15, 
2009. Consistent with EPA's ``Guidance on the Use of Models and Other 
Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for the 8-
Hour Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and Regional Haze'' (``EPA 
Modeling Guidance''), the Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan included the 
following components: A conceptual description of the area's 
nonattainment problem, a modeling protocol, model selection and set-up, 
selection and evaluation of ozone episodes to model, meteorological and 
emissions input data preparation, model performance evaluations for the 
photochemical and meteorological models, the modeled attainment test, 
and a weight of evidence evaluation. See Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment 
Plan, chapter 3 and appendix A, exhibit 2. EPA evaluated these 
components and found that they provided an adequate basis for the 
attainment demonstration. See 77 FR 21690, at 21697-21699.
    For the modeled 10-year maintenance test, MAG selected the same 
photochemical and meteorological-input models and set-up and the same 
high-ozone episodes to model as evaluated in the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Attainment Plan. As such, we are not reassessing the modeling protocol, 
choice of ozone episodes, and model performance. Here, the model was 
used to predict the effect of changes in emissions due to land use 
changes, growth, and the effect of control measures from a baseline 
emission year of 2005 to maintenance years 2019 and 2025.\32\ The 
resulting concentrations were used to evaluate the impact of emission 
changes during the high-ozone episode-specific meteorological 
conditions. See Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan (chapter 3 and 
appendix A, exhibit 2) and the Maintenance Plan Supplement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ We evaluate the emissions inventory for the baseline and 
maintenance years in section V.D.1., above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPA Modeling Guidance, the model is used to develop relative 
response factors (RRFs) that give the model's response to emission 
changes, and the RRFs are applied to monitored design value 
concentrations to arrive at the predicted future concentrations. The 
particulars of the calculation, and which model grid cells and modeled 
days are to be included, are specified in the EPA Guidance. See EPA 
Modeling Guidance, pages 15, 25, and 155. MAG assessed the 2019 and 
2025 effects and found the maximum predicted ozone design value to be 
0.081 parts per million (ppm) in 2019 and 0.081 ppm in 2025. All values 
equal to or less than 0.084 ppm meet the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and 
thus, the modeling results predict continued maintenance of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa area for at least ten years beyond 
redesignation (assuming redesignation of the area before 2016).
    In addition to a modeled maintenance demonstration, which focuses 
on locations with an air quality monitor, EPA generally requires an 
unmonitored area analysis. This analysis is intended to ensure that a 
control strategy leads to maintenance of the NAAQS in other locations 
that have no monitor but that might have base year (and/or future year) 
ambient ozone levels exceeding the NAAQS. The unmonitored area analysis 
uses a combination of model output and ambient data to identify areas 
that might exceed the NAAQS if monitors were located there. In order to 
examine unmonitored areas in all portions of the modeling domain, EPA 
recommends use of interpolated spatial fields of ambient data combined 
with gridded modeled outputs. See EPA Modeling Guidance, page 29. MAG 
used the EPA developed Modeled Attainment Test Software (MATS) Version 
2.0.1 to conduct this analysis. The maximum design values from this 
analysis were 0.083 ppm in 2019 and 0.083 ppm in 2025, i.e., in 
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See Maintenance Plan 
Supplement.
    Based on our prior approval of MAG's photochemical modeling 
approach for 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration purposes and because 
we find MAG's application of the same basic approach to the 8-hour 
ozone maintenance demonstration to be reasonable, we accept the results 
of MAG's modeling as a sufficient demonstration that the plan provides 
for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa area 
through the first ten years after redesignation to attainment. 
Therefore, we propose to find that the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan meets the maintenance demonstration requirements under CAA section 
175A(a).
3. Monitoring Network
    Continued ambient monitoring of an area is generally required over 
the maintenance period. As discussed in section V.A. of this document, 
ozone is currently monitored by ADEQ, MCAQD, and PCAQCD at a total of 
20 sites within the Phoenix-Mesa 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. 
ADEQ and MCAQD monitors represent 19 of the 20 sites.
    The Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan (see page 3-21 of the plan) 
indicates that ADEQ and MCAQD will continue to operate an appropriate 
air quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to 
verify continued attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Further, if 
there is significant change to parameters such as population, vehicle 
miles of travel, or significant sources, ADEQ and MCAQD will undertake 
studies to determine if it is appropriate to re-site monitors or add 
additional monitors to the network. Lastly, the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan takes note of the annual review by EPA of State and 
local ambient monitoring network plans under 40 CFR part 58 as 
providing a continuing means for ensuring the adequacy of the ozone 
monitoring network in the Phoenix-Mesa area.
    We note that PCAQCD is not cited in the subsection on an approved 
monitoring network and verification of continued attainment in the 
Eight-Hour Maintenance Plan, but find the failure to include PCAQCD in 
the plan's discussion of continued monitoring and verification of 
continued attainment to be harmless error because the applicable 
monitoring requirements in 40 CFR part 58 will continue to apply to 
PCAQCD's ozone monitor regardless of our approval of the maintenance 
plan and redesignation request and because the overall ozone monitoring 
network operated by ADEQ and MCAQD alone (i.e., 19 of 20 NAMS and SLAMS 
stations) is sufficient to meet ozone monitoring requirements in the 
Phoenix-Mesa are. Therefore, for the reasons given above, EPA finds 
that the Eight-Hour Maintenance Plan adequately provides for continued 
ambient ozone monitoring in the Phoenix-Mesa area.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Each State should ensure that it has the legal authority to 
implement and enforce all measures necessary to attain and to maintain 
the NAAQS. Previously, in taking action to approve the various measures 
that the State is relying on for attainment and maintenance of the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS, such as the cleaner burning gasoline regulations 
and the vehicle emissions inspection (VEI) program, we determined that 
the State has the necessary legal authority to implement and enforce 
the measures and find no sunset clauses that would be triggered for 
these control measures upon redesignation to attainment. We are, 
however, aware of Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) section 41-3017.01 
which provides for the termination of the VEI on January 1, 2017, but 
recognize that the Arizona Legislature has at various intervals in the 
past

[[Page 16747]]

extended the termination date for the VEI program and expect it to do 
so again before 2017. We also find that the applicable State, regional, 
and county agencies, such as ADEQ, the Arizona Department of Weights 
and Measures, Arizona Department of Transportation (DOT), MAG, Maricopa 
County, Pinal County, and local cities and towns, have the necessary 
authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any emission control 
contingency measures determined to be necessary to correct ozone NAAQS 
violations.
    To verify continued attainment, in addition to continuing to 
operate an ozone monitoring network that meets EPA ambient air quality 
surveillance requirements, MCAQD will continue to update the emissions 
inventory for ozone precursors in the Phoenix-Mesa area every three 
years with input and assistance from ADEQ, Arizona DOT, and MAG. These 
emissions inventory updates will provide a means with which to track 
emissions relative to those projected in the maintenance plan, and 
thereby verify the continued attainment of the NAAQS.
    Lastly, the transportation conformity process, which requires a 
comparison of on-road motor vehicle emissions that would occur under 
new or amended transportation plans and programs with the motor vehicle 
emissions budgets in the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, represents 
another means by which to verify continued attainment of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa area, given the importance of 
motor vehicle emissions to the overall emissions inventories of ozone 
precursors. See pages 3-14 and 3-15 of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan. These methods are sufficient for the purpose of verifying 
continued attainment.
5. Contingency Provisions
    Section 175A(d) of the Act requires that maintenance plans include 
contingency provisions, as EPA deems necessary, to promptly correct any 
violations of the NAAQS that occur after redesignation of the area. 
Such provisions must include a requirement that the State will 
implement all measures (with respect to the control of the air 
pollutant concerned) that were contained in the SIP for the area before 
redesignation of the area as an attainment area.
    Under section 175A(d), contingency measures identified in the 
contingency plan do not have to be fully adopted at the time of 
redesignation. However, the contingency plan is considered to be an 
enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that the contingency 
measures are adopted expeditiously once they are triggered by a 
specified event. The maintenance plan should clearly identify the 
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and 
implementation, and a specific timeline for action by the State. As a 
necessary part of the plan, the State should also identify specific 
indicators or triggers that will be used to determine when the 
contingency measures need to be implemented.
    As required by section 175A of the CAA, MAG adopted a contingency 
plan to address possible future ozone air quality problems. See page 3-
21 of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. The plan includes both 
specific contingency measures that have already been adopted and are 
being implemented early \33\ and a mechanism to trigger the adoption of 
additional measures as needed. The specific contingency measures, which 
are described in more detail in section IV-7-2 of MAG's TSD for the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan (appendix A, exhibit 2 of the plan), 
are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ MAG followed the August 13, 1993 EPA guidance memorandum 
entitled ``Early Implementation of Contingency Measures for Ozone 
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Gross Polluter Option for I/M Program Waivers;
     Increased Waiver Repair Limit Options;
     Federal Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Emissions Standards;
     Coordinate Traffic Signal Systems;
     Develop Intelligent Transportation Systems; and
     Liquid Leaker Test as Part of Vehicle Emissions Inspection 
Program.

Two of the measures, ``coordinate traffic signal systems'' and 
``develop intelligent transportation systems,'' are control measures 
that the Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan had relied upon to 
demonstrate attainment of the standard. As noted above, CAA section 
175A(d) requires contingency plans to include a requirement that the 
State will implement all measures with respect to the control of the 
air pollutant concerned that were contained in the SIP for the area 
before redesignation of the area as an attainment area, i.e., if 
triggered under the terms of the contingency plan. In the case of these 
two specific contingency measures, we do not believe that the 
contingency plan must include a specific requirement to resume their 
implementation, i.e., if triggered, because the measures themselves 
continue to be implemented by the relevant agencies. The Eight-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan simply does not rely on emissions reductions 
from them to demonstrate maintenance through 2025. The emissions 
reductions from the other contingency measures listed above are also 
not included in the projected emissions inventory, and no emission 
reduction credit was taken for these measures in the modeling for the 
maintenance demonstration. As noted in the maintenance plan, 
implementation of these measures should provide additional assurance 
that the 1997 ozone standard will be maintained through 2025.
    In addition to the previously implemented contingency measures 
listed above, the plan includes a commitment to examine ambient air 
quality data to determine if additional contingency measures are 
needed. If the three-year average of the annual fourth highest daily 8-
hour ozone concentration exceeds 84 parts per billion at any ozone 
monitor, additional control measures will be considered. The plan 
requires that (1) the monitoring data will be verified within three 
months after the activation of the trigger; (2) control measures will 
be considered for adoption six months after the date established in 
(1); and (3) the resultant committed measures will be implemented 
within six to twelve months, depending on the time needed to put the 
measures in place.
    Upon our review of the plan, as summarized above, we find that the 
contingency provisions of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan 
identify specific contingency measures, contain tracking and triggering 
mechanisms to determine when contingency measures are needed, and 
contain specific timelines for action. Accordingly, we conclude that 
the contingency provisions of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan are 
adequate to ensure prompt correction of a violation and therefore 
comply with section 175A(d) of the Act.
6. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
    CAA section 175A(b) provides that States shall submit a SIP 
revision eight years after redesignation that provides for maintaining 
the NAAQS for an additional ten years. The Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan includes MAG's commitment to prepare the revised maintenance plan 
eight years after redesignation to attainment. See page 3-22 of the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan.
7. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA. 
Our transportation conformity rule (codified in 40 CFR part 93, subpart 
A) requires

[[Page 16748]]

that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to SIPs, and 
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not 
they do so. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities 
will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air 
quality standards or any interim milestones.
    Maintenance plan submittals must specify the emissions of 
transportation-related VOC and NOX emissions allowed in the 
last year of the maintenance period, i.e., the motor vehicle emissions 
budgets (MVEBs or budgets). The MVEBs serve as a ceiling on emissions 
that would result from an area's planned transportation system. The 
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 
1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble 
describes how to establish MVEBs in the SIP and how to revise the MVEBs 
if needed.
    The submittal must also demonstrate that these emissions levels, 
when considered with emissions from all other sources, are consistent 
with maintenance of the NAAQS. In order for us to find these emissions 
levels or ``budgets'' adequate and approvable, the submittal must meet 
the conformity adequacy provisions of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). For 
more information on the transportation conformity requirement and 
applicable policies on MVEBs, please visit our transportation 
conformity Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/index.htm.
    EPA's process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of three 
basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2) 
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a 
public comment period; and (3) making a finding of adequacy based on 
our initial review of the submitted SIP. The process for determining 
the adequacy of a submitted MVEB is codified at 40 CFR 93.118.
    The availability of the SIP submission with MVEBs was announced for 
public comment on EPA's Adequacy Web site on April 27, 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/tansconf/currsips.htm, which provided a 
30-day public comment period. The comment period for this notification 
ended on May 28, 2009, and EPA received no comments from the public. 
Note, however, that a second mechanism is also provided for EPA review 
and public comment on MVEBs, as described in 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2). This 
mechanism provides for EPA's review of the adequacy of an 
implementation plan MVEB simultaneously with its review and approval or 
disapproval of the submitted plan itself. In this instance, EPA used 
the web notification discussed above to solicit public comments on the 
adequacy of the Phoenix-Mesa MVEBs in the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan, but is taking comment on the approvability of the submitted MVEBs 
through this proposed rule. Any and all comments on the approvability 
of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan MVEBs should be submitted 
during the comment period stated in the DATES section of this document.
    The Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan contains new VOC and 
NOX MVEBs for the Phoenix-Mesa area for 2025.\34\ MAG 
developed the budgets for the 2025 maintenance year by using geographic 
information systems (GIS) to separate the on-road motor vehicle 
emissions in the Phoenix-Mesa air quality planning area from the larger 
ozone modeling domain, resulting in MVEBs of 43.8 metric tons per day 
(mtpd) of VOC and 101.8 mtpd of NOX. The MVEBs include a 10% 
safety margin \35\ and correspond to the peak episode day (Thursday) in 
June 2025 that was used to model maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa area in the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The derivation of the MVEBs is discussed in MAG's emissions 
inventory, which was included in the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance 
Plan submittal as Appendix A, Exhibit 1 (pages 99-110), and in 
Section IV-2 of MAG's TSD, which was included in the Eight-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan submittal as Appendix A, Exhibit 2. 
Additional discussion of the on-road emissions budgets is included 
in Section IV-9 of the TSD.
    \35\ MAG increased the 2025 VOC and NOX emissions 
from on-road motor vehicle sources in the eight-hour ozone modeling 
domain in order to address the ``inherent uncertainties associated 
with the use of the latest planning assumptions in conformity 
analyses.'' MAG distributed the increase spatially ``based on the 
proportion of onroad mobile emissions assigned to each four 
kilometer grid cell.'' See page 3-20 of the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To estimate motor vehicle emissions for the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan and related MVEBs, MAG used the version of EPA's motor 
vehicle emissions factor model (MOBILE6.2) that was current at the time 
the emissions estimates were prepared. The calculated emission factors 
were multiplied by the estimates of vehicle miles of travel (VMT) to 
generate emission estimates for on-road motor vehicle sources. The 
projected emissions inventory and related MVEBs take into account 
expected growth in VMT and reductions from the maintenance measures, 
but do not include reductions from implementation of the contingency 
measures.
    The MVEBs are consistent with the 2025 on-road motor vehicle source 
VOC and NOX emissions included in the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan's 2025 emission inventory, as summarized above in 
table 3, above. The conformity rule (40 CFR 93.124(a)) allows for a 
safety margin, and even with the 10 percent safety margin added to the 
on-road emissions, the overall emissions in the Phoenix-Mesa area are 
consistent with continued maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard.
    EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs for 2025 as part of our 
approval of the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the Phoenix-Mesa 
area. We have determined that the MVEB emission targets are consistent 
with emission control measures in the SIP and that the Phoenix-Mesa 
area can maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for ten years beyond 
redesignation. The details of EPA's evaluation of the MVEBs for 
compliance with the budget adequacy criteria of 40 CFR 93.118(e) are 
provided in a separate memorandum included in the docket of this 
rulemaking.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See EPA memorandum dated October 31, 2013 entitled 
``Adequacy Documentation for Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets in the 
February 2009 Ozone Maintenance State Implementation Plan for the 
Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment Area.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If we finalize this action as proposed, we will make the adequacy 
finding for the 2025 MVEBs in the final rule in which we approve the 
Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan. Pursuant to 40 CFR 
93.118(f)(2)(iii), our adequacy finding will be effective upon 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. Once found 
adequate, MAG and the U.S. Department of Transportation must use these 
new budgets for 2025 in conformity analyses with applicable horizon 
years after 2024. The 2008 MVEBs established in MAG's Eight-Hour Ozone 
Attainment Plan, which EPA previously approved (77 FR 35285), also 
remain in effect. On-road motor vehicle emissions in any required 
analysis years up to and including 2024 cannot exceed levels 
established by those previously-approved MVEBs.

VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment

    Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and for the reasons set forth above, 
EPA is proposing to approve ADEQ's submittal dated March 23, 2009 of 
the MAG Eight-Hour Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for 
the Maricopa Nonattainment Area (February 2009)

[[Page 16749]]

(``Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan'') as a revision to the Arizona 
state implementation plan (SIP). In connection with the Eight-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA finds that the maintenance demonstration 
showing how the area will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS for 10 years beyond redesignation and the contingency provisions 
describing the actions that the relevant State, regional, and local 
agencies will take in the event of a future monitored violation meet 
all applicable requirements for maintenance plans and related 
contingency provisions in CAA section 175A. EPA is also proposing to 
approve the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the Eight-Hour Ozone 
Maintenance Plan because we find they meet the applicable 
transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR 93.118(e). The 
motor vehicle emissions budgets, 43.8 mtpd of VOC and 101.8 mtpd of 
NOX, include a 10% safety margin and correspond to the peak 
episode day (Thursday) during the June 2025 ozone episode that was used 
to model maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa 
area in the Eight-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan.
    Second, under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), we are proposing to approve 
ADEQ's request, which accompanied the submitted of the maintenance 
plan, to redesignate the Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 
to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We are doing so based on 
our conclusion that the area has met the five criteria for 
redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). Our conclusion in this 
regard is in turn based on our proposed determination that the area has 
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, that relevant portions of the 
Arizona SIP are fully approved, that the improvement in air quality is 
due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions, that Arizona 
has met all requirements applicable to the Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area with respect to section 110 and part D of the CAA, 
and based on our proposed approval as part of this action of the Eight-
Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this 
document or on other relevant matters. We will accept comments from the 
public on this proposal for the next 30 days. We will consider these 
comments before taking final action.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not 
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those 
imposed by State law. Redesignation to attainment does not in and of 
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the 
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have 
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, 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, these actions merely propose to approve a 
State plan and redesignation request as meeting Federal requirements 
and do not impose additional requirements beyond those by State law. 
For these reasons, these proposed actions:
     Are 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);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not an economically significant regulatory action 
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical, appropriate, 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. Nonetheless, EPA has 
discussed the proposed action with the three Tribes, the Fort McDowell 
Yavapai Nation, the Salt River-Pima Maricopa Indian Community, and the 
Tohono O'odham Nation located within the Phoenix-Mesa 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: March 14, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2014-06661 Filed 3-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```