26912 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1Rule 210 also contains requirements to address 

the CAA title V requirements for operating permit 

programs, but we are not evaluating the rule for title 

V purposes at this time. We will evaluate Rule 210 

for compliance with the requirements of title V of 

the Act and the EPA’s implementing regulations in 

40 CFR part 70 following receipt of an official part 

70 program submittal from Maricopa County 

containing this rule. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12408 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–C 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0481; FRL–9978– 

82—Region 9] 

Air Quality State Implementation 

Plans: Arizona; Approval and 

Conditional Approval of State 

Implementation Plan Revisions; 

Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department; Stationary Source Permits 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing action on 

revisions to the Maricopa County Air 

Quality Department (MCAQD) portion 

of the state implementation plan (SIP) 

for the State of Arizona. We are 

proposing full approval of three rules 

and conditional approval of three rules 

submitted by the MCAQD. The revisions 

update the MCAQD’s New Source 

Review (NSR) permitting program for 

new and modified sources of air 

pollution. We are taking comments on 

this proposed rule and plan to follow 

with a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

July 11, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2017–0481 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

R9AirPermits@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be removed or edited from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shaheerah Kelly, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4156, kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

III. Proposed Action and Public Comment 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The word or initials ADEQ mean or refer 

to the Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality. 

(ii) The word or initials CAA or Act mean 

or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

(iii) The initials CFR mean or refer to Code 

of Federal Regulations. 

(iv) The initials or words EPA, we, us or 

our mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(v) The word or initials MCAQD or 

Department mean or refer to the Maricopa 

County Air Quality Department, the agency 

with jurisdiction over stationary sources 

within Maricopa County, Arizona. 

(vi) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to 

the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 

(vii) The initials NSR mean or refer to New 

Source Review. 

(viii) The initials NNSR mean or refer to 

nonattainment New Source Review. 

(ix) The initials PSD mean or refer to 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration. 

(x) The initials SIP mean or refer to State 

Implementation Plan. 

(xi) The word State means or refers to the 

State of Arizona. 

(xii) The word TSD means or refers to the 

Technical Support Document. 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the submitted rules 

addressed by this action with the dates 

that the rules were adopted by the 

MCAQD and submitted to EPA by the 

ADEQ, which is the governor’s designee 

for Arizona SIP submittals. These rules 

constitute the MCAQD’s air quality 

preconstruction NSR permit program. 

TABLE 1—MCAQD SUBMITTED RULES

Regulation & Rule No. Rule title 

Adoption or 

amendment 

date 

Submitted 

Regulation I, Rule 100 .................................................. General Provisions; General Provisions and Definitions.2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 200 ................................................. Permits and Fees; Permit Requirements ..................... 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 210 1 .............................................. Permits and Fees; Title V Permit Provisions ............... 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 220 ................................................. Permits and Fees; Non-Title V Permit Provisions ....... 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 230 ................................................. Permits and Fees; General Permits ............................. 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 240 ................................................. Permits and Fees; Federal Major New Source Review 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 241 ................................................. Permits and Fees; Minor New Source Review ............ 9/7/2016 11/25/2016 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26913 

2Copies of the completeness letters are in the 

docket for today’s rulemaking. 3See Section 4.8.1.5 in our TSD in the docket for 

this action for a list of these definitions. 4The MCAQD combined its ‘‘installation’’ 

(referred to in EPA regulations as ‘‘construction’’) 

and ‘‘operating’’ permit programs to form a 

‘‘unitary’’ permit program that authorizes both 

construction and operation of a stationary source in 

a single permit document. A single permit 

application is submitted by a stationary source to 

satisfy both the NSR and Title V Operating permit 

program requirements. Also, the public notification 

and review process for the combined permit action 

is designed to satisfy both the NSR and operating 

permit program requirements. 5The excluded definitions were removed from 

the SIP-approved version of Rule 2 on June 18, 1982 

(47 FR 26382). 6The NSR SIP Submittal identifies Rule 20 in the 

list of SIP rules intended to be replaced by the 

submitted revised rules. While Rule 20 is not listed 

in the current approved SIP (see 40 CFR 52.120), 

it is not entirely clear that it was ever removed from 

the SIP. Therefore, for completeness we are listing 

the rule. 

7This approval action was approved by the EPA 

on August 10, 1988 (53 FR 30224), then vacated and 

restored on January 29, 1991 (56 FR 3219). 

8 Id. 

9While Rule 21, Section F is not listed in the 

current approved SIP (see 40 CFR 52.120), it is not 

entirely clear that it was ever removed from the SIP. 

Therefore, for completeness we are listing the rule. 

On October 31, 2016, the EPA 

determined that the submittal for the 

MCAQD’s Rules 100, 200, 210, 220, 230, 

and 240 met the completeness criteria in 

40 CFR part 51 Appendix V. 

Additionally, on January 17, 2017, the 

EPA determined that the submittal for 

the MCAQD Rule 241 met the 

completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 

Appendix V.2 These NSR rule 

submittals, which we refer to 

collectively herein as ‘‘MCAQD’s NSR 

submittal’’ or ‘‘the submittal,’’ represent 

a comprehensive revision to the 

MCAQD’s preconstruction review and 

permitting program and are intended to 

satisfy the requirements under part D 

(NNSR) of title I of the Act as well as 

the general preconstruction review 

requirements under section 110(a)(2)(C) 

of the Act. 

In a letter dated April 6, 2018, the 

ADEQ requested that the rules or rule 

sections listed in Table 2 be withdrawn 

from the May 18, 2016 SIP submittal. 

Therefore, these rules or rule sections 

are not part of the submitted rules that 

the EPA is evaluating and proposing 

action on in this notice. 

TABLE 2—WITHDRAWN MCAQD RULES OR RULE SECTIONS

Regulation, rule, & section No. Title 

Adoption or 

amendment 

date 

Submitted 

Regulation I, Rule 100, Section 200.24 ....................... Definition of ‘‘Begin Actual Construction’’ .................... 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation I, Rule 100, Section 200.73 ....................... Definition of ‘‘Modification’’ ........................................... 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation I, Rule 100, Section 200.104(c) ................. Definition of ‘‘Regulated Air Pollutant’’ ......................... 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 230 ................................................. Permits and Fees; General Permits ............................. 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

Regulation II, Rule 240, Section 305 ........................... Permit Requirements for New Major Sources or Major 

Modifications located in Attainment or 

Unclassifiable Areas.

2/3/2016 5/18/2016 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

The existing SIP-approved NSR 

program for new or modified stationary 

sources in Maricopa County consists of 

the rules identified in Table 3. 

Collectively, these rules establish the 

NSR permit requirements for stationary 

sources under the MCAQD’s 

jurisdiction. 

The rules listed in Table 1 will 

replace the existing SIP-approved NSR 

program rules listed in Table 3, in their 

entirety, except for certain definitions 

the EPA has identified that must be 

retained in the SIP.3 The MCAQD made 

significant revisions to its NSR program, 

including, for example, switching from 

separate preconstruction and operating 

permit programs to a ‘‘unitary’’ permit 

program.4 The EPA’s action on this SIP 

submittal will update the MCAQD 

portion of the Arizona SIP. 

TABLE 3—MCAQD’S CURRENT SIP-APPROVED RULES

Regulation, rule, & section No. Rule title SIP approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

citation 

Regulation I, Rule 1 ...................................................... General Provisions; Emissions Regulated: Policy, 

Legal Authority.

7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

Regulation I, Rule 2, No. 11 ‘‘Alteration or Modification’’ and No. 33 ‘‘Existing Source’’.General Provisions; Definitions ................................... 6/18/1982 47 FR 26382 

Regulation I, Rule 2 (excluding Nos. 18, 49, 50, 52, 

54 and 57) 5.

General Provisions; Definitions ................................... 4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 

Regulation I, Rule 3 ...................................................... General Provisions; Air Pollution Prohibited ............... 4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 

Regulation I, Rule 100, Section 108 ............................. General Provisions; Hearing Board ............................. 8/10/2015 80 FR 47859 

Regulation I, Rule 100, Section 500 ............................. General Provisions; Monitoring and Records ............. 11/5/2012 77 FR 66405 

Regulation II, Rule 20 6 ................................................. Permits and Fees; Permits Required .......................... 7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

Regulation II, Rule 21.0, (paragraphs A–C; subparagraphs D.1.a-d; and paragraph E only) 7.Permits and Fees; Procedures for Obtaining an Installation Permit.1/29/1991 56 FR 3219 

Regulation II, Rule 21.0, (subparagraph D.1 and subparagraphs D.1.e, f and g only) 8.Permits and Fees; Procedures for Obtaining an Installation Permit.1/29/1991 56 FR 3219 

Regulation II, Rule 21, Section F 9 ............................... Permits and Fees; Procedures for Obtaining an Installation Permit.7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

Regulation II, Rule 21, Section G ................................. Permits and Fees; Procedures for Obtaining an Installation Permit.4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 

Regulation II, Rule 23 ................................................... Permits and Fees; Permit Classes .............................. 7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

Regulation II, Rule 25 ................................................... Permits and Fees; Emissions Test Methods and Procedures.4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26914 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 3—MCAQD’S CURRENT SIP-APPROVED RULES—Continued 

Regulation, rule, & section No. Rule title SIP approval 

date 

Federal 

Register 

citation 

Regulation II, Rule 26 ................................................... Permits and Fees; Air Quality Models ........................ 4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 

Regulation II, Rule 26 ................................................... Permits and Fees; Portable Equipment ...................... 7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

Regulation II, Rule 220 ................................................. Permits and Fees; Permits to Operate ....................... 1/6/1992 57 FR 354 

Regulation IV, Rule 40 .................................................. Production of Records: Monitoring, Testing, and 

Sampling Facilities; Record Keeping and Reporting.

4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 

Regulation IV, Rule 43 .................................................. Production of Records: Monitoring, Testing, and 

Sampling Facilities; Right of Inspection.

7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

Regulation VII, Rule 71 ................................................. Ambient Air Quality Standards; Anti-degradation ....... 4/12/1982 47 FR 15579 

Regulation VIII, Rule 80 ................................................ Validity and Operation; Validity ................................... 7/27/1972 37 FR 15080 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit regulations that include 

a pre-construction permit program for 

new or modified stationary sources of 

pollutants, including a permit program 

as required by part D of title I of the 

CAA. 

The purpose of the MCAQD’s NSR 

submittal, which includes Rules 100, 

200, 210, 220, 240, and 241, is to 

implement the county’s preconstruction 

permit program for new and modified 

minor sources, and new and modified 

major stationary sources for areas 

designated nonattainment for at least 

one National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS). 

A portion of Maricopa County 

(Phoenix-Mesa, AZ) is currently 

designated as a Moderate nonattainment 

area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and as 

a Marginal nonattainment area for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. Additionally, a 

different portion of the county (Phoenix 

Planning Area) is currently designated 

as a Serious nonattainment area for the 

1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. See 40 CFR 

81.303. 

We present our evaluation under the 

CAA and the EPA’s implementing 

regulations applicable to SIP submittals 

and NSR permit programs in general 

terms below. We provide a more 

detailed analysis in our TSD, which is 

available in the docket for this proposed 

action. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules? 

The EPA has reviewed the MCAQD 

rules listed in Table 1 for compliance 

with the CAA’s general requirements for 

SIPs in CAA section 110(a)(2), and for 

the nonattainment NSR programs in part 

D of title I (sections 172 and 173). The 

EPA also evaluated the rules for 

compliance with the CAA requirements 

for SIP revisions in CAA sections 110(l) 

and 193. In addition, the EPA evaluated 

the submitted rules for consistency with 

the regulatory provisions of 40 CFR part 

51, subpart I (Review of New Sources 

and Modifications) (i.e., 40 CFR 51.160– 

51.165) and 40 CFR 51.307. 

Among other things, section 110 of 

the Act requires that SIP rules be 

enforceable, and provides that the EPA 

may not approve a SIP revision if it 

would interfere with any applicable 

requirements concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress (RFP) or any 

other requirement of the CAA. In 

addition, section 110(a)(2) and section 

110(l) of the Act require that each SIP 

or revision to a SIP submitted by a state 

must be adopted after reasonable notice 

and public hearing. 

Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act 

requires each SIP to include a program 

to regulate the modification and 

construction of any stationary source 

within the areas covered by the SIP as 

necessary to assure attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS. The EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR 51.160–51.164 

provide general programmatic 

requirements to implement this 

statutory mandate commonly referred to 

as the ‘‘general’’ or ‘‘minor’’ NSR 

program. These NSR program 

regulations impose requirements for 

approval of state and local programs 

that are more general in nature as 

compared to the specific statutory and 

regulatory requirements for NSR 

permitting programs under part D of 

title I of the Act. 

Part D of title I of the Act contains the 

general requirements for areas 

designated nonattainment for a NAAQS 

(section 172), including preconstruction 

permit requirements for new major 

sources and major modifications 

proposing to construct in nonattainment 

areas (section 173). 40 CFR 51.165 sets 

forth the EPA’s regulatory requirements 

for SIP-approval of a nonattainment 

NSR permit program. 

The protection of visibility 

requirements that apply to NSR 

programs are contained in 40 CFR 

51.307. This provision requires that 

certain actions be taken in consultation 

with the local Federal Land Manager if 

a new major source or major 

modification may have an impact on 

visibility in any mandatory Federal 

Class I Area. 

Section 110(l) of the Act prohibits the 

EPA from approving any SIP revisions 

that would interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

RFP or any other applicable requirement 

of the CAA. Section 193 of the Act, 

which only applies in nonattainment 

areas, prohibits the modification of a 

SIP-approved control requirement in 

effect before November 15, 1990, in any 

manner unless the modification insures 

equivalent or greater emission 

reductions of such air pollutant. 

Our TSD, which can be found in the 

docket for this rule, contains a more 

detailed discussion of the approval 

criteria. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

The EPA has reviewed the submitted 

rules in accordance with the rule 

evaluation criteria described above. 

With respect to procedural 

requirements, CAA sections 110(a)(2) 

and 110(l) require that revisions to a SIP 

be adopted by the state after reasonable 

notice and public hearing. Based on our 

review of the public process 

documentation included in the May 18, 

2016 and November 25, 2016 SIP 

submittals, we find that the MCAQD has 

provided sufficient evidence of public 

notice, and an opportunity for comment 

and a public hearing prior to adoption 

and submittal of these rules to the EPA. 

With respect to substantive 

requirements, we have reviewed the 

submitted rules in accordance with the 

evaluation criteria discussed above. We 

are proposing to fully approve Rules 

210, 240 and 241 as part of the 

MCAQD’s general and major source 

NSR permitting program because we 

have determined that these rules satisfy 

the substantive statutory and regulatory 

requirements for NSR permit programs 

as contained in part D of title I of the 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26915 

Act (sections 172, 173 and 182(a)), the 

part D requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(C), 40 CFR 51.160–51.165, and 

40 CFR 51.307. 

In addition, we are proposing a 

conditional approval of Rules 100, 200, 

and 220 because we have determined 

that while they mostly satisfy the 

statutory and regulatory requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and part D of 

title I of the Act, the rules also contain 

eight deficiencies that prevent full 

approval. Below we describe the eight 

identified deficiencies. Our TSD 

contains a more detailed evaluation and 

recommendations for program 

improvements. 

1. Definitions of ‘‘PM2.5’’ and ‘‘PM10’’ 

(Rule 200, Sections 201 and 315) 

The EPA finds the definitions of 

‘‘PM2.5’’ and ‘‘PM10’’ in Rule 100, 

Sections 200.91 and 200.92, deficient 

because they do not provide that 

gaseous emissions, which form 

particulates, are included in the 

respective definitions. The MCAQD may 

correct this deficiency by adding 

language to clarify that gaseous 

emissions are included in these 

definitions. 

2. Good Engineering Practice Stack 

Height Provisions (Rule 200, Sections 

201 and 315) 

An NSR program is required to 

contain provisions to satisfy the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.164, 

pertaining to stack height procedures. 

The NSR program must contain 

provisions ensuring that a source with 

a stack height that exceeds good 

engineering practice (GEP), or that uses 

any other dispersion technique, does 

not affect the amount of emissions 

control required. 40 CFR 51.164 also 

includes specific requirements that 

must be met before a permit may be 

issued for any stack that exceeds GEP 

and a clarifying statement that the 

regulation does not restrict the actual 

stack height of any source. 

Rule 200, Section 201 defines the 

term GEP Stack Height as ‘‘stack height 

meeting the requirements described in 

Rule 240 (Federal Major NSR) of these 

rules.’’ (Emphasis added) This 

definition is inconsistent with the 

definition for this term provided in 40 

CFR 51.100(ii), which provides a 

numerical value, or formulas for 

calculating a numerical value, relevant 

to stack height. Rule 240, Section 306 

does not contain any ‘‘requirements for 

stack height,’’ but instead provides 

criteria for determining if a stack height 

exceeds GEP, and a prohibition on stack 

height exceeding GEP from affecting the 

degree of emission limitation required 

by any source for control of any air 

pollutants. Because Rule 240, Section 

306 does not provide any specific 

requirements for stack height, this 

definition lacks clarity and practical 

enforceability. Therefore, the EPA finds 

this definition deficient. The MCAQD 

may correct this deficiency by removing 

this definition or revising it in Rule 200 

to read ‘‘as defined in 40 CFR 

51.100(ii),’’ which will ensure the 

definition of GEP Stack Height is 

consistent with the EPA definition. 

Rule 200, Section 315 states that ‘‘the 

degree of emission limitation required 

of any source of any pollutant shall not 

be affected by so much of any source’s 

stack height that exceeds good 

engineering practice or by any other 

dispersion technique as determined by 

the procedures of 40 CFR 51.118 and the 

EPA regulations cross-referenced 

therein.’’ (Emphasis added) While this 

language satisfies the first sentence of 40 

CFR 51.164, it does not include 

provisions (1) excluding certain stacks 

(as provided in 40 CFR 51.118(b)); (2) 

allowing stacks to exceed GEP in 

specified circumstances; or (3) clarifying 

that these provisions do not limit the 

stack height of any source. In addition, 

despite the language of Rule 200, 

Section 315, 40 CFR 51.118 does not 

include any procedures for determining 

if the degree of emission limitation is or 

is not affected by a stack height that 

exceeds GEP or by any other dispersion 

technique. Therefore, the EPA finds 

Rule 200, Section 315 to be deficient. 

The MCAQD may correct this deficiency 

by moving or adding the provisions of 

Rule 240, Section 306 to Rule 200, 

Section 315. 

3. Exemption for Agricultural 

Equipment Used in Normal Farm 

Operations (Rule 200, Section 305.1.c) 

While the EPA agrees that, in general, 

certain types of equipment may be 

exempted from the minor NSR program, 

the MCAQD must provide a basis under 

40 CFR 51.160(e) to demonstrate that 

regulation of the equipment exempted 

in Rule 200, Section 305.1.c is not 

needed for the MCAQD’s program to 

meet federal NSR requirements for 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS or review for compliance with 

the control strategy. 

Such demonstration must address: (1) 

Identification of the types of equipment 

that the MCAQD considers to be 

‘‘agricultural equipment used in normal 

farm operations’’ and whether this type 

of equipment could potentially be 

expected to occur at a stationary source 

subject to title V of the CAA, 40 CFR 

parts 60, 61, and 63, or part C or D of 

title I of the CAA, and, if so, whether 

such equipment is subject to NSR 

review at such sources; and (2) the 

MCAQD’s basis for determining that 

‘‘agricultural equipment used in normal 

farm operations’’ does not need to be 

regulated as part of the MCAQD’s minor 

NSR program under 40 CFR 51.160(e). 

4. Notification and Implementation 

Provisions for Certain Changes That Do 

Not Require a Non-Title V Revision 

(Rule 220, Section 404.3) 

Rule 200, Section 404.3 provides 

criteria for replacing or changing certain 

equipment if the source provides 

written notification to the Control 

Officer within 7 or 30 days in advance 

of the change. The EPA is concerned 

that two of the listed provisions 

(subparagraphs e. and f.) allow changes 

with potentially significant emission 

increases and should not be listed as 

changes that can be made after 

providing only a notification to the 

MCAQD. Subparagraph f. allows 

changes associated with an emission 

increase greater than 10 percent of the 

major source threshold (greater than 10 

tpy for most criteria pollutants and 25 

tpy for some other pollutants), if the 

increase does not trigger a new 

applicable requirement. These allowable 

emission increase thresholds are greater 

than some of the public notice 

thresholds provided in Rule 100, 

Section 200.98. Because the rule 

contains conflicting requirements—a 

notification and implementation 

provision allowing changes without a 

permit revision versus a public notice 

requirement for changes with emission 

increases equal or greater than these 

amounts, the EPA finds the provisions 

contained in subparagraph f. to be 

deficient. Likewise, the provision in 

subparagraph e. is for reconstructed 

sources, which are defined, in part, as 

sources where the fixed capital cost of 

the new components exceeds 50 percent 

of the fixed capital cost that would be 

required to construct a comparable new 

facility. This type of change is not likely 

to result in an insignificant revision; 

therefore, the EPA finds that this 

provision is also deficient. These 

deficiencies may be addressed by 

adding language stating that the 

provisions of Section 404.3 only apply 

to changes that do not require a permit 

revision pursuant to Section 403.2. (See 

language contained in Rule 200, Section 

404.3, subparagraph b.) 

5. Expiration of NSR Terms and 

Conditions 

The MCAQD’s permit programs now 

rely on a single unitary permit to satisfy 

both NSR and title V program 

requirements. Rule 210, Section 402 and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26916 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

10See Section 9.2 of the TSD for additional 

information about how the MCAQD will correct the 

identified deficiencies. The April 2, 2018 and April 

6, 2018 commitment letters from the MCAQD and 

the ADEQ are contained in the docket for today’s 

rulemaking. 

Rule 220, Section 402, both specify that 

a Title V and Non-Title V permit, 

respectively, shall remain in effect for 

no more than 5 years. 

The MCAQD’s permit program must 

ensure that all NSR terms and 

conditions contained in either type of 

permit do not expire even if the Title V 

or Non-Title V permit expires. Rule 200, 

Section 403.2 provides that if a timely 

and complete application for a permit 

renewal is submitted, then the permit 

will not expire until the renewal permit 

has been issued or denied. However, 

Rule 200, Section 403.2 does not 

specifically ensure the continuity of the 

NSR terms and conditions when a Title 

V or Non-Title V permit expires. The 

lack of such a provision is a NSR 

program deficiency. The MCAQD may 

correct this deficiency by adding a 

provision similar to paragraph B of 

ADEQ’s R18–2–303. 

6. Inappropriate Rule References of 

Appendix G in Rules 100 and 200 

Appendix G (Incorporated Materials) 

is referenced throughout the submitted 

rules as containing pertinent 

requirements for provisions contained 

in the MCAQD’s rules, but it is not 

included in the existing SIP, nor has it 

been included in the SIP submittal. For 

this reason, the following sections of the 

submitted rules, which reference 

Appendix G for the applicability of 

specified provisions, are deficient. 

• Rule 100, Section 200.14 (Definition 

of ‘‘AP–42’’) 

• Rule 100, Section 200.80 (Definition 

of ‘‘Non-Precursor Organic 

Compound’’) 

• Rule 100, Section 200.103 (Definition 

of ‘‘Reference Method’’) 

• Rule 100, Section 503 (Emission 

Statements Required as Stated in the 

Act) 

• Rule 200, Section 315 (Stack Height 

Provisions) 

The MCAQD may correct these 

deficiencies by removing the references 

to Appendix G and, where appropriate, 

citing to the appropriate CFR provision 

without incorporating the provision by 

reference into a specific MCAQD rule. 

7. Inappropriate Rule References of 

Arizona Testing Manual in Rules 100 

and 200 

Rules 100 and 200 both include 

references to the Arizona Testing 

Manual (ATM). Rule 100, Section 

200.17 defines the term ‘‘ATM’’ as 

Sections 1 and 7 of the ATM for Air 

Pollutant Emissions, amended as of 

March 1992 (and no future editions). 

However, only Section 1 of the ATM is 

approved in the Arizona SIP. This 

provision is deficient for two separate 

reasons. First, Rule 100 cross-references 

and relies on provisions that are not SIP 

approved. Second, the ATM is 

significantly out of date, and therefore it 

is not appropriate to be relied upon as 

the sole basis for testing procedures as 

specified in Section 408 of Rule 200. 

The MCAQD may correct this deficiency 

by revising Section 408 to specify 

current EPA test methods or alternative 

test methods approved by the Director 

and the EPA in writing. 

8. Definitions To Be Retained in the SIP 

The MCAQD’s SIP submittal states 

that the Department is seeking to delete 

certain definitions from the approved 

SIP by replacing the rules containing 

these definitions with newly submitted 

rules that no longer contain these 

definitions (in effect, these definitions 

would be repealed from the SIP). 

However, these definitions are used in 

other SIP rules and therefore cannot be 

repealed from the SIP without further 

justification. Therefore, these 

definitions will be retained in the SIP. 

For a list of these definitions see Section 

4.8.1.5 of our TSD, which is available in 

the docket for this proposed action. 

III. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

If a portion of a plan revision meets 

all the applicable CAA requirements, 

CAA section 110(k)(3) authorizes the 

EPA to approve the plan revision in 

part. As such we are proposing full 

approval of MCAQD Rules 210, 240, and 

241. In addition, CAA section 110(k)(4) 

authorizes the EPA to conditionally 

approve a plan revision based on a 

commitment by the state to adopt 

specific enforceable measures by a date 

certain but not later than one year after 

the date of the plan approval. In letters 

dated April 2, 2018 and April 6, 2018, 

the MCAQD and the ADEQ committed 

to adopt and submit specific enforceable 

measures to address the identified 

deficiencies in Rules 100, 200, and 220 

within one year after the date of final 

approval.10 Accordingly, pursuant to 

section 110(k)(4) of the Act, the EPA is 

proposing a conditional approval of 

submitted Rules 100, 200, and 220. We 

are proposing to conditionally approve 

these rules based on our determination 

that, separate from the deficiencies 

listed in Section II.B of this notice, the 

rules satisfy the substantive statutory 

and regulatory requirements for a 

general NSR permit program as 

contained in 40 CFR 51.160–51.164, as 

well as a nonattainment NSR permit 

program as set forth in the applicable 

provisions of part D of title I of the Act 

(sections 172, 173 and 182(a)), 40 CFR 

51.165, and 40 CFR 51.307. Moreover, 

we conclude that if the MCAQD and the 

ADEQ submit the changes listed in their 

commitment letters, the identified 

deficiencies will be cured. 

In support of this proposed action, we 

have concluded that our conditional 

approval of the submitted rules would 

comply with section 110(l) of the Act 

because the amended rules, as a whole, 

would not interfere with continued 

attainment of the NAAQS in Maricopa 

County. The intended effect of our 

proposed conditional approval action is 

to update the applicable SIP with 

current MCAQD rules and provide the 

MCAQD the opportunity to correct the 

identified deficiencies, as discussed in 

their commitment letter dated April 2, 

2018. If we finalize this action as 

proposed, our action would be codified 

through revisions to 40 CFR 52.120 

(Identification of plan) and 40 CFR 

52.119 (Part D conditional approval). 

If the ADEQ and MCAQD meet their 

commitment to submit the required 

revisions and/or demonstrations within 

12 months of the EPA’s final action on 

this SIP submittal, and the EPA 

approves the submission, then the 

deficiencies listed above will be cured. 

However, if the MCAQD or the ADEQ 

fails to submit these revisions and/or 

demonstrations within the required 

timeframe, the conditional approval will 

become a disapproval and the EPA will 

issue a finding of disapproval. The EPA 

is not required to propose the finding of 

disapproval. Further, a finding of 

disapproval would start an 18-month 

clock to apply sanctions under CAA 

section 179(b) and a two-year clock for 

a federal implementation plan under 

CAA section 110(c)(1). 

We will accept comments from the 

public on the proposed approval and 

conditional approval of the MCAQD 

rules listed in Table 1 of this notice for 

the next 30 days. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the MCAQD rules listed in Table 1 of 

this notice, except for the rules or rule 

sections listed in Table 2 of this notice. 

The EPA has made, and will continue 

to make, these documents generally 

available electronically through 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26917 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region IX Office (see the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA because this action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities beyond those imposed by state 

law. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, will result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175, because the SIP is not 

approved to apply on any Indian 

reservation land or in any other area 

where the EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction, and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. The EPA believes that this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of section 12(d) of the NTTAA because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

The EPA lacks the discretionary 

authority to address environmental 

justice in this rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, New 

Source Review, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: May 18, 2018. 

Deborah Jordan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12390 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R03–RCRA–2017–0553; FRL–9979– 

06—Region 3] 

District of Columbia: Proposed 

Authorization of District Hazardous 

Waste Management Program 

Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The District of Columbia (the 

District) has applied to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

for final authorization of revisions to its 

hazardous waste program under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA). EPA has reviewed the 

District’s application, and has 

determined that these revisions satisfy 

all requirements needed to qualify for 

final authorization. As a result, by this 

proposed rule, EPA is proposing to 

authorize the District’s revisions and is 

seeking public comment prior to taking 

final action. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received by July 11, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

RCRA–2017–0553, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: kinslow.sara@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Sara Kinslow, U.S. EPA 

Region III, RCRA Waste Branch, 

Mailcode 3LC32, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. 

4. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

You may view and copy the District’s 

application from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., 

Monday through Friday at the following 

locations: District of Columbia 

Department of Energy and Environment, 

Environmental Services Administration, 

Hazardous Waste Branch, 1200 First 

Street NE, 5th Floor, Washington, DC, 

Phone number: (202) 654–6031, Attn: 

Barbara Williams; and EPA Region III, 

Library, 2nd Floor, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029, Phone 

number: (215) 814–5254. 

Instructions: EPA must receive your 

comments by July 11, 2018. Direct your 

comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

RCRA–2017–0553. EPA’s policy is that 

all comments received will be included 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS