1 

Technical Support Document 

Revisions to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan 

PM2.5 SILs and SMC: Removal of Vacated Elements 

June 30, 2015 

Contents 

1. Executive Summary 

a. What submittals are evaluated in this Technical Support Document? 

b. What actions are not included in EPA’s current analysis? 

2. Background of Federal Actions 

3. Background of State Submittals 

4. Technical Review of State Submittals 

a. Evaluation of the August 6, 2014, Submittal with Respect to Section 110(l) of the 

CAA 

b. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the August 6, 2014, SIP Submittal 

c. Evaluation of the May 23, 2011, and August 6, 2014, Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC 

5. Conclusion 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Adina Wiley, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Permits Section (6PD-R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas, 

75202-2733, (214) 665-2115 

 
2 

1. Executive Summary 

a. What submittals are evaluated in this Technical Support Document? 

This technical support document (TSD) reviews portions of two proposed revisions to the New 

Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) permitting program for New Mexico. The PSD permitting program applies statewide for 

areas that are attainment or unclassifiable for pollutants regulated by the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Doña Ana County is the only nonattainment area in New Mexico, currently designated as 

moderate nonattainment for particulate matter less than 10 micrometers (PM10).1

 

The May 23, 2011, SIP revision added an exemption for the air quality demonstration for PM2.5, 

at 20.2.74.303(A) and 20.2.74.503 of the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC), similar to 

that made possible by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) PM2.5 Significant 

Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC) established in 2010 (see 

2. Background of Federal Actions below). The August 6, 2014, revisions remove the exemption, 

consistent with later revisions EPA made in light of a court decision. Throughout this document 

wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA. 

This TSD’s review will determine if the program revisions submitted on May 23, 2011, and 

August 6, 2014, are consistent with the requirements of the CAA and the EPA’s policy and 

guidance. The submittals may be described as follows. 

May 23, 2011 

In a letter dated May 23, 2011, Governor Martinez submitted revisions to the New Mexico SIP 

that were adopted by the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board (NM EIB) on May 3, 

2011, and became effective on June 3, 2011. This SIP submittal includes revisions to: 

 the New Mexico PSD Permitting Program at 20.2.74 NMAC, Permits - Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration, and; 

 the Nonattainment New Source Review Permitting Program at 20.2.79 NMAC. 

August 6, 2014 

In a letter dated August 6, 2014, the Secretary of the New Mexico Environment Department 

submitted revisions to the New Mexico SIP that were adopted by the NM EIB on July 18, 2014, 

and became effective on August 18, 2014. This SIP submittal provides revisions to: 

 the New Mexico PSD Permitting Program at 20.2.74 NMAC, Permits – Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration. 

b. What actions are not included in EPA’s current analysis? 

This review will not address revisions in the May 23, 2011, submittal that were approved by the 

EPA at 78 FR 4339 on January 22, 2013, including all of the revisions to the New Mexico 

Nonattainment New Source Review Permitting Program at 20.2.79 NMAC. The only portion of 

                                                            

1 Doña Ana County, New Mexico is designated as a moderate PM10 nonattainment area. The nonattainment area is 

the area bounded by Anthony Quadrangle, Anthony, New Mexico - Texas. SE/4 La Mesa 15' Quadrangle, N3200 - 

W10630/7.5, Township 26S, Range 3E, Sections 35 and 36 as limited by the New Mexico - Texas State line on the 

south.
3 

the May 23, 2011, submittal that remains before the EPA for review is the revision to 

20.2.74.303(A) NMAC, which was revised again in the August 6, 2014, submittal. 

2. Background of Federal Actions 

Under Section 165 of the CAA, PSD permit applications must contain air quality monitoring 

data representing air quality in the area affected by the proposed source for the 1-year period 

preceding receipt of the application. See 42 U.S.C. §7475. 

On October 20, 2010, the EPA promulgated regulations known as the “Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC); Final Rule” 

(75 FR 64864). These regulations added two screening tools, SILs and SMC, under the PSD 

regulations for areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for PM2.5. These tools were 

established to determine whether a new source may be exempted from the requirement based on 

the grounds that the increase of the pollutant is de minimis. (EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQOAR-2006-0605) 

On April 6, 2012, a petition was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (the Court) for review of the October 20, 2010, PSD regulations. The Court 

granted a request from the EPA to vacate and remand to the EPA portions of the October 20, 

2010, PSD regulations establishing the PM2.5 SIL and further vacated the portions of the PSD 

regulations establishing a PM2.5 SMC. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir., January 

22, 2013). 

On December 9, 2013, the EPA amended its regulations to remove the vacated PM2.5 SIL and 

SMC provisions from the PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5), 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(i)(5). 

See 78 FR 73698, EPA Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2006-0605. Because 40 CFR 

51.166(i)(5)(iii) and 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(iii) establish an exemption from air monitoring 

requirements for any pollutant “not listed in paragraph (i)(5)(i),” the reference to PM2.5 in 

paragraph (i)(5)(i) may not be removed. Were the EPA to completely remove PM2.5 from the list 

of pollutants in sections 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) of the PSD regulations, PM2.5 

would no longer be a listed pollutant and the paragraph (iii) provision could be interpreted as 

giving reviewing authorities the discretion to exempt permit applicants from the requirement to 

conduct monitoring for PM2.5, in contravention of the Court’s decision and the CAA. Instead, 

the EPA revised the concentration listed in sections 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) to 0 

micrograms per cubic meter (μgl/m3

). This means that there is no air quality impact level below 

which a reviewing authority has the discretion to exempt a source from the PM2.5 monitoring 

requirements. 

3. Background of State Submittals 

On May 3, 2011, the NM EIB adopted revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC, which became effective on 

June 3, 2011. These revisions incorporated the EPA’s 2010 PM2.5 SILs and SMC into New 

Mexico’s regulations at 20.2.74.303(A) and 20.2.74.503 NMAC, among other changes. New 

Mexico submitted these changes to the EPA for approval on May 23, 2011. 

On January 22, 2013, EPA approved portions of the NM SIP revision submittal of May 23, 2011, 

and a June 11, 2009, submittal (78 FR 4339, EPA Docket ID NO. EPA-R06-2011-0033). A 
4 

revision to 20.2.74.503 NMAC was included in this approval. However, the EPA severed the 

May 23, 2011, revision to 20.2.74.303(A) NMAC and did not act on it because it was equivalent 

to the provisions we had requested the Court to remand and vacate. The EPA chose to wait to 

act on this revision until after the Court addressed EPA’s request. 

New Mexico’s August 6, 2014, submittal modifies the PM2.5 SIL and SMC provisions at 

20.2.74.303(A) and 20.2.74.503 NMAC, making them consistent with the current federal 

regulation. 

4. Technical Review of State Submittals 

The TSD for EPA’s January 22, 2013, approval of portions of the May 23, 2011, SIP submittal 

found that the submittal satisfies the completeness criteria described below. Therefore, we will 

not re-evaluate the May 23, 2011, submittal for completeness under 40 CFR Part 51 in this TSD. 

Only the August 6, 2014, submittal will be evaluated in 4.a. and b. Both submittals will be 

evaluated in 4.c. 

This technical review of the August 6, 2014, revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC consists of a 

comparison between the relevant Clean Air Act requirements and the corresponding sections in 

the SIP submittal (see 4.a. below). The submittal is also separately reviewed for completeness 

under Part 51, Appendix V (see 4.b. below). 

a. Evaluation of the August 6, 2014, SIP submittal with respect to section 110(l) of the 

CAA 

Section 110(l) of the CAA states: 

Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under this Act shall be adopted by 

such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a 

revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable 

requirement of this Act. 

Thus, under section 110(l), the August 6, 2014, SIP submittal containing revisions to the NM 

PSD permitting programs must not interfere with attainment or reasonable further progress or 

any other applicable requirement of the Act. The August 6, 2014, revisions to the NM PSD 

permit programs were adopted by the NM EIB to implement the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The revisions are required to adequately implement 

the NM PSD permitting programs consistent with EPA regulations and the CAA. Therefore, 

because the August 6, 2014, SIP submittals are required under the CAA to implement statutorily 

mandated air permitting programs, these revisions by extension will not interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other 

applicable requirement of the CAA. 

b. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the August 6, 2014, SIP Submittal 

The criteria for completeness determination are found in Appendix V to Part 51 - Criteria for 

Determining the Completeness of Plan Submissions and are outlined below. 
5 

1.0 Purpose: Appendix V sets forth the minimum criteria for determining whether a State 

implementation plan submitted for consideration by EPA is an official submission for purposes 

of review under 40 CFR 51.103. 

1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or revision thereof which fails to 

meet the criteria set forth in this appendix V, and request corrective action, identifying the 

component(s) absent or insufficient to perform a review of the submitted plan. 

1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a plan submission meets the 

requirements of this appendix V within 60 days of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no later 

than 6 months after the date which the State was required to submit the plan or revision. If a 

completeness determination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a submittal, the submittal 

shall be deemed complete by operation of law on the date 6 months from receipt. A 

determination of completeness under this paragraph means that the submission is an official 

submission for purposes of 40 CFR 51.103. 

The following checklist outlines the basic criteria included under 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of 

Appendix V. 
6 

SIP Completeness Checklist for the August 6, 2014, NM SIP Submittal 

Administrative Materials (2.1) 

a. The package is sent with a formal submittal letter from the Governor or his or her 

designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision. 

Mr. Ryan Flynn, Secretary of the New Mexico Environment Department, by letter of August 6, 

2014, formally submitted revisions to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan, including 

amendments to the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) 20.2.74 NMAC – Permits – 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration. 

b. Evidence is included that the State has adopted the revision in the State code or body of 

regulations, or that the State has issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter 

document) in final form. This evidence would include the date of adoption or final issuance and 

the effective date of revision, if different from adoption/issuance date. 

The August 6, 2014, SIP submittal included a copy of the revised regulation, 20.2.74 NMAC, 

which was filed with the State Records Center July 18, 2014, and effective August 18, 2014. 

c. Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt 

and implement the revision, e.g., a citation of the appropriate State authority. 

The August 6, 2014, SIP submittal includes a letter signed by the Assistant General Counsel to 

the New Mexico Environment Department, which demonstrates the SIP submittal was developed 

pursuant to 20.1.1 NMAC – Rulemaking Procedures. The NM EIB is authorized to adopt 

revisions to the New Mexico PSD program under the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act, 

NMSA 1978, §74-2-5. 

d. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and 

incorporation by reference into the SIP including an indication of the changes made to the 

existing approved plan where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State 

regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official indicating that 

it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation document shall, 

whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. 

The August 6, 2014, SIP submittal includes a copy of the existing regulation, 20.2.74 NMAC, a 

redline/strikeout version of the changes, and a copy of the revised regulation filed with the State 

Records Center July 18, 2014, and effective August 18, 2014. 

e. Evidence is included that the State followed all the procedural requirements of its laws 

and/or its constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. 

The August 6, 2014, SIP submittal includes a letter signed by the Assistant General Counsel to 

the New Mexico Environment Department, which demonstrates the SIP submittal was developed 

pursuant to 20.1.1 NMAC – Rulemaking Procedures. The NM EIB is authorized to adopt 

revisions to the NM PSD program under the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act, NMSA 1978, 

§74-2-5. 
7 

f. Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed changes consistent 

with the procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice, (e.g., 

notarized or certified copies of any public notices published in newspapers). (The notice should 

be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s).) 

The submittal includes notarized Affidavits of Publication from the New Mexico Register and the 

Albuquerque Journal. Each Affidavit confirms publication of a Notice of Rulemaking Hearing 

on July 11, 2014. The publication date for each was April 30, 2014, at least 30 days prior to the 

hearing. Copies of the published notices are included. 

g. A certification is included indicating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance 

with the information provided in the public notice(s) and the State's laws and constitution, if 

applicable. 

The August 6, 2014, SIP submittal includes a transcript of the July 11, 2014, public hearing. 

h. A compilation of public comments and the State's response is included. 

The August 6, 2014, submittal package includes a copy of EPA’s June 6, 2014, comment letter, 

which was the only comment received on this action. 

Technical Support (2.2) 

The State should include the following technical information in its SIP revision request package. 

a. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision is included. 

The August 6, 2014, submittal revises the New Mexico PSD permitting regulations for PM2.5. 

These revisions apply to attainment areas statewide. 

b. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA 

attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for 

the affected area(s) is included. 

The August 6, 2014, submittal revises 20.2.74.303 and 20.2.74.503 NMAC. These regulations 

apply specifically to the New Mexico PSD permit program. The revisions will apply to major 

sources or major modifications of sources of PM2.5 statewide. The only nonattainment area in 

New Mexico is Doña Ana County, which is designated nonattainment for PM10. 

c. Quantification of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the affected sources is 

included. (Examples include estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected 

sources and/or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected 

sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowable 

emissions anticipated if the revisions were approved.) 

Quantification of “SIP allowable emissions” is not required for the August 6, 2014, submittal. A 

determination of “allowable emissions” consistent with the PSD permitting requirements will be 

addressed on a permit-by-permit basis. 
8 

d. Demonstration is included that the NAAQS/PSD increments/Reasonable Further Progress 

demonstration and visibility as applicable would be protected if the revision were approved and 

implemented. 

The August 6, 2014, revisions to the New Mexico PSD permit program are necessary to 

implement statutorily required programs. Adoption of these programs will protect the 

NAAQS/PSD increments/Reasonable Further Progress demonstration and visibility. 

e. Modeling information, if applicable, is required to support the proposed revision. 

Modeling information is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the August 6, 2014, 

SIP revision. Modeling will be provided on a permit-by-permit basis, in accordance with the 

New Mexico PSD SIP regulations. 

f. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous 

emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on controls, industrial/process equipment designs, 

reformulated materials, etc.). 

Evidence that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology is not 

necessary to support the analysis and review of the August 6, 2014, SIP revision. Emission 

limitations will be established on a permit-by-permit basis, in accordance with the PSD SIP 

regulations. 

g. Evidence is included indicating that a SIP revision contains emission limitations, work 

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements to ensure stated emission levels. 

The August 6, 2014, SIP revisions do not establish changes to emission limitations, work 

practice standards, or recordkeeping/reporting requirements. These will be established on a 

permit-by-permit basis, in accordance with the PSD SIP regulations 

h. Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will be determined in 

practice (including at what frequency). 

The August 6, 2014, SIP revision does not establish compliance/enforcement strategies. Each 

PSD SIP permit will separately address compliance/enforcement. 

i. As appropriate, special economic and technological justifications are included per 

applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justifications are not necessary should be 

included. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such justification. 

These justifications are not necessary for August 6, 2014, SIP revision. 

Exceptions for Parallel Processing (2.3) 

The August 6, 2014, SIP revision does not contain a request for parallel processing. 

The August 6, 2014, proposed SIP revision meets the completeness criteria established in 40 

CFR part 51, Appendix V.
9 

 c. Evaluation of the May 23, 2011, and August 6, 2014, Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC 

20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTS Current NM SIP Approved by EPA on June 20, 2011 76 FR 43149

Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC Submitted May 23, 2011; Adopted by the NM Environmental Improvement Board on May 3, 2011; Effective June 3, 2011New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.

Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC Submitted August 6, 2014; Adopted by the NM Environmental 

Improvement Board on July 18, 2014; Effective August 18, 2014New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.

AnalysiApplica

20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTS: A. The requirements of this section shall apply to each pollutant emitted by a new major stationary source or major modification in amounts equal to or greater than those in Table 2 of this Part (20.2.74.502 NMAC). For particulate matter, the source will only be required to perform ambient impact analysis for PM10

when the source has the potential to emit significant amounts of PM10 (Table 2, 

20.2.74.502 NMAC).

20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTS: A. The requirements of this section shall apply to each pollutant emitted by a new major stationary source or major modification in amounts equal to or greater than those in Table 2 of this Part (20.2.74.502 NMAC). For particulate matter [PM10], the source will only be required to perform ambient impact analysis for PM10 when the source has the 

potential to emit significant amounts of PM10 (Table 2, 20.2.74.502 NMAC). [For 

PM2.5 the demonstration required in Subsection B of 20.2.74.303 NMAC is deemed to have been made if the emissions increase from the new stationary source alone or from the modification alone would cause, in all areas, air quality impacts less than 0.06 micrograms per cubic meter (annual average) and 0.07 micrograms per cubic meter (24-hour average) for Class I federal areas and 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (annual average) and 1.2 micrograms per cubic meter (24 hour average) for Class II and Class III federal areas.]

20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTS: A. The requirements of this section shall apply to each pollutant emitted by a new major stationary 33 source or major modification in amounts equal to or greater than those in Table 2 of this Part (20.2.74.502 NMAC). For PM10, the 

source will only be required to perform ambient impact analysis for PM10 when 

the source has the potential to emit significant amounts of PM10 (Table 2, 

20.2.74.502 NMAC). For PM2.5, the 

demonstration required in Subsection B of 20.2.74.303 NMAC is deemed to have been made if the emissions increase from the new stationary source alone or from the modification alone would cause, in all areas, air quality impacts less than 0.06 micrograms per cubic meter (annual average) and 0.07 micrograms per cubic meter (24 hour average) for Class I federal areas and 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (annual average) and 1.2 micrograms per cubic meter (24 hour average) for Class II and Class III federal areas.

The EPA 20.2.74.approve50879). The Malanguagimpact asources establishSILs—Saction foFR 4339took no to remanat 40 CFThe Augthe PM2

2011, suconsiste51.166(and 40 CaccordaClub v. January 
10 

20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTS Current NM SIP Approved by EPA on June 20, 2011 76 FR 43149

Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC Submitted May 23, 2011; Adopted by the NM Environmental Improvement Board on May 3, 2011; Effective June 3, 2011New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.

Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC Submitted August 6, 2014; Adopted by the NM Environmental 

Improvement Board on July 18, 2014; Effective August 18, 2014New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.

AnalysiApplica

The onl2011, anis to rep“PM10.” 

The rev

20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIP Approved by EPA on January 22, 2013 78 FR 4339

AnalysiApplica

B. The allowable emission increases from the proposed source or modification, including secondary emissions, in conjunction with all other applicable emissions increases or reductions, including secondary emissions, shall not cause or contribute to air pollution in violation of: 

(1) Any National Ambient Air Quality Standard in any location; or (2) Any applicable maximum allowable increase as shown in Table 4 of this Part (20.2.74.504 NMAC) over the baseline concentrations in any area. (3) The owner or operator of the proposed major stationary source or major modification shall demonstrate that neither paragraph (1) nor paragraph (2) of 20.2.74.303 NMAC will occur. 

[07/20/95; 20.2.74.303 NMAC - Rn, 20 NMAC 2.74.303, 10/31/02]

The EPA 20.2.74approve50879). New MeLanguag

20.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Current NM SIP Approved by EPA on January 22, 2013 78 FR 4339

AnalysiApplica

20.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS: A. Any application for a permit under this part shall contain an analysis of ambient air quality. Air quality data can be that measured by the applicant or that available from a government agency in the area affected by the major stationary source or major 

modification. The analysis shall contain the following: 

The EPA 20.2.74on Janurevision
11 

20.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Current NM SIP Approved by EPA on January 22, 2013 78 FR 4339

AnalysiApplica

(1) for a major stationary source, each pollutant for which the potential to emit is equal to or greater than the significant 

emission rates as listed in Table 2 of this part (20.2.74.502 NMAC); or (2) for a major modification, each pollutant that would result in a significant net emission increase. 

B. If no national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for a pollutant exists, and there is an acceptable method for monitoring that pollutant, the analysis shall contain such air quality monitoring data as the department determines is necessary to assess ambient air quality for that pollutant. C. Continuous air quality monitoring data shall be required for all pollutants for which a national ambient air quality standard 

exists. Such data shall be submitted to the department for at least the one (1) year period prior to receipt of the permit application. 

The department has the discretion to: 

(1) determine that a complete and adequate analysis can be accomplished with monitoring data gathered over a period shorter than one year but not less than four months; or (2) determine that existing air quality monitoring data is representative of air quality in the affected area and accept such 

data in lieu of additional monitoring by the applicant. 

D. Ozone monitoring shall be performed if monitoring data is required for volatile organic compounds. Post construction ozone 

monitoring data may be submitted in lieu of providing preconstruction data as required under Subsection C of 20.2.74.306 NMAC if the owner or operator of the proposed major source or major modification satisfies all the provisions of 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix S, Section IV. E. The department may require monitoring of visibility in any Class I federal area where the department determines that an adverse

impact on visibility may occur due primarily to the operations of the proposed new source or modification. Such monitoring shall be conducted following procedures approved by the department and subject to the following: 

(1) visibility monitoring methods specified by the department shall be reasonably available and not require any research and development; and (2) the cost of visibility monitoring required by the department shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the cost of ambient 

monitoring required by this part; if ambient monitoring is not required, the cost shall be estimated as if it were required foreach pollutant to which this part applies; (3) both preconstruction and post construction visibility monitoring may be required; in each case, the duration of such 

monitoring shall not exceed one (1) year. 

F. The owner or operator of a major stationary source or major modification shall conduct post construction ambient monitoring as the department determines is necessary to validate attainment of ambient air quality standards and to assure that increments are not 

exceeded. G. The owner or operator of a major stationary source or major modification shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR 58, Appendix B during the operation of monitoring stations for purposes of satisfying the requirements of this section. H. The department has the discretion to exempt a stationary source or modification from the requirements of this section with 

respect to monitoring for a particular pollutant if the emissions of the pollutant from the new source or the net emissions increase of the pollutant from the modification would cause, in any area, increases in ambient concentrations less than the levels listed in Table 3 of this part (20.2.74.503 NMAC). 

Languag
12 

20.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Current NM SIP Approved by EPA on January 22, 2013 78 FR 4339

AnalysiApplica

I. The department shall exempt a stationary source or modification from the requirements of this section with respect to preconstruction monitoring for a particular pollutant if: 

(1) for ozone, volatile organic compound emissions are less than one hundred (100) tons per year; or 

(2) the air pollutant is not a regulated pollutant; or (3) the existing ambient concentrations of the pollutant in the area that the source or modification would affect are less 

than the concentrations listed in Table 3 of this part (20.2.74.503 NMAC); or (4) the pollutant is not listed in Table 3 of this part (20.2.74.503 NMAC). 

[07/20/95; 20.2.74.306 NMAC - Rn, 20 NMAC 2.74.306, 10/31/02; A, 6/3/11]

20.2.74.503 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS, TABLE 3 – SIGNIFICANT MONITORING CONCENTRATICurrent NM SIP Approved by EPA on January 22, 2013 78 FR 4339

Revisions Submitted August 6, 2014; Adopted by the NM EIB on July 18, 2014; Effective August 18, New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.

20.2.74.503 TABLE 3 - SIGNIFICANT MONITORING CONCENTRATIONS. 

POLLUTANT AIR QUALITY 

CONCENTRATION 

micrograms per 

cubic meter 

AVERAGING 

TIME 

Carbon monoxide 575 8 hours Fluorides 0.25 24 hours Lead 0.1 3 months Nitrogen Dioxide 14 Annual Ozone b PM10 10 24 hours PM2.5 4 24 hours Sulfur compounds 

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) Reduced sulfur compounds (incl. H2S) Sulfur dioxide Sulfuric acid mist 

0.20 

10 13 

a 

1 hour 1 hour 

24 hours 

20.2.74.503 TABLE 3 - SIGNIFICANT MONITORING CONCENTRATIONS. 

POLLUTANT AIR QUALITY 

CONCENTRATION 

micrograms per 

cubic meter 

AVERAG

TIME 

Carbon monoxide 575 8 hourFluorides 0.25 24 houLead 0.1 3 monthNitrogen Dioxide 14 AnnuaOzone B PM10 10 24 houPM2.5 4 [0] 24 houSulfur compounds 

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) Reduced sulfur compounds (incl. H2S) Sulfur dioxide Sulfuric acid mist 

0.20 

10 13 

a 

1 hour 1 hour 

24 hou
13 

20.2.74.503 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS, TABLE 3 – SIGNIFICANT MONITORING CONCENTRATICurrent NM SIP Approved by EPA on January 22, 2013 78 FR 4339

Revisions Submitted August 6, 2014; Adopted by the NM EIB on July 18, 2014; Effective August 18, New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.

Total reduced sulfur (incl. H2S) 

10 1 hour 

a - No acceptable monitoring techniques available at this time. Therefore, monitoring is not required until acceptable techniques are available. b - No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone. However, any net increase of 100 tons per year or more of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides subject to PSD would be required to perform an ambient impact analysis, including the gathering of ambient air quality data. 

[07/20/95; 20.2.74.503 NMAC - Rn, 20 NMAC 2.74 Table 3, 10/31/02; A, 1/22/06; A, 8/31/09; A, 6/3/11]

Total reduced sulfur (incl. H2S) 

10 1 hour 

a - No acceptable monitoring techniques available at this time. Therefore, monitoring is not required until acceptable techniques aavailable. b - No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone. Howeveany net increase of 100 tons per year or more of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides subject to PSD would be required tperform an ambient impact analysis, including the gathering of ambient air quality data. 

[07/20/95; 20.2.74.503 NMAC - Rn, 20 NMAC 2.74 Table 3, 10/31A, 1/22/06; A, 8/31/09; A, 6/3/11; 8/18/14] 
14 

4. Conclusion 

 

The technical analysis provided in the preceding sections has compared the applicable sections 

of the CAA and 40 CFR Part 51 to the May 23, 2011, and the August 6, 2014, proposed 

revisions to the New Mexico SIP for PSD permitting. This analysis found that the adoption of 

the revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC submitted on May 23, 2011, and August 6, 2014, is consistent 

with the CAA and 40 CFR Parts 51.166(i)(5) and 52.21(i)(5), as applicable, and is necessary to 

implement the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 PSD permitting requirements (as published in the December 

9, 2013, at 78 FR 73698). Therefore, the EPA recommends approval of the May 23, 2011, SIP 

revision, as amended by the August 6, 2014, SIP revision. Because these are noncontroversial 

revisions, the EPA should consider a direct final approval.