1 Technical Support Document

Revisions to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan

PM 2.5 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 wi th 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 Sectio n (6PD-R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas,

75202-2733, (214) 665-21152 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) concer ning the Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) permitting program for New Mexico. Th e PSD permitting program applies statewide for

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

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

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

The May 23, 2011, SIP revision added an exempti on for the air quality demonstration for PM 2.5

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

that made possible by the U.S. Enviro nmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) PM 2.5 Significant

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

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

consistent with later revisions EPA made in li ght 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 th e program revisions submitted on May 23, 2011, and

August 6, 2014, are consistent with the require ments 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, Gove rnor Martinez submitted revisions to the New Mexico SIP

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

2011, and became effective on June 3, 2011. Th is 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 th at 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 th e 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 Pr ogram at 20.2.79 NMAC. The only portion of

1 Doña Ana County, New Mexico is designated as a moderate PM 10 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 app lications 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 app lication. 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 (PM 2.5 )—Increments,

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

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

regulations for areas designated atta inment or unclassifiable for PM 2.5 . 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 Appeal s 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 PM 2.5 SIL and further vacated the portions of the PSD

regulations establishing a PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 SIL and

SMC provisions from the PSD regulations at 40 CF R 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 exem ption from air monitoring

requirements for any pollutant “not listed in paragraph (i)(5)(i),” the reference to PM 2.5 in

paragraph (i)(5)(i) may not be removed. Were the EPA to completely remove PM 2.5 from the list

of pollutants in sections 51.166( i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21( i)(5)(i)(c) of the PSD regulations, PM 2.5 would no longer be a listed polluta nt and the paragraph (iii) provi sion could be in terpreted as

giving reviewing authorities the di scretion to exempt permit appli cants from the requirement to

conduct monitoring for PM 2.5 , in contravention of the Court’ s decision and the CAA. Instead,

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

micrograms per cubic meter (μgl/m 3 ). This means that there is no air quality impact level below

which a reviewing authority has the disc retion to exempt a source from the PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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). A4 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 th e Court addressed EPA’s request.

New Mexico’s August 6, 2014, submittal modifies the PM 2.5 SIL and SMC provisions at

20.2.74.303(A) and 20.2.74.503 NMAC, making them cons istent 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 evalua ted 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 w ith respect to section 110(l) of the

CAA

Section 110(l) of the CAA states:

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

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

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

attainment and reasonable further progress (as de fined 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 reasonab le further progress or

any other applicable requirem ent 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 PM 2.5 National

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The re visions 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 requi red under the CAA to implement statutorily

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

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further pr ogress, 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 ar e 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 mini mum 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 wa s required to submit the plan or revision. If a

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

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

determination of completeness unde r this paragraph mean s that the submission is an official

submission for purposes of 40 CFR 51.103.

The following checklist outlines the basic cr iteria 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 subm ittal letter from the Governor or his or her

designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision.

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

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

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

Prevention of Significant Deterioration.

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

regulations, or that the State has issued th e permit, order, consen t agreement (hereafter

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

the effective date of revision, if di fferent 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 neces sary legal authority under State law to adopt

and implement the revision, e.g., a citati on 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 unde r 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 includin g an indication of the changes made to the

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

regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by th e appropriate State offi cial indicating that

it is fully enforceable by the State. The eff ective 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 regulati on 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 comp leting 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 Ne w 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 pub lication of such notice, (e.g.,

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

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

The submittal includes notarized Affidavits of Pu blication 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 wa s April 30, 2014, at least 30 days prior to the

hearing. Copies of the p ublished notices are included.

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

with the information provided in the public notice(s) and the St ate'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 followi ng technical information in its SIP revision request package.

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

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

These revisions apply to atta inment areas statewide.

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

attainment/nonattainment designatio n 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 perm it program. The revisions will apply to major

sources or major modifications of sources of PM 2.5 statewide. The only nonattainment area in

New Mexico is Doña Ana County, whic h is designated nonattainment for PM 10

.

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

included. (Examples include estimates of change s 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 woul d be protected if the re vision were approved and

implemented.

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

implement statutorily required programs. A doption of these programs will protect the

NAAQS/PSD increments/Reasonable Further Pr ogress demonstration and visibility.

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

Modeling information is not necessary to s upport 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 cont rols, industrial/proce ss 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, SI P revision. Emission

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

regulations.

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

practice standards, and recordk eeping/reporting requirements to en sure stated emission levels.

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

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

permit-by-permit basis, in accordan ce 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 establis h compliance/enforcement strategies. Each

PSD SIP permit will separately address compliance/enforcement.

i. As appropriate, special economic and tec hnological jus tifications are included per

applicable EPA policies or an e xplanation why such justificati ons are not necessary should be

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

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

Exceptions for Parallel Processing (2.3)

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

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

CFR part 51, Appendix V.9c. Evaluation of the May 23, 2011, and August 6, 2014, Revisions to 20.2.74 NMAC20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on June 20, 201176 FR 43149Revisions to 20.2.74 NMACSubmitted May 23, 2011;Adopted by the NMEnvironmentalImprovement Board on May 3, 2011;Effective June 3, 2011New text in brackets, underlined.Deletions in strikeout text.Revisions to 20.2.74 NMACSubmitted August 6, 2014;Adopted by the NMEnvironmentalImprovement Board on July 18, 2014;Effective August 18, 2014New text in brackets, underlined.Deletions in strikeout text.Analysis and Evaluation AgainstApplicable Federal Requirements20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACTREQUIREMENTS:A. The requirements of this section shallapply to each pollutant emitted by a newmajor stationary source or majormodification in amounts equal to orgreater than those in Table 2 of this Part(20.2.74.502 NMAC). For particulatematter, the source will only be required toperform ambient impact analysis for PM10when the source has the potential to emitsignificant amounts of PM10(Table 2,20.2.74.502 NMAC).20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACTREQUIREMENTS:A. The requirements of this section shallapply to each pollutant emitted by a newmajor stationary source or majormodification in amounts equal to orgreater than those in Table 2 of this Part(20.2.74.502 NMAC). For particulatematter [PM10], the source will only berequired to perform ambient impactanalysis for PM10when the source has thepotential to emit significant amounts ofPM10(Table 2, 20.2.74.502 NMAC). [ForPM2.5the demonstration required inSubsection B of 20.2.74.303 NMAC isdeemed to have been made if theemissions increase from the newstationary source alone or from themodification alone would cause, in allareas, air quality impacts less than 0.06micrograms per cubic meter (annualaverage) and 0.07 micrograms per cubicmeter (24-hour average) for Class Ifederal areas and 0.3 micrograms percubic meter (annual average) and 1.2micrograms per cubic meter (24 houraverage) for Class II and Class III federalareas.]20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACTREQUIREMENTS:A. The requirements of this section shallapply to each pollutant emitted by a newmajor stationary 33 source or majormodification in amounts equal to orgreater than those in Table 2 of this Part(20.2.74.502 NMAC). For PM10, thesource will only be required to performambient impact analysis for PM10whenthe source has the potential to emitsignificant amounts of PM10(Table 2,20.2.74.502 NMAC). For PM2.5, thedemonstration required in Subsection Bof 20.2.74.303 NMAC is deemed to havebeen made if the emissions increase fromthe new stationary source alone or fromthe modification alone would cause, in allareas, air quality impacts less than 0.06micrograms per cubic meter (annualaverage) and 0.07 micrograms per cubicmeter (24 hour average) for Class Ifederal areas and 0.3 micrograms percubic meter (annual average) and 1.2micrograms per cubic meter (24 houraverage) for Class II and Class III federalareas.The EPA has not revised the language at20.2.74.306(A) NMAC since it wasapproved on September 5, 2007 (72 FR50879).The May 23, 2011, submittal addedlanguage implementing the ambient airimpact analysis exemption for majorsources or major modifications EPAestablished in the PM2.5PSD Increment –SILs—SMC Rule. In the final approvalaction for the May 23, 2011, revision (78FR 4339), EPA severed this revision andtook no action on it because of litigationto remand and vacate the SIL provisionsat 40 CFR 51.166(k)(2).The August 6, 2014, submittal removesthe PM2.5language added in the May 23,2011, submittal. This revision isconsistent with changes made to 40 CFR51.166(i)(5)(i-iii), 40CFR 51.166(k)(2),and 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c), and is inaccordance with the court decisionSierraClub v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir,January 22, 2013).1020.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on June 20, 201176 FR 43149Revisions to 20.2.74 NMACSubmitted May 23, 2011;Adopted by the NMEnvironmentalImprovement Board on May 3, 2011;Effective June 3, 2011New text in brackets, underlined.Deletions in strikeout text.Revisions to 20.2.74 NMACSubmitted August 6, 2014;Adopted by the NMEnvironmentalImprovement Board on July 18, 2014;Effective August 18, 2014New text in brackets, underlined.Deletions in strikeout text.Analysis and Evaluation AgainstApplicable Federal RequirementsThe only effect ofthe combined May 23,2011, and the August 6, 2013, submittalsis to replace “particulate matter” with“PM10.”The revision is approvable.20.2.74.303 AMBIENT IMPACT REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on January 22, 201378 FR 4339Analysis and Evaluation AgainstApplicable Federal RequirementsB. The allowable emission increases fromthe proposed source or modification, including secondary emissions, in conjunction withall other applicable emissions increases or reductions, including secondary emissions, shall not cause or contribute to air pollutionin 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 baselineconcentrations in any area.(3) The owner or operator of the proposed major stationary source or major modification shall demonstrate that neitherparagraph (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 has not revised the language at20.2.74.306(B) NMAC since it wasapproved on September 5, 2007 (72 FR50879). No revisions are proposed byNew Mexico.Language provided for context.20.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on January 22, 201378 FR 4339Analysis and Evaluation AgainstApplicable Federal Requirements20.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS:A.Any application for a permit under this part shall contain an analysis of ambient air quality. Air quality data can be thatmeasured by the applicant or that available from a government agency in the area affected by the major stationary source or majormodification. The analysis shall contain the following:The EPA has not revised the language at20.2.74.306 NMAC since it was approvedon January 22, 2013 (78 FR 04341). Norevisions are proposed by New Mexico.1120.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on January 22, 201378 FR 4339Analysis and Evaluation AgainstApplicable Federal Requirements(1)for a major stationary source, each pollutant for which the potential to emit is equal toor greater than the significantemission 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 thatpollutant, the analysis shall contain such air quality monitoring data as the department determines is necessary to assess ambient airquality for that pollutant.C.Continuous air quality monitoring data shall be required forall pollutants for which a national ambient air quality standardexists. Such data shall be submitted to the department for atleast 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 beaccomplished with monitoring data gathered over a periodshorter 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 suchdata in lieu of additional monitoring by the applicant.D.Ozone monitoring shall be performed if monitoring data isrequired for volatile organic compounds. Post construction ozonemonitoring data may be submitted in lieu of providing preconstruction data as required under Subsection C of 20.2.74.306 NMACif 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 ClassI federal area where the department determines that an adverseimpact on visibility may occur due primarily to the operations of the proposed new source or modification. Such monitoring shallbe conducted following procedures approved by the department and subject to the following:(1)visibility monitoring methodsspecified by the department shall be reasonably available and not require any researchand development; and(2)the cost of visibility monitoring required by the department shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the cost of ambientmonitoring required by this part; if ambient monitoring is notrequired, the cost shall be estimated as if it were required foreach pollutant to whichthis part applies;(3)both preconstruction and post constructionvisibility monitoring may be required; in each case, the duration of suchmonitoring 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 asthe department determines is necessary to validate attainment ofambient air quality standards and to assure that increments are notexceeded.G.The owner or operator of a major stationary source or major modification shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR 58, AppendixB 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 sourceor modification from the requirements of this section withrespect to monitoring for a particular pollutant if the emissions of the pollutant from the new source or the net emissions increase ofthe pollutant from the modification would cause, in any area, increases in ambient concentrations less than the levels listed in Table3 of this part (20.2.74.503 NMAC).Language provided for context.1220.2.74.306 MONITORING REQUIREMENTSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on January 22, 201378 FR 4339Analysis and Evaluation AgainstApplicable Federal RequirementsI.The department shall exempt a stationarysource or modification from the requirements of this section with respect topreconstruction 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 lessthan 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 CONCENTRATIONSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on January 22, 201378 FR 4339Revisions Submitted August 6, 2014;Adopted by the NM EIB on July 18, 2014; Effective August 18, 2014New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.Analysis andEvaluation AgainstApplicable FederalRegulations20.2.74.503 TABLE 3 - SIGNIFICANT MONITORINGCONCENTRATIONS.POLLUTANT AIR QUALITYCONCENTRATIONmicrograms percubic meterAVERAGINGTIMECarbon monoxide 575 8 hoursFluorides 0.25 24 hoursLead 0.1 3 monthsNitrogen Dioxide 14 AnnualOzone bPM1010 24 hoursPM2.54 24 hoursSulfur compoundsHydrogen sulfide (H2S)Reduced sulfur compounds(incl. H2S)Sulfur dioxideSulfuric acid mist0.201013a1 hour1 hour24 hours20.2.74.503 TABLE 3 - SIGNIFICANT MONITORINGCONCENTRATIONS.POLLUTANT AIR QUALITYCONCENTRATIONmicrograms percubic meterAVERAGINGTIMECarbon monoxide 575 8 hoursFluorides 0.25 24 hoursLead 0.1 3 monthsNitrogen Dioxide 14 AnnualOzone BPM1010 24 hoursPM2.54 [0]24 hoursSulfur compoundsHydrogen sulfide (H2S)Reduced sulfur compounds(incl. H2S)Sulfur dioxideSulfuric acid mist0.201013a1 hour1 hour24 hoursThe August 6, 2014,submittal changes theAir QualityConcentration for PM2.5from 4 to 0, andremoves the “24 hours”for PM2.5from theAVERAGING TIMEcolumn.This revision isconsistent with 40 CFR51.166(i)(5)(i-iii), andis in accordance withthe court decisionSierra Club v. EPA,706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir,January 22, 2013).1320.2.74.503 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS, TABLE 3 –SIGNIFICANT MONITORING CONCENTRATIONSCurrent NM SIPApproved by EPA on January 22, 201378 FR 4339Revisions Submitted August 6, 2014;Adopted by the NM EIB on July 18, 2014; Effective August 18, 2014New text in brackets, underlined. Deletions in strikeout text.Analysis andEvaluation AgainstApplicable FederalRegulationsTotal reduced sulfur (incl.H2S)10 1 houra - No acceptable monitoring techniques available at this time.Therefore, monitoring is not required until acceptable techniquesare available.b - No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone. However,any net increase of 100 tons peryear or more of volatile organiccompounds or nitrogen oxides subject to PSD would be required toperform an ambient impact analysis, including the gathering ofambient 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 houra - No acceptable monitoring techniques available at this time.Therefore, monitoring is not required until acceptable techniques areavailable.b - No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone. However,any net increase of 100 tons peryear or more of volatile organiccompounds or nitrogen oxides subject to PSD would be required toperform an ambient impact analysis, including the gathering ofambient 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; 8/18/14]The revision isapprovable.14 4. Conclusion

The technical analysis provided in the preceding s ections 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 permitt ing. 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 PM 2.5 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 thes e are noncontroversial

revisions, the EPA should consider a direct final approval.