+(,121/,1(

Citation: 80 Fed. Reg. 14044 2015 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Fri May 1 17:07:52 2015

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

 uncorrected OCR text.
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Incorporation by reference,

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

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

Dated: March 6, 2015.

William C. Early,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IlL

[FR Doe. 2015-06220 Filed 3-17-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0187; FRL-9924-48-

Region 9]

Revisions to Air Plan; Arizona;

Stationary Sources; New Source

Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is proposing a limited

approval and limited disapproval of

revisions to the Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) portion

of the applicable state implementation

plan (SIP) for the State of Arizona.

These revisions are primarily intended

to serve as a replacement of ADEQ's

existing SIP-approved rules for the

issuance of New Source Review (NSR)

permits for stationary sources, including

but not limited to review and permitting

of major sources and major

modifications under the Clean Air Act

(CAA or Act). After a lengthy

stakeholder process, the State of

Arizona developed and submitted a

NSR program for SIP approval that

satisfies most of the applicable Clean

Air Act and NSR regulatory

requirements, and will significantly

update ADEQ's existing SIP-approved

NSR program. It also represents an

overall strengthening of ADEQ's SIPapproved NSR program by clarifying

and enhancing the NSR permitting

requirements for major and minor

stationary sources. This proposed action

will update the applicable plan and set

the stage for remedying certain

deficiencies in these rules. We are

seeking comment on our proposed

action and plan to follow with a final

action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by

April 17, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments,

identified by docket number EPA-R09-

OAR-2015-0187, by one of the

following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online

instructions.

2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.

3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

Deliveries are only accepted during the

Regional Office's normal hours of

operation.

Instructions: All comments will be

included in the public docket without

change and may be made available

online at www.regulations.gov,

including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes

Confidential Business Information (CBI)

or other information whose disclosure is

restricted by statute. Information that

you consider CBI or otherwise protected

should be clearly identified as such and

should not be submitted through

www.regulations.gov or email.

www.regulations.gov is an "anonymous

access" system, and EPA will not know

your identity or contact information

unless you provide it in the body of

your comment. If you send email

directly to EPA, your email address will

be automatically captured and included

as part of the public comment. If EPA

cannot read your comment due to

technical difficulties and cannot contact

you for clarification, EPA may not be

able to consider your comment.

Electronic files should avoid the use of

special characters, any form of

encryption, and be free of any defects or

viruses.

Docket: Generally, documents in the

docket for this action are available

electronically at www.regulations.gov

and in hard copy at EPA Region 9, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,

California. While all documents in the

docket are listed at

www.regulations.gov, some information

may be publicly available only at the

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted

material, large maps), and some may not

be publicly available in either location

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy

materials, please schedule an

appointment during normal business

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa

Beckham, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-

3811, beckham.lisa@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, the terms

"we," "us," and "our" refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittals

A. Which rules or statutory provisions did

the State submit?

B. Are there previous versions of the

statutory provisions or rules in the

Arizona SIP?

C. What is the purpose of this proposed

rule?

II. EPA's Evaluation

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules and

statutory provisions?

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria

for Minor New Source Review?

1. Legally Enforceable Procedures

2. ADEQ's Program Under 40 CFR

51.160(e)

3. Public Availability of Information

4. Administrative Procedures

5. Stack Height Procedures

C. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria

for Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD)?

1. General PSD Program Requirements

2. Restrictions on Area Classifications

3. Redesignations

4. Impacts on Class I Areas

5. Public Participation

6. Plantwide Applicability Limits

7. Definitions

8. PM 2.

5 Significant Monitoring

Concentration

9. Definition for Basic Design Parameter

D. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria

for Nonattainment New Source Review?

1. General Nonattainment NSR Program

Requirements

2. Plantwide Applicability Limits

3. Definitions

4. Definition for Basic Design Parameter

5. Additional Provisions for Particulate

Matter Nonattainment Areas

E. Review of Non-NSR Related Rules and

Statutory Provisions

F. Review of Rules and Statutory

Provisions Requested To Be Removed

From the SIP

G. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria

under Sections 110(1) and 193 of the Act?

H. Conclusion

III. Public Comment and Proposed Action

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 words or initials Act or CAA mean

or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the

context indicates otherwise.

(ii) The initials ADEQ mean or refer to the

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality.

(iii) The initials A.R.S. mean or refer to the

Arizona Revised Statutes.

(iv) The initials BACT mean or refer to Best

Available Control Technology.

(v) The initials CFR mean or refer to Code

of Federal Regulations.

(vi) The initials CO means or refer to

carbon monoxide.

(vii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean

or refer to the United States Environmental

Protection Agency.

(viii) The initials FIP mean or refer to

Federal Implementation Plan.

14044
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

(ix) The initials GHG mean or refer to

greenhouse gas.

(x) The initials IBF mean or refer to

incorporation by reference.

(xi) The initials LAER mean or refer to

Lowest Achievable Emissions Rate.

(xii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to

National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

(xiii) The initials NA-NSF mean or refer to

Nonattainment New Source Review.

(xiv) The initials NOx mean or refer to

nitrogen oxides.

(xv) The initials NSF mean or refer to New

Source Review.

(xvi) The initials PAL mean or refer to

Plantwide Applicability Limits.

(xvii) The initials PMlo mean or refer to

particulate matter with an aerodynamic

diameter of less than or equal to 10

micrometers (coarse particulate matter).

(xviii) The initials PM 2 .5 mean or refer to

particulate matter with an aerodynamic

diameter of less than or equal to 2.5

micrometers (fine particulate matter).

(xix) The initials PSD mean or refer to

Prevention of Significant Deterioration.

(xx) The initials PTE mean or refer to

potential to emit.

(xxi) The initials FACT mean or refer to

reasonable available control technology.

(xxii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State

Implementation Plan.

(xxiii) The initials SMC mean or refer to

significant monitoring concentration.

(xxiv) The initials S02 mean or refer to

sulfur dioxide.

(xxv) The words State or Arizona mean the

State of Arizona, unless the context indicates

otherwise.

(xxvi) The initials TSD mean or refer to the

technical support document for this action.

(xxvii) The initials VOC mean or refer to

volatile organic compound.

I. The State's Submittals

A. Which rules or statutory provisions

did the State submit?

On July 28, 2011 and October 29,

2012, ADEQ submitted revisions to the

ADEQ portion of the Arizona SIP. On

May 16, 2014, ADEQ supplemented the

July 28, 2011 submittal. On September

6, 2013, July 2, 2014, and February 16,

2015, ADEQ supplemented the October

29, 2012 submittal. Collectively, these

submittals generally comprise ADEQ's

current program for preconstruction

review and permitting of new or

modified stationary sources under

ADEQ's jurisdiction in Arizona (as

described below).' The NSR SIP

revisions that are the subject of this

action, 2 referred to herein as the "NSR

SIP submittal" represent a

comprehensive revision to ADEQ's

preconstruction review and permitting

program and are intended to satisfy the

requirements under both part C

(prevention of significant deterioration)

(PSD) and part D (nonattainment new

source review) of title I of the Act as

well as the general preconstruction

review requirements under section

110(a)(2)(C) of the Act. 3 The

preconstruction review and permitting

programs are often collectively referred

to as "New Source Review" (NSR).

The proposed revisions to the SIP that

are subject to this action cover those

areas of Arizona where ADEQ has

jurisdiction. Currently, ADEQ has

permitting jurisdiction for the following

stationary source categories in all areas

of Arizona: Smelting of metal ores, coalfired electric generating stations,

petroleum refineries, Portland cement

plants, and portable sources. ADEQ also

has permitting jurisdiction for major

and minor sources in the following

counties: Apache, Cochise, Coconino,

Gila, Graham, Greenlee, La Paz,

Mohave, Navajo, Santa Cruz, Yavapai,

and Yuma. Finally, ADEQ has

permitting jurisdiction over major

sources in Pinal County 4 and the

Rosemont Copper Mine in Pima County.

Table 1 lists the rules we are

proposing for approval in today's action

with the corresponding effective dates

and submittal dates. The submitted

rules are from the Arizona

Administrative Code, Title 18-

Environmental Quality, Chapter 2-

Department of Environmental QualityAir Pollution Control, Articles 1, 2, 3,

and 4. The submitted statutory

provision is from Title 49 of the Arizona

Revised Statutes, Chapter 1, Article 1.

TABLE 1-SUBMITTED STATUTES AND RULES PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL IN THIS ACTION

State

Rule or statute Title effective Submitted

date

A.R.S §49-107 ...........................................................

R18-2-101 [only definitions (2), (32), (87), (109),

and (122)].

R 1 8 - 2 - 2 1 7 ..................................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 2 1 8 ..................................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 3 0 1 ..................................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 3 0 2 ..................................................................

R18-2-302.01 .............................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 3 0 3 ..................................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 3 0 4 ..................................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 3 0 6 ..................................................................

R18-2-306.01 .............................................................

R18-2-306.02 .............................................................

R 1 8 - 2 - 3 1 1 ..................................................................

Local delegation of state authority ............................

D e fin itio n s ..................................................................

Designation and Classification of Attainment Areas

Limitation of Pollutants in Classified Attainment

Areas.

D e fin itio n s ..................................................................

Applicability; Registration; Classes of Permits ..........

Source Registration Requirements ............................

Transition from Installation and Operating Permit

Program to Unitary Permit Program; Registration

transition; Minor NSR transition.

Permit Application Processing Procedures ...............

P e rm it C o nte nts .........................................................

Permits Containing Voluntarily Accepted Emission

Limitations and Standards.

Establishment of an Emissions Cap ..........................

Test Methods and Procedures ..................................

08/18/1987

08/07/2012

11/15/1993

08/07/2012

08/07/2012

08/07/2012

08/07/2012

08/07/2012

08/07/2012

12/20/1999

01/01/2007

09/22/1999

11/15/1993

07/2/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

10/29/2014

07/28/2011

'In addition, these submittals and our current

action also address two rules and one statutory

provision that are not directly related to NSR.

2 We note that portions of ADEQ's SIP-approved

rule R18-2-310, which provides affirmative

defenses for excess emissions during malfunctions

(R18-2-310(B)) and for excess emissions during

startup or shutdown (R18-2-310(C)), are currently

the subject of a separate rulemaking action by EPA.

In a 2013 notice of proposed rulemaking, and a

2014 supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking

that revised certain of the findings described in the

2013 notice, EPA proposed to find R18-2-310(B)

and R18-2-310(C) substantially inadequate to meet

CAA requirements and proposed to issue a SIP call

with respect to these provisions. See 78 FR 12460,

12533-34, Feb. 22, 2013; 79 FR 55920, 55946-47,

Sept. 17, 2014. ADEQ's R18-2-310 is not part of the

ADEQ SIP submittal that is under consideration in

this action, and this rule is not being evaluated or

otherwise addressed by EPA as part of our current

action on ADEQ's SIP submittal.

3 Rules R18-2-301 through R18-2-334 (Article 3

rules) also contain requirements to address the CAA

title V requirements for operating permit programs,

but we are not evaluating these rules for title V

purposes at this time. We will evaluate the Article

3 rules for compliance with the requirements of title

V of the Act and EPA's implementing regulations

in 40 CFR part 70 following receipt of an official

part 70 program revision submittal from ADEQ.

4 ADEQ has delegated implementation of the

major source program to the Pinal County Air

Quality Control District.

14045
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

TABLE 1-SUBMITTED STATUTES AND RULES PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL IN THIS ACTION-Continued

State

Rule or statute Title effective Submitted

date

R 18-2-312 .................................................................. Perform ance Tests ................... .......... ............. 11/15/1993 07/28/2011

R 18-2-3 15 .................................................................. Posting of Pe rm it .......... . ............................ 11/15/1993 10/29/2014

R18-2-316 .................................................................. Notice by Building Perm it Agencies .......................... 05/14/1979 10/29/2014

R 18-2-319 .................................................................. M inor Perm it Revisions ............................................ 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R18-2-320 .................................................................. Significant Perm it Revisions .................... ..... ........... 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R18-2-321 .................................................................. Permit Reopenings; Revocation and Reissuance ..... 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R 18-2-323 .................................................................. Perm it T ransfers ....... ............................ 02/03/2007 10/29/2014

R 18-2-330 .................................................................. Public Participation ..................... ......... ............. 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R 18-2-332 .................................................................. Stack Height Lim itation ............................................ . 11/15/1993 10/29/2014

R18-2-334 .................................................................. M inor New Source Review .................... ..... ............ 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R 18-2-401 [excluding definition (3)] .......................... Definitions .................................................................. 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R 18- 2-4 0 2 .................................................................. G e ne ra l ...................................................................... 0 8/0 7/20 12 10/29/2 0 14

R18-2-403 .................................................................. Permits for Sources Located in Nonattainment 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

Areas.

R 18-2-404 .................................................................. O ffset Standards ........................................................ 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

R18-2-405 .................................................................. Special Rule for Major Sources of VOC or Nitrogen 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

Oxides in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Classified

as Serious or Severe.

R18-2-406 .................................................................. Permit Requirements for Sources Located in Attain- 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

ment and Unclassifiable Areas.

R18-2-407 [excluding subsection (H)(1)(c)] .............. Air Quality Impact Analysis and Monitoring Require- 08/07/2012 10/29/2014

ments.

R 18-2-4 09 .................................................................. Air Q uality M odels ................... ....... ............... . 11/15/1993 10/29/2014

R 18- 2-4 12 .................................................................. P A Ls .......................................................................... 0 8/0 7/20 12 10/29/2 0 14

On December 28, 2012, April 29, B. Are there previous versions of the reduction credits in nonattainment

2013, and December 2, 2014, ADEQ's statutory provisions or rules in the areas.

July 28, 2011, October 29, 2012, and Arizona SIP? Consistent with ADEQ's stated intent

July 2, 2014 submittals, respectively, EPA has not approved significant to have the submitted NSR rules replace

were deemed complete by operation of revisions or updates to ADEQ's SIP- the existing NSR program in the SIP,

law to meet the completeness criteria in approved NSR program since the 1980s. EPA's approval of the regulations

40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which The existing SIP-approved NSR program identified above in Table 1 generally

must be met before formal EPA review, for new or modified stationary sources would have the effect of superseding

Each of these submittals includes under ADEQ's jurisdiction generally our prior approval of the current SIPevidence of public notice and adoption consists of the rules identified below in approved NSR program.5 Table 2 lists

of the regulation. Our technical support Table 2 that we are proposing to the existing rules in the Arizona SIP that

document (TSD) provides additional supersede in or delete from the Arizona would be superseded or removed from

background information on each of the SIP. Collectively, these regulations the Arizona SIP as a result of our

submitted rules. established the NSR requirements for proposed action. If EPA were to take

both major and minor stationary sources final action as proposed herein, these

under ADEQ jurisdiction in Arizona, rules generally would be replaced in, or

including requirements for the otherwise deleted from, the SIP by the

generation and use of emission submitted set of rules listed in Table 1.

TABLE 2-SIP RULES SUPERSEDED OR REMOVED FROM ARIZONA SIP IN THIS ACTION

A 1a Federal

Rule or statute Title EPA Approval Register citation

R 9 - 3 - 1 0 1 ....................................................................

R9-3-217(B) ...............................................................

R9-3-301, [excluding subsections (I), (K)] .................

R 9 - 3 - 3 0 2 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 0 3 ....................................................................

R9-3-304, [excluding subsection (H)] ........................

R 9 - 3 - 3 0 5 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 0 6 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 0 7 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 0 8 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 1 1 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 1 4 ....................................................................

R 9 - 3 - 3 1 5 ....................................................................

5 Except for certain sections that ADEQ requested

that we not remove from the SIP at this time.

D e fin itio n s ..................................................................

Attainment Areas: Classification and Standards .......

Installation Perm its: General .....................................

Installation Perm its in Nonattainment Areas .............

Offset Standards ........................................................

Installation Perm its in Attainment Areas ...................

Air Quality Analysis and Monitoring Requirements ...

Source Registration Requirements ............................

R e p la c e m e n t ..............................................................

Permit Conditions ......................................................

Air Quality Models .....................................................

Excess Emissions Reporting .....................................

Posting of Perm its .....................................................

Various

04/23/1982

05/03/1983

08/10/1988

08/10/1988

05/03/1983

05/03/1983

05/03/1983

05/05/1982

04/23/1982

04/23/1982

04/23/1982

04/23/1982

Various

47 FR 17486

48 FR 198879

53 FR 30220

53 FR 30220

48 FR 19879

48 FR 19879

48 FR 19879

47 FR 19328

47 FR 17485

47 FR 17485

47 FR 17485

47 FR 17485

14046
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

TABLE 2-SIP RULES SUPERSEDED OR REMOVED FROM ARIZONA SIP IN THIS ACTION-Continued

Federal

Rule or statute Title EPA Approval Register date citation

R9-3-316 .................................................................... Notice by Building Permit Agencies .......................... 04/23/1982 47 FR 17485

R9-3-317 .................................................................... Permit Non-transferrable; Exception ......................... 04/23/1982 47 FR 17485

R9-3-318 .................................................................... Denial or Revocation of Installation or Operating 04/23/1982 47 FR 17485

Permit.

R8-3-319 .................................................................... Perm it Fees ....... ................................ 04/23/1982 47 FR 17485

R9-3-322 .................................................................... Tem porary Conditional Perm its ................................. 10/19/1984 49 FR 41026

R 9- 3- 110 1 .................................................................. Ju risd ictio n ................................................................. 05/03/1983 48 F R 19879

Appendix 4 .................................................................. Fee Schedule for Installation and Operating Permits 09/19/1977 42 FR 16926

Appendix 5 .................................................................. Fee Schedule for Conditional Permits ....................... 09/19/1977 42 FR 46926

C. What is the purpose of this proposed

rule?

The purpose of this proposed rule is

to present our evaluation under the

CAA and EPA's regulations of rules and

statutory provisions submitted by ADEQ

on July 28, 2011, October 29, 2012, and

July 2, 2014, which are identified in

Table 1. We provide our reasoning in

general terms below, and include our

more detailed analysis in the TSD,

which is available in the docket for this

proposed rulemaking.

II. EPA's Evaluation

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules and

statutory provisions?

EPA has reviewed the provisions

submitted by ADEQ that are the subject

of this action, including those governing

NSR for stationary sources under ADEQ

jurisdiction for compliance with the

CAA's general requirements for SIPs in

CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA's

regulations for stationary source

permitting programs in 40 CFR part 51,

sections 51.160 through 51.166, and the

CAA requirements for SIP revisions in

CAA section 110(1) and 193.6

With respect to procedures, CAA

sections 110(a) and 110(1) require that

revisions to a SIP be adopted by the

State after reasonable notice and public

hearing. EPA has promulgated specific

procedural requirements for SIP

revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F.

These requirements include publication

6 CAA section 110(1) requires SIP revisions to be

subject to reasonable notice and public hearing

prior to adoption and submittal by States to EPA

and prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision

that would interfere with any applicable

requirement concerning attainment and reasonable

further progress, or any other applicable

requirement of the CAA. CAA section 193, which

was added by the CAA Amendments of 1990,

includes a savings clause that provides, in pertinent

part: "No control requirement in effect, or required

to be adopted by an order, settlement agreement, or

plan in effect before November 15, 1990, in any area

which is a nonattainment area for any air pollutant

may be modified after November 15, 1990, in any

manner unless the modification insures equivalent

or greater emission reductions of such air

pollutant."

of notices, by prominent advertisement

in the relevant geographic area, of a

public hearing on the proposed

revisions, a public comment period of at

least 30 days, and an opportunity for a

public hearing.

Based on our review of the public

process documentation included in the

July 28, 2011, October 29, 2012 and July

2, 2014 submittals, we find that ADEQ

has provided sufficient evidence of

public notice and opportunity for

comment and public hearings prior to

adoption and submittal of these rules to

EPA.

With respect to substantive

requirements, we have generally

reviewed the ADEQ provisions that are

the subject of our current action in

accordance with the CAA and

applicable regulatory requirements,

focusing primarily on those that apply

to: (1) General preconstruction review

programs, including for minor sources,

under section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act; (2)

PSD permit programs under part C of

title I of the Act; and (3) Nonattainment

NSR permit programs under part D of

title I of the Act (NA-NSR). For the most

part, ADEQ's submittal satisfies

applicable CAA requirements,

specifically including the applicable

requirements for these three

preconstruction review programs and

would strengthen the applicable SIP by

updating the regulations and adding

requirements to address new or revised

NSR permitting and other requirements

promulgated by EPA, but the submitted

rules also contain specific deficiencies

that prevent full approval. Below, we

discuss generally our evaluation of

ADEQ's submittal and the deficiencies

that are the basis for our proposed

action on these rules. Our TSD contains

a more detailed evaluation as well as

additional recommendations for

program improvements.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation

criteria for Minor New Source Review?

Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires each SIP

to include a program for the regulation

of the modification and construction of

any stationary source within the areas

covered by the plan as necessary to

assure attainment and maintenance of

the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS). In addition to the

permit programs required under parts C

and D of the CAA for PSD sources and

nonattainment NSR sources,

respectively, which are discussed

below, EPA's regulations at 40 CFR

51.160-51.164 provide general

programmatic requirements to

implement this statutory mandate

commonly referred to as the "minor

NSR program." These minor NSR

program regulations impose

requirements for SIP approval of State

and local programs that are more

general in nature as compared with the

specific statutory and regulatory

requirements for PSD and NA-NSR

permitting programs. Under EPA's

regulations governing the minor NSR

program, States and local air agencies

retain a level of discretion to define the

types and sizes of sources subject to the

program, whereas under the PSD and

nonattainment NSR permitting

programs, the sources subject to

regulation are specified by EPA

regulations. The substantive

requirements for the preconstruction

review and permitting of minor

stationary sources under ADEQ

jurisdiction are ADEQ rules R18-2-

302.01 and R18-2-334. These rules, and

other administrative rules included in

the minor NSR portion of the SIP

submittal, satisfy most of the statutory

and regulatory requirements for minor

NSR programs, but these rules also

contain several deficiencies that form

the basis for our proposed limited

disapproval, as discussed below.

We are proposing a limited approval

and limited disapproval of ADEQ's

minor NSR program because it is not

fully consistent with the requirements

of 40 CFR 51.160, 40 CFR 51.161, 40

CFR 51.163 and 40 CFR 51.164, as

described below. We find that approval

14047
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

of ADEQ's updated minor NSR program

will substantially strengthen the SIP

overall, as the submitted minor NSR

program generally has more extensive

requirements for minor sources and

non-major modifications than ADEQ's

current SIP-approved program and

lower permitting thresholds that will

provide additional mechanisms for

protecting the NAAQS, as well as

updating the SIP with current State

regulations for minor sources and nonmajor modifications. However, specific

provisions of the minor NSR program

submittal are inconsistent with federal

minor NSR program requirements, and

these deficiencies must be addressed

before we can fully approve ADEQ's

minor NSR program into the SIP. The

deficiencies that we have identified

with ADEQ's minor NSR program that

provide the basis for our limited

approval and limited disapproval are

described below.

1. Legally Enforceable Procedures

40 CFR 51.160 requires that each NSR

program contain certain legally

enforceable procedures. We have

identified several deficiencies with

ADEQ's program as it pertains to these

requirements.

First, as required by 40 CFR 51.160(a),

ADEQ's permitting procedures are not

enforceable in all instances. ADEQ's

program allows certain sources to begin

construction when a "proposed final

permit" is issued by ADEQ, rather than

preventing construction until a final

permit has been issued. See R18-2-

101(114), R18-2-302(G), R18-2-334(B),

R18-2-402(C). The definition for

"proposed final permit" in R18-2-101

does not specify that such an action is

a final decision for NSR purposes. As a

result, the program does not provide

ADEQ with clear authority to prevent

construction or modification before it

issues a final decision on the request for

authority to construct as is required per

40 CFR 51.160(a) and (b). ADEQ has

clarified that, in effect, under ADEQ's

rules, a proposed final permit is treated

as a final authorization to construct, and

that it will treat proposed final permit

as a final, appealable agency action

under Arizona law. 7 Nevertheless, a

revision to ADEQ's NSR program is

necessary to ensure that these types of

permit actions clearly serve as a final

authority to construct in order to satisfy

the federal NSR program requirement

that the agency be able to prevent

construction until and unless it has

7 ADEQ Memo-Proposed Final Permits to be

Treated as Appealable Agency Actions, dated

February 10, 2015 and ADEQ's February 23, 20157

supplement at 2.

issued a final decision on the request for

authority to construct.

Second, ADEQ's program does not

contain adequate enforceable

procedures to ensure compliance by

sources subject to review under its NSR

program with the NAAQS as required

by 40 CFR 51.160(a)(2) and (b)(2).

Although NAAQS is a defined term in

ADEQ's regulations, see R18-2-101(85),

ADEQ's NSR program generally does

not refer to the NAAQS and instead

generally references the State's ambient

air standards in Article 2 of ADEQ's air

program. See R18-2-302.01, R18-2-

334, and R18-2-406.8 Also, in some

instances, ADEQ's NSR regulations

simply refer to Arizona ambient air

quality standards with no specific

reference to Article 2, which makes the

applicable standards ambiguous. 9 See

R18-2-218, R18-2-406, and R18-2-

407. In some instances, ADEQ's NSR

program does not ensure that a source

would not interfere with attainment or

maintenance of the NAAQS in

neighboring areas outside ADEQ's

permitting jurisdiction, as is required

under 40 CFR 51.160(a) and (b), as the

State air standards are not generally

applicable in neighboring States,'1 and

the NSR Program submittal does not

demonstrate that they are applicable in

neighboring States for purposes of

ADEQ's NSR program. See R18-2-

302.01(C); R18-2-334(C)(2), (F), and (G);

and R18-2-406(A)(5)(a) and (b). Also,

for minor sources subject to permitting

under R18-2-334, the rule does not

meet these federal requirements as it

does not require ADEQ to evaluate

whether the project under review will

interfere with attainment or

maintenance of the NAAQS in all cases,

and instead allows sources to apply

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) in lieu of such an evaluation

and, in some cases, appears to allow

sources with lower levels of emissions

to avoid both substantive NAAQS

review and RACT requirements. See

8 ADEQ's list of state air standards does not

contain the current PM2 .5 annual NAAQS of 12 p g/

m 3 PM2 .5-. See 78 FR 3086, Jan. 13, 2013. This is

not a disapproval issue for ADEQ's minor NSR and

NA-NSR programs, which have three years to adopt

programs implementing the new NAAQS. However,

the new NAAQS is applied immediately upon its

effective date to sources subject to the PSD program.

9 For example, R18-2-407(B) contains "any such

pollutant for which no Arizona ambient air quality

standard exists." "Arizona ambient air quality

standard" is not a defined term in ADEQ's

regulations.

10 See, for example, the definition of "attainment

area" in R18-2-101, limiting attainment areas to

those in Arizona. A.R.S. § 49-106 provides, in

relevant part: "The rules adopted by the department

apply and shall be observed throughout this state,

or as provided by their terms, and the appropriate

local officer, council or board shall enforce them."

R18-2-334(C)(1)(a)-(b). ADEQ has not

demonstrated that this approach ensures

that all sources subject to review under

its NSR program will not interfere with

attainment or maintenance of the

NAAQS. While R18-2-334(G) allows

Director's discretion to require a

NAAQS analysis on a case-by-case

basis, we find this discretion too great

to ensure compliance with this

requirement. Finally, R18-2-

302.01(C)(4) needs to include a

reference to "or maintenance" of a

standard, instead of just "attainment of

a standard."

Third, for sources subject to ADEQ's

registration program at R18-2-302.01,

ADEQ has not demonstrated that its

NSR program meets the requirement to

ensure that sources subject to NSR

review comply with the applicable

portions of the control strategy as

required by 40 CFR 51.160(b)(1).

Fourth, ADEQ's registration program

in R18-2-302.01 does not contain

enforceable procedures for the owner or

operator to submit the necessary

information for ADEQ to determine

whether a source will violate the

applicable control strategy or interfere

with attainment or maintenance of the

NAAQS as required by 40 CFR

51.160(c). R18-2-302.01(A)(3) requires

applicants to calculate a source's

uncontrolled potential to emit, but then

references provisions in another rule,

R18-2-327(C), that are used to calculate

"actual" emissions. As such, ADEQ's

program contains conflicting procedures

for calculating potential emissions. In

addition, rule R18-2-327, is not in the

Arizona SIP, and has not been

submitted to EPA for SIP approval.

Fifth, ADEQ's program does not meet

the requirement that the applicant

submit information related to the nature

and amounts of emissions, for certain

kinds of emissions units as required by

40 CFR 51.160(c)(1). For Class I and

Class II permits, R18-2-304(E)(9) allows

sources to avoid providing emission

information for "insignificant

activities," as defined in R18-2-101(68).

The term "insignificant activities" is

generally associated with the title V

program. Many of the activities listed in

ADEQ's definition of insignificant

activity are activities that would not be

expected to emit regulated NSR

pollutants. However, this is not true for

all activities, such as those listed under

R18-2-101(68)(a-c) that include liquid

storage tanks, combustion engines, and

"low-emitting processes."

Sixth, for sources subject to R18-2-

302.01, ADEQ's program does not meet

the requirement in 40 CFR 51.160(d)

that its procedures provide that

approval of construction or modification

14048
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

will not affect the responsibility of the

owner or operator to comply with

applicable portions of the control

strategy.

Finally, for sources subject to ADEQ's

registration program under R18-2-

302.01, ADEQ's program does not meet

the requirement to use Appendix W to

40 CFR part 51 for air quality modeling

as required by 40 CFR 51.160(f)(1).

2. ADEQ's Program Under 40 CFR

51.160(e)

40 CFR 51.160(e) requires ADEQ's

submittal to provide a basis for the types

and sizes of facilities, buildings,

structures, or installations that will be

subject to review under 40 CFR 51.160.

Such exclusions are appropriate so long

as such sources and modifications are

not environmentally significant,

consistent with the de minimis

exemption criteria set forth in Ala.

Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323, at

360-361 (D.C. Cir. 1979). Here, we

discuss our evaluation of the basis

provided by ADEQ for the types and

sizes of facilities, buildings, structures

or installations it will subject to review

under its minor NSR program.

Historically, ADEQ's minor NSR

program required permitting of minor

sources and non-major modifications

causing an increase in potential

emissions of a criteria pollutant at or

above the significant emission rates

under the PSD program in 40 CFR

51.166(b)(23)(i). In a May 22, 1996 letter

to ADEQ, EPA Region 9 indicated that

the significant emission rates used by

ADEQ for its minor NSR permitting

program did not represent an acceptable

threshold for applying the basic

preconstruction requirements for minor

NSR purposes. To address EPA's

concerns, ADEQ assessed other

potential permitting thresholds for its

minor NSR program and selected

revised thresholds for its minor NSR

program following this assessment. A

detailed analysis of ADEQ's assessment

is provided in our TSD. ADEQ's new

minor NSR program established a

minimum preconstruction review

threshold for new or modified stationary

sources with potential emissions or

emissions increases of: 50 tons per year

(tpy) of carbon monoxide; 20 tpy of

NOx, SO 2, and VOC; 7.5 tpy for PM1o;

5 tpy for PM 2.

5; and 0.3 tpy for lead. We

find ADEQ's general approach to

meeting 40 CFR 51.160(e) acceptable.

We are proposing a limited disapproval

of ADEQ's minor NSR program based in

part on the following issues concerning

the approach:

First, ADEQ's submittal does not

provide a clear basis for concluding that

the exemption thresholds selected by

ADEQ will ensure a sufficient

percentage of minor sources are subject

to review in nonattainment areas. As

ADEQ points out in its submittal,

ADEQ's analysis is based on data for

Maricopa County ", which has lower

NSR permitting thresholds than the

exemption thresholds adopted by ADEQ

due to Maricopa County's local air

quality problems. In addition, (1) some

of the other permitting programs in

Table 3 above have lower permitting

thresholds in nonattainment areas than

those applicable in attainment areas

under their jurisdiction; (2) in looking at

a similar analysis of minor source

emissions for another permitting

program in Region 9, which has local air

quality problems, the permitting agency

generally set thresholds that include a

larger percentage of emissions in the

NSR program than the percentage

included in ADEQ's program 12; and (3)

typically, nonattainment areas have

more control requirements that apply to

smaller minor sources, as compared to

attainment areas. As such, ADEQ's basis

does not clearly address how its

adopted preconstruction review

exemption thresholds adequately

address nonattainment areas.' 3

Second, while EPA agrees that, in

general, certain types of equipment may

be exempted from the minor NSR

program, ADEQ must provide a basis

under 40 CFR 51.160(e) to demonstrate

that regulation of the equipment

exempted in R18-2-302(C) and A.R.S.

§ 49-426(B) is not needed for ADEQ'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)

An explanation of whether the

regulatory exemption in R18-2-302(C)

for "agricultural equipment used in

normal farm operations" constitutes an

interpretation or refinement of the

exemption for such sources in A.R.S.

11 ADEQ does not have jurisdiction for permitting

of minor sources in Maricopa County, AZ.

12 See EPA's Technical Support Document for

Revision ofAir Quality Implementation Plan;

California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality

Management District; Stationary Source Permits, 78

FR10589, Feb. 2, 2014, at 6-7, describing the

thresholds applicable in Sacramento as generally

excluding less than 5% of the emissions inventory

except for SO 2.

13 In addressing this deficiency, ADEQ does not

necessarily have to consider lower permitting

exemption thresholds in nonattainment areas. For

example, ADEQ could provide further analysis to

demonstrate that the adopted thresholds are

appropriate for nonattainment areas or consider a

different approach, such as requiring minor sources

in nonattainment areas subject to a SIP requirement

for the nonattainment pollutant, or its precursors,

to obtain a registration, if ADEQ can demonstrate

that such an approach would serve to satisfy the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.160.

§ 49-426(B), and how the two

provisions apply to ADEQ's NSR

program; (2) Identification of the types

of equipment ADEQ 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 Act, 40 CFR

parts 60, 61, or 63, or major NSR, and,

if so, whether such equipment is subject

to NSR review at such sources; (3)

ADEQ's basis for determining that

"agricultural equipment used in normal

farm operations" does not need to be

regulated as part of ADEQ's minor NSR

program under 40 CFR 51.160(e); and

(4) ADEQ's interpretation of the

exemption for fuel burning equipment

in A.R.S. § 49-426(B) and how it does,

or does not, apply in the context of its

major and minor NSR programs, and, to

the extent such equipment is not subject

to NSR review, ADEQ's basis for

determining that equipment exempted

under this provision does not need to be

reviewed as part of ADEQ's minor NSR

program under 40 CFR 51.160(e).

Finally, ADEQ's minor NSR program

sets a permitting exemption threshold

for PM 2.

5 of 5 tons per year, but ADEQ's

analysis does not provide a basis for this

threshold.

3. Public Availability of Information

40 CFR 51.161 requires that each NSR

program contain certain procedures

related to public participation. We have

identified several deficiencies with

ADEQ's program as it pertains to these

requirements.

First, ADEQ's program does not

ensure that NSR review for all minor

sources regulated under ADEQ's NSR

program, as ADEQ defines it pursuant to

40 CFR 51.160(e), is subject to public

notice and comment consistent with 40

CFR 51.161(a). 40 CFR 51.161(a)

requires that the program under 51.160

provide for public comment on the

information submitted by owners or

operators. In addition, the public

information must include ADEQ's

analysis of the effects of construction or

modification on ambient air, including

ADEQ's proposed approval or

disapproval. ADEQ's program does not

meet this requirement because: (1) "modification" of existing sources that

become subject to the registration

program under R18-2-302.01 (currently

only "construction" of a source) are not

subject to public notice (see R18-2-

302.01(B)(3)); (2) R18-2-334(G) exempts

most modifications from public notice;

(3) R18-2-330 does not clearly define

which public notice requirements apply

to registrations; and (4) public

participation does not appear to be

14049
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

required for a proposed disapproval of

an application for any portion of

ADEQ's NSR program (registration,

minor NSR, or major NSR).

Second, ADEQ's registration program

at R18-2-302.01(F) does not contain the

necessary enforceable procedures for

sources taking "elective limits" to limit

their potential to emit in a manner that

allows the source to avoid the public

participation requirements in 40 CFR

51.161(a), while otherwise being subject

to the registration program. See R18-2-

302.01(B)(3)(b) and R18-2-302(E)(1).

While ADEQ's rule contains

requirements for monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting of elective

limits, these requirements are not

sufficiently enforceable for purposes of

limiting the source's potential to emit,

and thereby avoiding public notice, as

well other substantive requirements of

ADEQ's minor NSR program when

issuing a registration. In order to meet

practical enforceability requirements for

limiting the potential to emit (PTE),

R18-2-302.01(F) must also contain (1) a

technically accurate limitation and the

portions of the source subject to the

limitation and (2) the time period for the

limitations (hourly, daily, monthly,

etc.). Further, if the limitation is over a

period longer than daily, R18-2-

302.01(F) must specify when to compile

daily records to show compliance with

the elected limit. Additional detail on

this issue is provided in our TSD.

Third, ADEQ's NSR program does not

ensure, for all sources subject to NSR

review, the availability for public

inspection, in at least one location in

the area affected, of the information

submitted by the owner or operator and

of ADEQ's analysis on the effect on air

quality as required by this federal

regulation. R18-2-330(D)(11) requires

the public notice to identify the nearest

ADEQ office where documents can be

inspected, but there are only two

department offices for ADEQ. See 40

CFR 51.161(b)(1). We do not interpret

this provision as meeting the

requirement to make information

available in the "area affected." In

addition, the public notice requirements

do not make reference to providing

ADEQ's analysis for public inspection.

Potentially, this is covered by "all other

materials available to the Director that

are relevant to the permit decision".14

But it is not clear that ADEQ would

interpret this to mean the Director's own

analysis.

Finally, ADEQ's NSR program does

provide notice to the necessary parties

in 40 CFR 51.161(d) for sources required

14 This requirement is met for ADEQ's registration

program at R18-2-302.01(B)(3)(a).

to obtain registrations under R18-2-

302.01.

4. Administrative Procedures

40 CFR 51.163 requires each NSR

program to include administrative

procedures that will be followed in

making the determinations specified in

40 CFR 51.160(a). While ADEQ's

program generally meets the

requirements of this provision, ADEQ's

submittal contains references to other

ADEQ rules, R18-2-317 and R18-2-

317.02, which are not in the SIP and

have not been submitted for SIP

approval. See R18-2-306.02(D), R18-2-

319(I), R18-2-304(J), R18-2-306(A),

and R18-2-306.02(D).

5. Stack Height Procedures

40 CFR 51.164 requires that each NSR

program contain certain provisions

related to good engineering practice for

stack heights. In addition to reviewing

ADEQ's submittal as compared with the

NSR program requirements of 40 CFR

51.164, we also reviewed ADEQ's

submittal as it relates to certain general

SIP program requirements in 40 CFR

51.100 and 51.118. The stack height

provisions in the NSR program rely on

the general stack height provisions in 40

CFR 51.118(b), which in turn references

the definitions in 40 CFR 51.100(hh)

through (kk). We have identified several

deficiencies with ADEQ's program as it

pertains to these requirements.

First, ADEQ's submittal does not meet

the public hearing requirements in 40

CFR 51.164 and 51.118(a). While R18-

2-332(E) contains a reference to holding

a public hearing, when required, the

provision references ADEQ's public

hearing provision in R18-1-402. R18-

1-402 is not in the SIP and has not been

submitted for SIP approval.

Second, ADEQ's submittal does not

contain language that meets the

exception in 40 CFR 51.118(b): "except

where pollutants are being emitted from

such stacks or using such dispersion

techniques by sources, as defined in

section 111(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act,

which were constructed, or

reconstructed, or for which major

modifications, as defined in

§§ 51.165(a)(1)(v)(A), 51.166(b)(2)(i) and

52.21(b)(2)(i), were carried out after

December 31, 1970." In addition, R18-

2-332(A)(3) incorrectly references July

1, 1975 instead of July 1, 1957 as that

date appears in 40 CFR 51.118(b).

Third, ADEQ's submittal does not

contain a requirement that owners or

operators seeking to rely on the equation

in 40 CFR 51.100(ii)(2)(i) produce

evidence that the equation was actually

relied on in establishing an emission

limitation. See R18-2-332(B)(2).

Finally, ADEQ's submittal contains a

provision at R18-2-332(D) that provides

additional provisions for sources "seeking credit because of plume

impaction which results in

concentrations in violation of national

ambient air quality standards or

applicable maximum allowable

increases." This provision is not

contained in the federal regulations and

appears to allow for the use of stack

heights beyond GEP stack height, as

defined in 40 CFR 51.100(ii).

In sum, while we have identified

several disapproval issues with ADEQ's

minor NSR program requirements as

they correspond to federal minor NSR

program requirements, compared to the

existing SIP, approving ADEQ's minor

NSR program into the Arizona SIP

nonetheless represents a significant

overall strengthening of ADEQ's NSR

program, as discussed above. Thus, we

are proposing a limited approval and

limited approval of ADEQ's minor NSR

program submittal.

C. Do the rules meet the evaluation

criteria for Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSI)?

Part C of title I of the Act contains the

provisions for the prevention of

significant deterioration (PSD) of air

quality in areas designated "attainment"

or "unclassifiable" for the NAAQS,

including preconstruction permit

requirements for new major sources or

major modifications proposing to

construct in such areas. EPA's

regulations for SIP-approved PSD

permit programs are found in 40 CFR

51.166.

ADEQ rules R18-2-402 and R18-2-

406 contain the substantive

requirements for review and permitting

of PSD sources under ADEQ's

jurisdiction. These regulations satisfy

most of the statutory and regulatory

requirements for PSD permit programs,

but these and other rules in the NSR SIP

submittal contain several deficiencies

that form the basis for our proposed

limited disapproval, or proposed

disapprovals as discussed below.

Although ADEQ's submittal meets

most PSD program requirements, we are

proposing to disapprove two specific

aspects of ADEQ's PSD program. The

ADEQ rule provisions that we are

proposing to disapprove are directly

comparable to federal PSD rule

provisions that have been vacated by

federal courts, and we find that they are

separable from the remainder of ADEQ's

PSD program. Accordingly, we find

these provisions suitable for disapproval

at this time. These provisions are

described below in Sections II.C.8 and

9.

14050
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

For the remainder of ADEQ's PSD

program submittal, we are proposing

limited approval and limited

disapproval. We find that approval of

ADEQ's updated PSD program, aside

from the two aspects that are separable

and will be disapproved as mentioned

above, will substantially strengthen the

SIP overall, particularly as the current

SIP-approved PSD program is

significantly out of date when compared

with current federal PSD regulatory

requirements as well as current State

regulations. See our discussion in

Section G below. However, specific

provisions of the PSD SIP program

submittal are inconsistent with PSD

program requirements, and these

deficiencies must be addressed before

we can fully approve ADEQ's PSD

program. The deficiencies that we have

identified with ADEQ's PSD program

that provide the basis for our limited

disapproval are described below in

Sections II.C.i through 7.

1. General PSD Program Requirements

First, ADEQ's submittal often refers to

Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ's

regulations where the federal

regulations refer to 40 CFR parts 60, 61,

or 63; or, similarly, sections 111 or 112

of the Act. See R18-2-101(53)(a),

(122)(b); R18-2-401(10); R18-2-

402(G)(2); and R18-2-406(A)(4).

Articles 9 and 11 are where ADEQ

incorporates by reference the federal

regulations in 40 CFR part 60, 61, and

63 (which EPA implements under

sections 111 and 112 of the Act).

However, these Articles are not in the

SIP, have not been submitted for SIP

approval, and do not contain provisions

equivalent to all of the subparts in parts

60, 61, and 63. See 40 CFR

51.166(b)(1)(iii)(aa), (b)(12), (b)(16)(i),

(b)(17), (b)(47)(ii)(c), (b)(49)(ii),

(i)(1)(ii)(aa), and (j).

Second, ADEQ's submittal uses the

term "increment" or "incremental

ambient standard," but does not

specifically define these terms or

otherwise identify what is meant by

these terms. While the PSD program

does not specifically define the term

"increment" either, the term is

introduced at 40 CFR 51.166(c)-

Ambient air increments and other

measures. (emphasis added) 40 CFR

51.166(c) then goes on to identify the

specific increment values as "maximum

allowable increases." ADEQ appears to

have taken the approach of using the

term "maximum allowable increase" to

refer to the increments, which is

acceptable. ADEQ adopted the

increments, or maximum allowable

increases, in R18-2-218-Limitation of

Pollutants in Classified Attainment

Areas. However, in other rules ADEQ

uses "increment" or "incremental

ambient standard" where it appears the

intent is to refer to the increments

established in R18-2-218 and identified

in ADEQ's rules as the "maximum

allowable increases." See R18-2-406(E),

R18-2-412(G)(b), R18-2-101(51), R18-

2-319, R18-2-320.

Third, on January 15, 2013, EPA

issued a final rule revising the NAAQS

for PM 2.

5 for the annual averaging

period, lowering the level of the

NAAQS from 15.0 to 12.0 mg/mt ,

effective March 18, 2013 (see 78 FR

3086). This new NAAQS is required to

be implemented for PSD sources (unless

otherwise grandfathered under

provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(10))

beginning with the effective date of the

NAAQS. However, ADEQ's PSD

program does not provide for the review

of new or modified sources for

compliance with this new NAAQS as

required in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(iii)(i)(2),

(b)(35), (d), (g)(3)(iii), (k), and (m)(1).

Instead, ADEQ's PSD program currently

references state ambient air quality

standards, which are set at levels that

are equivalent to all of the current

NAAQS, except for this newly adopted

PM 2.

5 NAAQS. See R18-2-218(F)(b)(ii),

R18-2-401(25), R18-2-406(A) and R18-

2-407(B). Because of the general

approach used in ADEQ's NSR program

with respect to incorporating the

NAAQS, i.e., the program's reference to

state air quality standards instead of the

NAAQS, any changes EPA makes to the

NAAQS will not be included in ADEQ's

program until ADEQ revises its air

quality standards rules to adopt the

revised NAAQS as state air quality

standards. This does not relieve any

owner or operator from the requirement

to comply with all NAAQS at the time

a final PSD permit is issued, including

the recently revised new PM 2.

5 NAAQS

(unless otherwise grandfathered under

40 CFR 51.166). See CAA section

165(a)(3).

Fourth, R18-2-406(A) contains a

reference to R18-2-408, but R18-2-408

is not in the SIP and has not been

submitted for SIP approval.

Fifth, ADEQ's submittal allows a

source at R18-2-302(G) and R18-2-

402(C) to begin actual construction

upon the issuance of a proposed final

permit. As previously discussed,

ADEQ's program is ambiguous as to

whether a proposed final permit, as

defined in R18-2-101(114), constitutes

final action by the Director. While

ADEQ has issued guidance clarifying

that it treats "proposed final permits" as

final actions for purposes of

preconstruction permitting 15, to obtain

full PSD program approval, ADEQ's

regulations must make clear that a

source may not begin actual

construction before a final

determination on a PSD permit

application is made by the Director.

Sixth, ADEQ's NSR submittal

contains provisions that allow for

exclusions from increment

consumption, for certain temporary

emissions, that do not conform to the

requirements in the analogous federal

rule. First, ADEQ's rule at R18-2-

218(F)(5) requires only the ADEQ

Director's approval for temporary

emissions beyond two years, but the

federal program requirements at 40 CFR

51.166(f)(i)(v) and 51.166(f)(4) require

the Administrator's approval to allow

temporary emissions that exceed two

years. In addition, ADEQ's program

language does not reference a specific

time period beyond two years that it

would allow for exclusions from

increment consumption, which is not

consistent with the federal regulation's

requirement at 40 CFR 51.166(f)(4) that

the time for such exclusions be

specified in the plan. Finally, the

provision at R18-2-218(F)(5)(b)(ii),

which references the state ambient air

quality standards, must be applied to

"any" air quality control region. As

currently written this provision does not

clearly apply to areas outside of Arizona

where Arizona's standards would not

generally apply.

Seventh, ADEQ's submittal contains a

provision at R18-2-406(E) providing an

exemption for certain portable

stationary sources with a prior permit

that contains requirements equivalent to

the PSD requirements in 40 CFR 51.166

(j) through (r), as allowed by 40 CFR

51.166(i)(1)(iii). However, ADEQ's rule

at R18-2-406(E) is worded broadly to

also allow an exemption for portable

sources that have been permitted under

Article 4 of ADEQ's regulations, which

also includes nonattainment NSR

permits and PAL permits. We do not

interpret this federal exemption as

generally applying to such permits, as it

is not clear that such permits contain

requirements "equivalent" to those in

40 CFR 51.166(j) through (r).

Eight, ADEQ's submittal contains

conditions generally meeting the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(k)(1) in

rule R18-2-406(A)(5)(a). However, R18-

2-406(A)(5) contains an "or" between

subsections (a) and (b) that could be

interpreted as allowing a source to

demonstrate it will not contribute to an

15 See ADEQ memo dated February 10, 2015

related to proposed final permits, and ADEQ's

February 23, 2015 Supplement at 2.

14051
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

increase above the significance levels in

an adjacent nonattainment area in lieu

of the demonstration required by R18-

2-406(A)(5)(a). The provisions of

subsection (b) relate to requirements

under a different portion of the NSR

program-specifically under 40 CFR

51.165. As such, it is likely ADEQ

would interpret subsections (a) and (b)

as separate requirements with which a

source must demonstrate compliance.

Nevertheless, the potential for

misinterpretation of this substantive

requirement of the PSD program

provides a basis for our limited

disapproval of the PSD program

submittal. In addition, R18-2-

406(A)(5)(a) requires that a person

applying for a PSD permit demonstrate

that the project would not cause a

violation of any maximum allowable

increase over the baseline concentration

in "any attainment or unclassifiable

area." However, ADEQ's definition for

"attainment area" in the SIP at R18-2-

101(19) limits attainment areas to those

"in the state." In addition, as discussed

previously, it is not clear that ADEQ's

references to the state's ambient air

standards would apply in areas outside

of Arizona.

Ninth, ADEQ's submittal includes

R18-2-406(A)(6)(b), which specifies

that the use of a modified or substituted

model must be subject to public notice

and the opportunity for public

comment, but neither the rule nor the

submittal makes clear the procedures

that would be used for notice and

comment for this purpose or

demonstrates that such procedures

would be consistent with 40 CFR

51.102, as required by 40 CFR

51.166(1)(2).

Tenth, ADEQ's PSD SIP submittal

does not appear to specifically address

the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(n)(1)

and (3), which require that the SIP must

require that (1) the owner or operator of

a proposed source or modification shall

submit all information necessary to

perform any analysis or make any

determination required under

procedures established in accordance

with 40 CFR 51.166, and (2) upon

request of the state, the owner or

operator shall also provide specified

information concerning air quality

impacts and growth. ADEQ's submittal

at R18-2-304, R18-2-402(G) and R18-

2-407 identifies the information

necessary for a complete application

under this program and requires

applicants to respond to deficiencies in

the application, but these provisions do

not appear to fully address the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(n)(1) and

(3).

Eleventh, ADEQ's submittal contains

an apparent typographical error in R18-

2-402(F)(1)(c), which includes a crossreference to R18-2-401(20)(b)(iii) rather

than R18-2-401(20)(b)(iv). See 40 CFR

51.166(r)(6).

Finally, ADEQ's submittal does not

require owners or operators to make

information required under 40 CFR

51.166(r)(6) available for review upon

request by the Director or the general

public pursuant to the requirements in

40 CFR 70.4(b)(3)(viii) as is required by

40 CFR 51.166(r)(7).

2. Restrictions on Area Classifications

40 CFR 51.166(e) contains provisions

related to restrictions on area

classifications (Class 1, 11, or II). We have

identified several deficiencies in

ADEQ's program with respect to these

provisions.

First, ADEQ's submittal contains

requirements for area classifications in

R18-2-217. However, ADEQ's submittal

does not completely meet the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(e) and

section 162(a) of the Act, which require

certain areas in existence on August 7,

1977 to be designated as Class I areas.

Such designations apply to any

boundary changes made to those Class

I areas after August 7, 1977. While

ADEQ generally includes this

requirement at R18-2-217(B), its rule

limits such boundary changes to those

made prior to March 12, 1993.

Second, ADEQ's NSR submittal at

R18-2-217 does not contain a provision

consistent with the federal regulatory

requirement for Class I area

redesignations prior to August 7, 1977

in rule R18-2-217 or elsewhere as

required by 40 CFR 51.166(e)(2). Even if

it is the case that there are no areas in

Arizona that were redesignated Class I

prior to August 7, 1977, ADEQ's

program must recognize Class I area

designations under this provision that

may have been made in other states for

which sources within ADEQ may have

an impact. See 40 CFR 51.166(e)(2).

Finally, ADEQ's NSR submittal does

not include a provision that is fully

consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(e)(3).

While ADEQ's rules generally meet this

requirement at R18-2-217(D), this rule

does not fully meet the requirements of

40 CFR 51.166(e)(3) because (1) it is not

clear what is meant in ADEQ's rule by "all other areas" and (2) it does not

contain a provision that ensures that

ADEQ recognizes federal legislation that

specified the area classification of a

particular area.

3. Redesignations

40 CFR 51.166(g) contains provisions

allowing certain areas classified as Class

1, 11, or III to be redesignated to another

classification. We have identified

several deficiencies in ADEQ's program

with these provisions.

First, ADEQ's submittal contains

provisions at R18-2-217(A) identifying

that attainment and unclassifiable areas

in the State shall be designated as Class

1, 11, or III. However, this portion of the

PSD program applies to all areas of the

State. That is, all areas of the State must

be designated as Class 1, 11, or III

irrespective of their attainment

designation under Section 107 of the

Act. See 40 CFR 51.166(g)(1).

Second, ADEQ's submittal contains

provisions at R18-2-217(E) for allowing

the state to redesignate certain areas, but

the submittal does not adequately meet

the public participation requirements

specified in the federal regulation at 40

CFR 51.166(g)(2)(i), which requires a

public hearing consistent with the

procedures in 40 CFR 51.102. ADEQ's

redesignation provisions do not specify

the public hearing procedures that will

be used. See 40 CFR 51.166(g)(2)(i).

Third, ADEQ's provisions for

redesignating areas to Class III do not

clearly identify which areas may be

designated as Class III as specified in 40

CFR 51.166(g)(3).

Fourth, R18-2-217(E) allows for the

redesignation to be approved by the

Governor or the Governor's designee.

However, the federal program at 40 CFR

51.166(g)(3)(ii) specifically requires the

Governor's approval and does not allow

for this approval to be delegated. See 40

CFR 51.166(g)(3)(ii).

Fifth, R18-2-217(F)(4) contains a

reference to "maximum allowable

concentration" which appears to refer to

R18-2-218(E). However, R18-2-218(E)

references the "ambient air quality

standards in this Article." The state's

ambient air quality standards do not

generally apply in areas outside of

Arizona, and ADEQ's NSR submittal

does not demonstrate that they would

apply outside of Arizona for purposes of

R18-2-217(F)(4). See 40 CFR

51.166(g)(3)(iii).

Finally, ADEQ's provisions do not

clearly require that a permit application

that can only be approved if an area is

redesignated to Class III, and material

submitted as part of that application,

must be available for public inspection

prior to the public hearing on the

redesignation to Class III. See 40 CFR

51.166(g)(3)(iv).

4. Impacts on Class I Areas

40 CFR 51.166(p) contains additional

requirements related to protection of

Federal Class I areas. We have identified

several deficiencies in ADEQ's program

with these provisions.

14052
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

First, ADEQ's submittal does not

address the requirements of 40 CFR

51.166(p)(1), but they are generally

addressed by existing SIP requirements

in R9-3-304(H). However, the existing

SIP only requires application

information to be submitted to the

Federal Land Manager, and does not

require that this information be

provided to EPA as required by this

provision. Consistent with 40 CFR

51.166(p)(2), the Federal Land Manager

works in consultation with EPA on the

protection of Class I lands.

Second, ADEQ's submittal does not

address the requirement under 40 CFR

51.166(p)(3), but it is addressed by the

existing SIP requirement in R9-3-

304(H)(1). However, the existing SIP

contains outdated maximum allowable

increases that must be updated. See 40

CFR 51.166(p)(3).

Finally, ADEQ's submittal generally

includes the provisions of 40 CFR

51.166(p)(4) at R18-2-406(F)(2), but

contains the phrase "no significant

adverse impacts," which is inconsistent

with the federal regulation which

requires a demonstration of "no adverse

impacts." The addition of the word

"significant" is somewhat ambiguous in

this context, but appears to allow

variances under circumstances not

allowed under the analogous federal

regulation.

5. Public Participation

40 CFR 51.166(q) contains several

specific public participation

requirements for issuing PSD permits.

We have identified several public

participation deficiencies in ADEQ's

program.

First, ADEQ's submittal does not

ensure that materials available during

the public comment period are available

in each region in which the proposed

source would be constructed as required

by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(ii). While

ADEQ's program at R18-2-330(D)(11)

requires these materials to be available

at the nearest Department office, ADEQ

only has two Department offices. As

such, it is not clear that in all instances

the public affected by a proposed

project would have reasonable access in

their region to the materials specified in

40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(ii).

Second, ADEQ's submittal does not

require ADEQ to notify the public of (1)

the degree of increment consumption

that is expected from the source or

modification, or (2) the Director's

preliminary determination, as required

by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iii).

Third, ADEQ's submittal does not

require ADEQ to make the public

comments and the written notification

of its final determination available in

the same location as the preliminary

documents as required by 40 CFR

51.166(q)(2)(vi) and (viii).

Finally, ADEQ's submittal requires

the Director to take final action on an

application within one year of receipt of

a complete application-R18-2-

402(I)(3). See 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vii).

However, ADEQ's program also

indicates that a source may begin actual

construction once a "proposed final

permit" is obtained. See R18-2-402(C)

and R18-2-302(G). ADEQ's regulations

are ambiguous as to whether a proposed

final permit, as defined in R18-2-

101(114), constitutes final action by the

Director that is subject to administrative

and/or judicial review. As EPA has

stated previously in the context of our

actions on other State SIP submittals,

we interpret the CAA to require an

opportunity for judicial review of a

decision to grant or deny a PSD permit,

whether issued by EPA or by a State

under a SIP-approved or delegated PSD

program. 77 FR 65305, 65306, Oct. 26,

2012 (EPA's approval of the San Joaquin

Valley Unified Air Pollution Control

District's PSD program into the

California SIP); see also 61 FR 1880,

1882. Jan. 24, 1996 (EPA's proposed

disapproval of Virginia's PSD program

SIP revision due to State law standing

requirements that limited judicial

review); 72 FR 72617, 72619, Dec. 21,

2007 (in approving South Dakota's PSD

program, EPA stated that it interprets

the CAA and regulations to require at

minimum an opportunity for state

judicial review of PSD permits). EPA

continues to interpret the relevant

provisions of the Act as described in

these prior rulemaking actions. While

ADEQ has issued guidance clarifying

that it treats "proposed final permits" as "appealable agency actions," under

Arizona law,16 in order to obtain full

PSD program approval, ADEQ's

regulations must make clear that a

source may not begin actual

construction before a final

determination on a PSD permit

application is made by the Director,

which would be subject to

administrative and/or judicial review.

6. Plantwide Applicability Limits

ADEQ's rules contain provisions for

using plantwide applicability limits

(PALs) in R18-2-412. We have

identified the following deficiencies

with ADEQ's PALs provisions program

as they relate to the PSD program.

First, neither the ADEQ regulatory

provisions for PALs at R18-2-412 nor

16 See ADEQ memo dated February 10, 2015

related to proposed final permits. ADEQ submitted

this memo in its February 23, 2015 supplement.

the ADEQ regulatory definitions in R18-

2-401 that apply in the context of major

sources and major modifications contain

a definition for major emissions unit as

is required by 40 CFR 51.166(w)(2)(iv).

(This term is also not included in the

definitions at R18-2-101 or R18-2-301

that ADEQ submitted for approval as

part of this action.)

Second, ADEQ's PAL provision for

calculating baseline emissions at R18-

2-412(B)(2) does not specify that

baseline actual emissions are to include

emissions associated not only with

operation of the unit, but also emissions

associated with startup, shutdown and

malfunction, as is required by 40 CFR

51.166(w)(3)(ii).

Third, ADEQ's PAL provisions at

R18-2-412(H) contain an incorrect

reference to (H)(4) instead of the

definition for major modification, and

R18-2-412(H)(5) uses "eliminated"

where the federal regulation uses

"established." See 40 CFR 51.166(w)(9).

Finally, ADEQ's PAL renewal

provisions at R18-2-412(I)(1) must

contain a reference to subsection (D) of

R18-2-412 instead of (F). In addition,

R18-2-(I)(4)(a) must reference

subsection (E) of R18-2-412. See 40

CFR 51.166(w)(10).

7. Definitions

ADEQ's submittal contains definitions

applicable to the PSD program that do

not fully meet the requirements of 40

CFR 51.166(b)(1), which requires each

State plan to contain specific definitions

for the PSD program. Deviations from

the wording are approvable if the State

specifically demonstrates that the

submitted definition is more stringent,

or at least as stringent, in all respects as

the corresponding definition in 40 CFR

51.166(b). We have carefully reviewed

the definitions used in ADEQ's PSD

program as compared with the federal

PSD definitions in 40 CFR 51.166(b) and

have found that, generally, ADEQ's

submittal contains the definitions

necessary to implement a PSD program.

However, a number of ADEQ's

definitions do not meet the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)

because their wording deviates from the

wording in the corresponding federal

regulatory definitions in 40 CFR

51.166(b)(1) in a manner that may be

less stringent than the federal

definitions, and the State has not

demonstrated otherwise.

Major stationary source at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(1)-language from

subparagraph 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(i)(c)

not included in the definition at R18-

2-101(75). See also discussion below of

the definition of "stationary source" in

40 CFR 51.166(b)(5).

14053
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

Net emissions increase at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(3)-ADEQ's definition at R18-

2-101(87)(c) identifies that an increase

or decrease in actual emissions is

creditable only to the extent that the

Director has not relied on it in issuing

a permit. However, this definition is

broader than the definition in the PSD

program, which only specifies that the

reviewing authority has not relied on

the increase or decrease in issuing a

PSD permit. In some respects this makes

ADEQ's definition more stringent

(decreases), but in other respects less

stringent (increases). In addition, the

equivalent of paragraph 40 CFR

51.166(b)(3)(viii) is not included in

ADEQ's definition at R18-2-101(87).

Stationary source at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(5)-the federal regulation at

40 CFR 51.166(b)(5) defines this term as "any building, structure, facility or

installation which emits or may emit a

regulated NSR pollutant," with

"regulated NSR pollutant" also being a

federally defined term at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(49), whereas ADEQ's

regulation at R18-2-101(39) defines

"stationary source" as "any building,

structure, facility or installation subject

to regulation pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-

426(A) which emits or may emit any air

pollutant," with "air pollutant" being

an undefined term in ADEQ's

regulation. We note that A.R.S. § 49-

426(A) provides a cross-reference to

certain exemptions from permitting

identified in A.R.S. § 49-426(B),

specifically agricultural equipment used

in normal farm operations and certain

fuel burning equipment, which do not

appear to be consistent with the federal

PSD definition. The federal definition

for stationary source is very broad and

does not exclude these source

categories. We agree that it is acceptable

for ADEQ to limit its NSR program to

certain kinds of stationary sources, as

specified in 40 CFR 51.160(e), but the

federal definition for a stationary source

in the context of the PSD program is not

the appropriate place for such an

exclusion, as it does not allow

exclusions for certain source categories.

Major source baseline date at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(14)-language equivalent to

paragraph 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(iv) is

not included at ADEQ's definition in

R18-2-218(B)(1).

Baseline area 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)-

ADEQ's definition at R18-2-218(D)

contains an incorrect reference to R18-

2-217 rather than referring to section

107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act or the

equivalent; also, language equivalent to

that in paragraph 40 CFR

51.166(b)(15)(iii) is not included.

Allowable emissions at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(16)-ADEQ's definition at

R18-2-101(13)(b) does not include the

"future compliance date" language that

is in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(16)(ii) and ADEQ

has not demonstrated that its regulatory

language is at least as stringent as the

federal definition.

Federally enforceable at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(17)-ADEQ's definition at

R18-2-101(53)(d) identifies that

requirements included in permits

pursuant to R18-2-306.01 or R18-2-

306.02 are included in the definition of

federally enforceable requirements, but

excludes those requirements that are

identified as "enforceable only by the

state." With this action, we approving

R18-2-306.01 and R18-2-306.02 into

the SIP, making requirements pursuant

to these rules federally enforceable. As

such, ADEQ does not have the

discretion to identify some of those

requirements as only enforceable by the

state.

Complete at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(22)-

ADEQ's definition at R18-2-401(4) is

missing the second sentence of the

federal definition.

Significant at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)-

ADEQ definition at R18-2-101(130)(e)

uses "milligrams" instead of

"micrograms" as required in paragraph

40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(iii).

Projected actual emissions at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(40)-ADEQ's definition at

R18-2-401(20)(b)(iii) does not

specifically require inclusion of

emissions from malfunctions in the

determination of projected actual

emissions, and exempts emissions from

a shutdown associated with a

malfunction from such determination,

while the federal definition at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(40)(ii)(b) requires that

emissions from both shutdowns and

malfunctions be included.

Subject to regulation at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(48)-this definition is not

included in ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal.

ADEQ did not adopt a definition for the

term "subject to regulation" or include

such definition as part of the NSR SIP

submittal, presumably because the

federal definition of the term contains

the requirements of the Greenhouse Gas

(GHG) Tailoring Rule, and GHGs cannot

be regulated under Arizona state law.17

We note, however, that while the GHG

program requirements are contained as

part of the definition of the term

"subject to regulation," the federal

definition of this term also contains

17 ADEQ is currently subject to a Federal

Implementation Plan under the PSD program for

GHGs because ADEQ did not adopt a PSD program

for the regulation of GHGs. See 40 CFR 52.37.

ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal does not attempt to

correct this program deficiency, as regulation of

GHG emissions currently is not permitted under

State law. See A.R.S. § 49-191.

non-GHG-specific program elements for

determining when a pollutant is

"subject to regulation." As such, ADEQ

must add a definition to its PSD

regulations to address these elements of

the term "subject to regulation" in order

to obtain full program approval.

Regulated NSR pollutant at 40 CFR

51.166(b)(49)-ADEQ's regulatory

definition at R18-2-101(122) does not

include the final two sentences of 40

CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a)or the language at

40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(iv); ADEQ's

definition also includes an incorrect

cross-reference to hazardous air

pollutants listed under R18-2-1101 that

is not consistent with the requirements

in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(v); and ADEQ's

regulatory definition needs to update

the July 1, 2010 date in the crossreference to CAA section 108.

8. PM 2.

5 Significant Monitoring

Concentration

On January 22, 2013, the U.S. DC

Circuit Court of Appeals in Sierra Club

v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, vacated the parts

of two federal PSD rules (40 CFR

51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 40 CFR

52.21(i)(5)(i)(c)) establishing a PM 2.5

significant monitoring concentration

(SMC), finding that EPA was precluded

from using the PM 2.5 SMC to exempt

permit applicants from the statutory

requirement to compile and submit

preconstruction monitoring data as part

of a complete PSD application. On

December 9, 2013, revisions to 40 CFR

51.166 and 52.21 were published in the

Federal Register to remove these

vacated rule elements, effective as of

that date. See 78 FR 73698.

ADEQ's submittal at R18-2-

407(H)(1)(c) contains the equivalent of

the PM 2.5 SMC that was vacated by the

Court of Appeals and which has been

removed from the federal PSD

regulations. As the Court of Appeals

found application of this SMC

impermissible, and because ADEQ's

regulation incorporating this SMC is a

separable portion of ADEQ's PSD

program, we are proposing a partial

disapproval of ADEQ's submitted PSD

program, to disapprove R18-2-

407(H)(1)(c).

9. Definition for Basic Design Parameter

ADEQ's submittal contains a

definition for basic design parameter at

R18-2-401(3) that reflects the definition

that EPA originally developed as part of

its Equipment Replacement Provisions.

See 68 FR 61248 Oct. 27, 2003.

However, the definition for basic design

parameter, and other elements related to

the Equipment Replacement Provisions,

were vacated by the DC Circuit Court of

Appeals in State of New York v. EPA,

14054
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

443 F.3d 880 (D.C. Cir. 2006). While the

federal PSD regulations still contain a

reference to "basic design parameter,"

this term is no longer specifically

defined under the federal PSD

regulations, and application of the

definition contained in the Equipment

Replacement Provisions that were

vacated by the Court of Appeals is

inconsistent with federal PSD

requirements. As the Court of Appeals

found this Equipment Replacement

Provisions and, therefore, this

definition, impermissible, and because

ADEQ's regulation incorporating this

definition is a separable portion of

ADEQ's PSD program, we are proposing

a partial disapproval of ADEQ's

submitted PSD program, to disapprove

R18-2-401(3).

D. Do the rules meet the evaluation

criteria for Nonattainment New Source

Review?

Part D of title I of the Act contains the

general requirements for areas

designated "nonattainment" for the

NAAQS, including preconstruction

permit requirements for new major

sources or major modifications

proposing to construct in such

nonattainment areas, commonly referred

to as "Nonattainment New Source

Review" or "NA-NSR." EPA's

regulations for NA-NSR permit

programs are found in 40 CFR 51.165.

Most areas under ADEQ's jurisdiction

are currently designated as "attainment"

or "unclassifiable/attainment" for all

NAAQS pollutants. However, there are

some areas under ADEQ's jurisdiction

that are nonattainment and warrant a

NA-NSR program. See 40 CFR 81.303.

R18-2-402 through 405 contain the

substantive NA-NSR requirements for

review and permitting of major sources

and major modifications in

nonattainment areas under ADEQ

jurisdiction in Arizona. These

regulations satisfy most of the statutory

and regulatory requirements for NANSR permit programs, but these rules

contain several deficiencies that that do

not allow us to fully approve the NANSR program submittal that is the

subject of this action, as discussed

below.

Although ADEQ's NA-NSR program

submittal meets most NA-NSR program

requirements, we are proposing to

disapprove one specific aspect of

ADEQ's NA-NSR program relating to

the definition of "basic design

parameter." The ADEQ rule provision

that we are proposing to disapprove is

directly comparable to a federal NANSR rule provision that has been

vacated by a federal court, and we find

that it is separable from the remainder

of ADEQ's NA-NSR program.

Accordingly, we find this provision

suitable for disapproval at this time.

This issue is described in more detail

below in Section II.D.4.

For most of the remainder of ADEQ's

NA-NSR program submittal, we are

proposing limited approval and limited

disapproval. We find that approval of

ADEQ's updated NA-NSR program,

aside from the aspect that is separable

and is proposed for disapproval as

mentioned above, will substantially

strengthen the SIP overall, particularly

as the current SIP-approved NA-NSR

program is significantly out of date

when compared with current federal

NA-NSR regulatory requirements as

well as current State regulations. See

our discussion in Section G below.

However, specific provisions of the NANSR SIP program submittal are

inconsistent with NA-NSR program

requirements, and these deficiencies

must be addressed before we can fully

approve ADEQ's NA-NSR program into

the SIP. The deficiencies that we have

identified with ADEQ's NA-NSR

program that provide the basis for our

limited approval and limited

disapproval are described immediately

below in Sections II.D.1 through 3.18

1. General Nonattainment NSR Program

Requirements

First, as discussed above with respect

to ADEQ's PSD program submittal,

ADEQ's NA-NSR program submittal

often refers to Articles 9 and/or 11 of

ADEQ's regulations where the federal

regulations refer to 40 CFR parts 60, 61,

or 63; or, similarly, sections 111 or 112

of the Act. See R18-2-101(122)(b); R18-

2-401(10); R18-2-402(G)(2); and R18-

2-406(A)(4). Articles 9 and 11 are where

ADEQ incorporates by reference the

federal regulations in 40 CFR parts 60,

61, and 63 (which EPA implements

under sections 111 and 112 of the Act).

However, these Articles are not in the

SIP, have not been submitted for SIP

approval, and do not necessarily contain

provisions equivalent to all of the

subparts in parts 60, 61, and 63. See 40

CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xiii)-lowest

achievable emission rate,

(a)(1)(xxxvii)-regulated NSR pollutant,

and (a)(1)(xl)-best available control

technology.

Second, the nonattainment NSR

program requirements at 40 CFR

18 For one other aspect of ADEQ's NA-NSR SIP

submittal, we are proposing limited approval at this

time. We cannot determine at this time whether

ADEQ's NA-NSR SIP submittal adequately

addresses all of elements necessary to satisfy the

CAA's title I, part D, subpart 4 requirements

regarding NSR permitting of PM2 .5 and PM1 0

precursors under CAA section 189(e). This issue is

discussed in detail in Section II.D.5 below.

51.165(a)(2) require each plan to have a

preconstruction review program to

satisfy the requirements of sections

172(c) and 173 of the Act. However, as

previously discussed in this preamble,

ADEQ's submittal allows a source at

R18-2-302(G) and R18-2-402(C) to

begin actual construction upon the

issuance of a proposed final permit.

ADEQ's program is ambiguous as to

whether a proposed final permit, as

defined in R18-2-101(114), constitutes

final action by the Director. While

ADEQ has issued guidance clarifying

that it treats "proposed final permits" as

final actions for purposes of

preconstruction permitting, 19 to obtain

full NA-NSR program approval, ADEQ's

regulations must make clear that a

source may not begin actual

construction before a final

determination on an NA-NSR permit

application is made by the Director.

Third, 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(G)

requires that credit for emission

reductions can be claimed only to the

extent that the reviewing authority has

not relied on it in issuing any permit

under regulations approved pursuant to

40 CFR 51 subpart I or the State has not

relied on it in demonstration of

attainment or reasonable further

progress. ADEQ's NSR submittal

generally addresses this requirement at

R18-2-404(H), but also needs to include

references to rules R18-2-302.01 and

R18-2-334, which are to be approved as

part of ADEQ's NSR regulations under

Subpart I.

Fourth, ADEQ's submittal contains an

apparent typographical error in R18-2-

402(F)(1)(c), which includes a crossreference to R18-2-401(20)(b)(iii) rather

than R18-2-401(20)(b)(iv). This error

must be corrected to ensure that the

requirement in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(6)(i)(c)

for owners and operators to document

and maintain a record of certain

applicability-related information is

satisfied.

Fifth, ADEQ's submittal does not

require owners or operators to make

information required under 40 CFR

51.165(a) (6) available for review upon

request by the Director or the general

public pursuant to the requirements in

40 CFR 70.4(b)(3)(viii) as is required by

40 CFR 51.165(a)(7).

Sixth, 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i) requires

that increases in emissions shall be

offset by reductions in emissions using

a ratio of emission decreases to emission

increases of at least 1 to 1. ADEQ's NANSR submittal contains this

requirement at R18-2-404(A), but could

19 See ADEQ Memo dated February 10, 2015

related to proposed final permits and ADEQ's

February 23, 2015 Supplement at 2.

14055
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

be interpreted as establishing the ratio

as increases to decreases, instead of

decreases to increases -"emission

increases shall be offset by emission

decreases at a ratio of at least 1 to 1."

In addition, R18-2-404(A) refers to

additional offset requirements in R18-

2-405, but does not refer to the offset

requirement in R18-2-404(J).

Seventh, 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11)

requires emission offsets to be obtained

for the same regulated NSR pollutant,

unless interprecursor offsetting is

permitted for a particular pollutant, as

further specified in the rule. ADEQ's

NA-NSR SIP submittal does not address

interprecursor offsets, and it is not

required to, but the submittal does not

contain a specific requirement that

offsets must be for the same regulated

pollutant.

Eighth, 40 CFR 51.165(b) requires that

ADEQ have a preconstruction program

that satisfies the requirements of section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act for any new

major stationary source or major

modification that would locate in an

attainment area, but would cause or

contribute to a violation of a NAAQS in

any adjacent area. ADEQ's program

contains provisions for 40 CFR

51.165(b) at R18-2-406(A)(5)(a)-(b) that

generally meet this requirement.

However, ADEQ's regulations at R18-2-

406(A)(5)(b) refer to the "Arizona

primary or secondary ambient air

quality standards," which is not a

defined term, whereas the analogous

federal program provisions refer to the

NAAQS. As a result, ADEQ's program

does not fully meet the requirements in

40 CFR 51.165(b)(1) and (2) as ADEQ's

regulations do not make clear which

standards are being referred to, and the

submittal does not demonstrate that

such standards would apply to areas

outside of Arizona for purposes of

ADEQ's NSR review. Similarly, ADEQ's

regulation at R18-2-406(A)(5)(a)

references the state's ambient air quality

standards in Article 2, which would not

clearly apply to areas outside of

Arizona.

Finally, Section 173(a)(4) of the Act

requires that NA-NSR permit programs

shall provide that permits to construct

and operate may be issued if "the

Administrator has not determined that

the applicable implementation plan is

not being adequately implemented for

the nonattainment area in which the

proposed source is to be constructed or

modified." However, ADEQ's program

does not contain a provision that would

prohibit the issuance of NA-NSR

permits in areas where the

Administrator has made this

determination or that requires that

ADEQ conduct a review to ensure that

this requirement is met. To obtain full

program approval, ADEQ must add a

provision to its NA-NSR program

requirements that ensures compliance

with CAA section 173(a)(4).

2. Plantwide Applicability Limits

ADEQ's rules contain provisions for

using plantwide applicability limits

(PALs) in R18-2-412. We have

identified the following deficiencies

with ADEQ's PALs provisions program

as they relate to the NA-NSR program.

First, ADEQ's provision for PALs does

not specify that modifications under a

PAL do not need approval through the

nonattainment major NSR program.

Only the PSD program is mentioned.

ADEQ's submittal does not contain a

definition for nonattainment major NSR

program (see 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxx)).

ADEQ should either add this definition

or considering referencing R18-2-403.

See 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1)(iii)(B).

Second, neither the ADEQ regulatory

provisions for PALs at R18-2-412 nor

the ADEQ regulatory definitions in R18-

2-401 that apply in the context of major

sources and major modifications contain

a definition for major emissions unit as

is required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(2)(iv).

Third, ADEQ's PAL provision for

calculating baseline emissions at R18-

2-412(B)(2) does not specify that

baseline actual emissions are to include

emissions associated not only with

operation of the unit, but also emissions

associated with startup, shutdown and

malfunction, as is required by 40 CFR

51.165(f)(3)(ii).

Fourth, ADEQ's PAL provisions at

R18-2-412(H) contain an incorrect

reference to R18-2-412(H)(4) instead of

the definition for major modification

and R18-2-412(H)(5) uses "eliminated"

where the federal regulation uses "established." See 40 CFR 51.165(f)(9).

Finally, ADEQ's program contains

incorrect cross-references in meeting the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1), as

follows: ADEQ's PAL renewal

provisions at R18-2-412(I)(1) must

contain a reference to subsection (D) of

R18-2-412 instead of (F), and R18-2-

(I)(4)(a) must reference subsection (E) of

R18-2-412.

3. Definitions

ADEQ's submittal contains definitions

applicable to the nonattainment NSR

program that do not fully meet the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1),

which requires each State plan to

contain specific definitions for the

nonattainment NSR program. Deviations

from the wording are approvable if the

State specifically demonstrates that the

submitted definition is more stringent,

or at least as stringent, in all respects as

the corresponding definition in 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1). We have carefully

reviewed the definitions used in

ADEQ's nonattainment NSR program as

compared with the federal PSD

definitions in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) and

have found that generally, ADEQ's

submittal contains the definitions

necessary to implement a NA-NSR

program. However, a number of ADEQ's

definitions do not meet the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)

because their wording deviates from the

wording in the corresponding federal

regulatory definitions in 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1) in a manner that may be

less stringent than the federal

definitions, and the State has not

demonstrated otherwise.

Stationary source at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(i)-the federal regulation at

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(i) defines this term

as "any building, structure, facility or

installation which emits or may emit a

regulated NSR pollutant," with

"regulated NSR pollutant" also being a

federally defined term at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii), whereas ADEQ's

regulation at R18-2-101(139) defines

"stationary source" as "any building,

structure, facility or installation subject

to regulation pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-

426(A) which emits or may emit any air

pollutant," with "air pollutant" being

an undefined term in ADEQ's

regulation. However, A.R.S. § 49-426(A)

provides a cross-reference to certain

exemptions from permitting identified

in A.R.S. § 49-426(B), specifically

agricultural equipment used in normal

farm operations and certain fuel burning

equipment, which do not appear to be

consistent with federal NA-NSR

definition. The federal definition of

stationary source at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(i) is very broad and does

not exclude these source categories from

the definition. We agree that it is

acceptable for ADEQ to limit its NSR

program to certain kinds of stationary

sources, as discussed in detail above

with respect to 40 CFR 51.160(e), but

the federal definition for a stationary

source in the context of the major NANSR program is not the appropriate

place for such an exclusion, as it does

not allow exclusions for certain source

categories. ADEQ must demonstrate that

its definition of stationary source is at

least as stringent as the federal

definition at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(i) in all

respects.

Major stationary source at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(iv)-language from

subparagraph 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3) not included in

the definition at R18-2-101(75); also see

comments above on definition of

14056
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

"stationary source" in 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(i).

Net emissions increase at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(vi)-The requirement of

paragraph 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(vi)(E)(3)

is not met because not all requirements

to be approved under subpart I are listed

(i.e., R18-2-302.01) in the definition at

R18-2-101(87). In addition, the

equivalent of paragraph 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(vi)(G) is not included in

ADEQ's definition at R18-2-101(87).

Significant at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(x)-

ADEQ's definition at R18-2-101(130)(b)

refers to R18-2-405 for determining

significant emissions in serious and

severe ozone nonattainment areas. The

definition for "significant" at R18-2-

405(B) does not use the term "net

emissions increase," which is a term

defined by the federal regulations at 40

CFR 51.165(a)(1)(vi).

Allowable emissions at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xi)-ADEQ's definition at

R18-2-101(13)(b) does not include the

"future compliance date" language that

is in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xi)(B) and (C)

and ADEQ has not demonstrated that its

regulatory language is at least as

stringent as the federal definition.

Federally enforceable at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xiv)-ADEQ's definition at

R18-2-101(53)(d) identifies that

requirements included in permits

pursuant to R18-2-306.01 or R18-2-

306.02 are included in the definition of

federally enforceable requirements, but

excludes those requirements that are

identified as "enforceable only by the

state." With this action, we are

approving R18-2-306.01 and R18-2-

306.02 into the SIP, making

requirements pursuant to these rules

federally enforceable. As such, ADEQ

does not have the discretion to identify

some of those requirements as only

enforceable by the state.

Regulated NSR pollutant at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)-ADEQ's definition

is missing this language from paragraph

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(C): "provided that such constituent or

precursor pollutant may only be

regulated under NSR as part of

regulation of the general pollutant" at

R18-2-101(122)(a).

Projected actual emissions at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xxviii)-ADEQ's definition

at R18-2-401(20)(b)(iii) does not

specifically require inclusion of

emissions from malfunctions in the

determination of projected actual

emissions, and exempts emissions from

a shutdown associated with a

malfunction from such determination,

while the federal definition at 40 CFR

51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(C) requires that

emissions from both shutdowns and

malfunctions be included.

4. Definition for Basic Design Parameter

ADEQ's submittal contains a

definition for basic design parameter at

R18-2-401(3) that reflects the definition

that EPA originally developed as part of

its Equipment Replacement Provisions.

See 68 FR 61248, Oct. 27, 2003.

However, the definition for basic design

parameter, and other elements related to

the Equipment Replacement Provisions,

were vacated by the DC Circuit Court of

Appeals in State of New York v. EPA,

443 F.3d 880 (D.C. Cir. 2006). While the

federal NA-NSR regulations still

contain a reference to "basic design

parameter," this term is no longer

specifically defined under the federal

NA-NSR regulations, and application of

the definition contained in the

Equipment Replacement Provisions that

were vacated by the Court of Appeals is

inconsistent with federal NA-NSR

requirements. As the Court of Appeals

found this Equipment Replacement

Provisions and, therefore, this

definition, impermissible, and because

ADEQ's regulation incorporating this

definition is a separable portion of

ADEQ's NA-NSR program, we are

proposing a partial disapproval of

ADEQ's submitted NA-NSR program, to

disapprove R18-2-401(3).

5. Additional Provisions for Particulate

Matter Nonattainment Areas

On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the District of Columbia

Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense

Council v. EPA,20 issued a decision that

remanded the EPA's 2007 and 2008

rules implementing the 1997 PM 2.5

NAAQS. EPA's 2008 implementation

rule addressed by the court decision,

"Implementation of New Source Review

(NSR) Program for Particulate Matter

Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM 2.

5)" (the

2008 NSR PM 2.5 Rule),21 promulgated

NSR requirements for implementation

of PM 2.5 in both nonattainment areas

(under the NA-NSR program) and

attainment/unclassifiable areas (under

the PSD program). The Court of Appeals

found that EPA erred in implementing

the PM 2.5 NAAQS in these rules for

nonattainment areas solely pursuant to

the general implementation provisions

of subpart 1 of part D of title I of the

CAA, rather than pursuant to the

additional implementation provisions

specific to particulate matter

nonattainment areas in subpart 4. The

Court of Appeals ordered the EPA to

"repromulgate these rules pursuant to

Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion."

706 F.3d at 437. Although the Court of

20706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Chi. 2013).

2173 FR 28321 May 16, 2008.

Appeals declined to establish a deadline

for EPA's response to the remand, EPA

intends to promulgate new generally

applicable implementation regulations

for the PM 2.5 NAAQS in accordance

with the requirements of subpart 4. In

the interim, however, states and EPA

still need to proceed with

implementation of the PM 2.5 NAAQS in

a timely and effective fashion in order

to meet statutory obligations under the

CAA and to assure the protection of

public health intended by those

NAAQS.

ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal generally

includes requirements for the PM 2.5

NA-NSR program consistent with the

provisions promulgated in the 2008

NSR PM 2 .

5 Rule. Specifically, ADEQ's

NSR SIP submittal includes the PM 2.5

significant emission rates at R18-2-

101(130), regulation of certain PM 2 .

5

precursors (S0 2 and NOx) at R18-2-

101(130), the regulation of PM 1o and

PM 2 .5 condensable emissions at R18-2-

101(122)(f), and the emissions offset

requirements at R18-2-403(A)(3).

Separate and aside from the issues

identified above that have resulted in

our proposing limited approval and

limited disapproval of ADEQ's NA-NSR

submittal, EPA has determined that it is

not prepared at this time to grant full

approval to ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal

as to the PM 2 .

5 NA-NSR program

requirements, in light of the Court's

remand of the 2008 NSR PM2 .5 Rule, and

for the reasons explained below.

EPA is in the process of evaluating the

requirements of subpart 4 as they

pertain to NA-NSR. In particular,

subpart 4 includes section 189(e) of the

CAA, which requires the control of

major stationary sources of PM1o

precursors (and hence under the court

decision, PM 2 .

5 precursors) "except

where the Administrator determines

that such sources do not contribute

significantly to PM-10 levels which

exceed the standard in the area."

Although ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal

does include regulation of S0 2 and NOx

as PM 2 .

5 precursors, it does not include

the regulation of VOCs or ammonia. Nor

does the NSR SIP submittal include a

demonstration as to whether or not the

regulation of VOCs or ammonia is

necessary under section 189(e). The

evaluation of which precursors need to

be controlled to achieve the standard in

a particular area is typically conducted

in the context of the state's preparing

and the EPA's reviewing an area's

attainment plan SIP. In this case, there

are two designated PM 2 .

5 nonattainment

areas in Arizona, the Nogales (portion of

Santa Cruz County, AZ) and West

Central Pinal (portion of Pinal County,

AZ) areas. Both are designated

14057
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

nonattainment for the 2006 annual

PM 2.5 NAAQS. However, on January 7,

2013 and September 4, 2013, EPA

finalized determinations of attainment

for these areas, respectively (78 FR 887

and 78 FR 54394), which suspended the

requirement for the state to submit,

among other things, an attainment plan

SIP for the area. 22 Accordingly, PM 2.5

attainment plans for SIP approval are

not currently before Region 9 for these

areas. As Region 9 does not have before

it the state's analysis as to which

precursors need to be controlled in

these areas pursuant to section 189(e) of

the Act, as would be generally

contained in an attainment plan SIP, it

cannot fully approve as complying with

the CAA a nonattainment NSR SIP that

only addresses a subset of the scientific

PM 2.5 precursors recognized by EPA.

On the other hand, while ADEQ's

submittal may not yet contain all of the

elements necessary to satisfy the CAA

requirements when evaluated under

subpart 4, the NA-NSR SIP submittal

represents a considerable strengthening

of the currently approved Arizona SIP,

which does not address NSR permitting

for PM 2.

5 at all. Therefore, EPA is

proposing to grant limited approval to

the PM 2.

5 NA-NSR provisions in

ADEQ's NSR submittal for the Nogales

and West Central Pinal PM2.5

nonattainment areas.

For the reasons explained above, EPA

is not evaluating at this time whether

ADEQ's NA-NSR submittal will require

additional revisions relating to PM 2.

5 to

satisfy the subpart 4 requirements. Once

EPA re-promulgates the Federal PM 2.

5

regulations with respect to NA-NSR

permitting in response to the Court's

remand, EPA will consider whether a

limited disapproval should also be

proposed for ADEQ's PM 2.

5 NA-NSR

program based on this issue.

In addition, section 189(e) of the CAA

requires that ADEQ's NSR program for

PM10 nonattainment areas apply to

major stationary sources of PM1o

precursors, except where the

Administrator determines that such

sources do not contribute significantly

to PM1 o levels which exceed the

standard in the area. As discussed

below, we have identified one area

under ADEQ's jurisdiction, the West

Pinal PM10 nonattainment area, for

which we are proposing a limited

approval with respect to PM1 o under

section 189(e) of the Act.

On September 4, 2013, the West Pinal

area was redesignated to nonattainment

for the 1987 p.m.10 standard. ADEQ's

22 Prior to the Court's decision, EPA would not

have reviewed PM 2 .5 attainment plan submittals for

compliance with Section 189.

NSR SIP submittal generally includes

NA-NSR requirements for PM10

nonattainment areas such as the PM10

significant emission rate at R18-2-

101(130), the regulation of PM10 and

PM 2.

5 condensable emissions at R18-2-

101(122)(f), and the emissions offset

requirements at R18-2-403(A)(3).

However, separate and aside from the

issues identified above that have

resulted in our proposing limited

approval and limited disapproval of

ADEQ's NA-NSR submittal, EPA has

determined that it is not prepared at this

time to grant full approval to ADEQ's

NSR SIP submittal as to the PM10

nonattainment NSR program

requirements for the West Pinal

nonattainment area. The evaluation of

which precursors need to be controlled

to achieve the standard in a particular

area is typically conducted in the

context of the state's preparing and the

EPA's reviewing of an area's attainment

plan SIP. On February 19, 2014, ADEQ

withdrew from EPA's consideration the

Arizona State Implementation Plan

Revision for the West Pinal County PM1 o

Nonattainment Area (submitted on

December 30, 2013). Accordingly, a

PM10 attainment plan for West Pinal is

not currently before Region 9. As such,

Region 9 does not have before it the

state's analysis as to which precursors

need to be controlled in this area

pursuant to section 189(e) of the Act, as

would be generally contained in an

attainment plan SIP, and cannot fully

approve as complying with the CAA a

nonattainment NSR SIP that does not

address scientific PM1o precursors

recognized by EPA.

While ADEQ's submittal may not yet

contain all of the elements necessary to

satisfy the CAA NA-NSR requirements

when evaluated under subpart 4, the

proposed revisions to ADEQ's NA-NSR

program represent a considerable

strengthening of the currently approved

Arizona SIP, which does not address

NSR requirements for PM1 o at all.

Therefore, EPA is proposing to grant

limited approval to the PM10 NA-NSR

provisions in ADEQ's NSR submittal as

they apply to the West Pinal

nonattainment area. Once ADEQ

submits a new PMo attainment plan for

this area, EPA will consider whether a

limited disapproval should also be

proposed based on this issue.

E. Review of Non-NSR Related Rules

and Statutory Provisions

In addition to ADEQ's NSR SIP

submittal, we are taking action on rules

R18-2-311 and R18-2-312. These rules

were submitted to EPA for SIP approval

in a separate submittal on July 28, 2011.

We delayed acting on rules R18-2-311

and R18-2-312 in a previous action,

and are therefore now evaluating and

taking action on the rules. We are also

taking action on A.R.S. § 49-107, an

Arizona statutory provision concerning

local delegation of state authority.

First, ADEQ's rule R18-2-311

specifies the test methods and

procedures which can be used to

determine compliance with

requirements established under ADEQ's

air program. On October 19, 1984, EPA

approved an earlier version of this rule

into the SIP.23 See 49 FR 41026. The

current submittal, adopted effective

November 15, 1993, renumbers the

earlier rule and expands on the previous

version by listing additional test

methods that may be used to determine

compliance. While the current rule

improves on the earlier version, we

cannot recommend it for full approval

into the SIP. We are proposing a limited

disapproval because Section D of the

rule allows the State to approve

alternatives to the applicable SIP

without EPA approval, in conflict with

the requirements of CAA sections

110(a)(2)(A) and 110(i).24

Second, ADEQ's rule R18-2-312

requires stationary sources to conduct a

performance test within 60 days of

achieving the capability to operate at its

maximum production rate, but no later

than 180 days after initial start-up. The

rule also specifies that testing shall be

conducted under such conditions

specified by State, including, but not

limited to appropriate test methods,

notification to the State, data reduction,

records, and number of test runs. On

April 23, 1982 (47 FR 17485) EPA

approved a version of this rule into the

SIP.25 The current submittal, adopted

effective November 15, 1993, renumbers

the earlier rule and expands on the

previous version by including

conditions when a test may be stopped

and allows compliance to be determined

with continuous emission monitoring as

long as the applicable quality assurance

procedures are followed. While the

current rule improves on the earlier

version, we cannot recommend it for

full approval into the SIP. We are

proposing a limited disapproval because

Section B of the rule allows the State to

approve the use of equivalent and

alternative test methods without EPA

approval, in conflict with CAA sections

110(a)(2)(A) and 110(i).26

23 The rule was previously numbered R9-3-310.

24 See, e.g., "Guidance Document for Correcting

VOC Rule Deficiencies," U.S. EPA Region 9, April

1991, revised August 21, 2001 (Little Bluebook).

25 The rule was previously numbered R9-3-312.

26 See, e.g., Little Bluebook.

14058
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

Third, A.R.S. § 49-107 is the current

Arizona state law that provides ADEQ

with authority to "delegate to a local

environmental agency, county health

department, public health services

district or municipality any functions,

powers or duties which the director

believes can be competently, efficiently

and properly performed by the local

agency if the local agency accepts the

delegation and agrees to perform the

delegated functions, powers and duties

according to the standards of

performance required by law and

prescribed by the director," and other

related authorities. This statutory

provision establishes that ADEQ has

clear authority to delegate various

functions under the CAA, including

NSR permitting, to county and other

local government agencies and, as such,

we find it to be approvable and propose

to approve it into the SIP. This

provision will replace 7-1-8.3(R9-3-

803)-Delegation of Authority, an older

ADEQ currently in the SIP, which we

are proposing to remove from the SIP as

part of this action.

F. Review of Rules and Statutory

Provisions Requested To Be Removed

From the SIP

In Table 2 of this preamble we

identify the rules and statutory

provisions we are proposing to remove

or supersede from the SIP as part of this

action. ADEQ's existing SIP-approved

NSR rules are generally outdated, as we

have not acted to approve substantial

revisions to ADEQ's NSR rules since the

1980s. Further, the ADEQ NSR rules

currently in the SIP have been repealed

for purposes of State law by ADEQ.

Significant changes have been made to

the Act and the underlying

implementing federal NSR regulations

since our last substantial action on

ADEQ's NSR SIP. Therefore, replacing

the existing, outdated NSR SIP rules

with the updated ADEQ rules in this

submittal that we propose to approve

into the SIP is appropriate and generally

serves as an overall strengthening of

Arizona's SIP. In some cases, we

approved updated versions of these

rules into the SIP in previous

rulemaking actions, and a few of the

rules proposed for removal are no longer

necessary for other reasons. Our TSD

provides additional detail.

G. Do the rules meet the evaluation

criteria under Section 110() and 193 of

the Act?

CAA Section 110(1) states: "Each

revision to an implementation plan

submitted by a State under this chapter

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 7501 of this title), or any

other applicable requirement of this

chapter."

With respect to the procedural

requirements of CAA section 110(1),

based on our review of the public

process documentation included in the

July 28, 2011, October 29, 2012 and July

2, 2014 submittals, we find that ADEQ

has provided sufficient evidence of

public notice and opportunity for

comment and public hearings prior to

submittal of this SIP revision and has

satisfied these procedural requirements

under CAA section 110(1).

With respect to the substantive

requirements of section 110(1), as

discussed further below, we have

determined that our approval of the

ADEQ NSR SIP Submittal and the other

rules and statutory provisions that we

are proposing to act on in this action

(including but not limited to the

rescission of numerous existing NSR SIP

rules), as described above in this

preamble, would strengthen the

applicable SIP in most respects. Taken

in its entirety, we find that the SIP

revision represents a strengthening of

ADEQ's minor NSR, PSD, and NA-NSR

programs as compared to the existing

SIP-approved NSR program for ADEQ

that was last substantially revised in the

SIP in the early 1980s, and that our

approval of this SIP submittal would not

interfere with any applicable

requirement concerning attainment and

reasonable further progress (RFP) or any

other applicable requirement of the Act.

First, this proposed action would

correct a number of deficiencies in

ADEQ's current SIP-approved NSR

program. ADEQ's existing SIP-approved

program does not currently contain

these significant program elements: (1)

Implementation of NSR requirements

for PM10 ; (2) implementation of NSR

requirements for PM 2.

5; (3) regulation of

NOx as a precursor to ozone; (4)

inclusion of condensable particular

matter in NSR permitting for

determining PM10 and PM 2.5 emissions;

and (5) ensuring that the construction or

modification of certain non-major

sources and non-major modifications

will (1) not interfere with attainment or

maintenance of the NAAQS and (2)

comply with the applicable SIP.

Further, ADEQ has also updated its

program to provide for additional

permitting flexibilities that have been

added to the federal NSR program, such

as PALs and the 2002 NSR Reforms.

Second, most of the deficiencies

identified with the ADEQ rule

provisions on which we are taking

action fit into one of two categories: (1)

Deficiencies that relate to an NSR

program element that has been added

since ADEQ's NSR program was

approved into the SIP (e.g., the

deficiency related to the omission of the

definition for major emissions unit in

the PALs provisions), or (2) deficiencies

that exist in the current SIP that were

not identified as deficiencies when the

provisions were approved into the SIP

(e.g., ensuring protection of the NAAQS

in areas outside of Arizona from

stationary source emissions regulated

under the NSR program). Therefore, in

considering whether our proposed

approval of the NSR SIP submittal will

interfere with attainment or reasonable

further progress, we only consider those

deficiencies in the first category, as the

deficiencies in the second category are

already a part of the current applicable

requirements for attainment and RFP in

the Arizona SIP. In many cases, the

deficiencies in the second category

occurred because of the numerous

changes to the NSR program since

ADEQ's NSR rules were last approved

into the SIP. That is, language that may

have been approvable previously is no

longer approvable.

The most significant deficiency that

we have identified, as discussed in

detail above in this notice, is the

absence of provisions that ensure

protection of the 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS for

the PSD program. This deficiency is the

most likely to affect the substantive

requirements of the overall application

of the PSD program, compared to other

deficiencies that we do not expect

would significantly affect the review of

emission impacts (e.g., administrative

requirements for permit issuance).

However, the 2012 PM 2.

5 NAAQS came

into effect after ADEQ submitted the

NSR SIP submittal to EPA. In addition,

although such standard is currently

applicable in the context of the PSD

program, the implementation

requirements for this standard are not

due until 2016. Accordingly, there are

no applicable requirements in the

existing ADEQ SIP-approved NSR

program related to this NAAQS that

would be affected by the deficiencies in

the submitted NSR rules we are

approving.

In addition, ADEQ has relaxed its

definition of "major stationary source."

ADEQ's previous definition applied the

PSD and NA-NSR program

requirements to existing non-major

sources when a project would cause

such a stationary source to become a "major stationary source." ADEQ

14059
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

revised its program to instead subject

existing non-major sources to the major

NSR program only if the project

constitutes a "major stationary source"

in and of itself, consistent with federal

NSR program requirements. We do not

find this relaxation to interfere with

attainment or reasonable further

progress because ADEQ is also

strengthening its minor NSR program to

address emissions from larger

modifications that do not qualify as

major modifications under ADEQ's

revised NSR program. While these

modifications would no longer be

subject to the major NSR program,

ADEQ's minor NSR program would

nonetheless apply and ensure the

modification does not interfere with

attainment or RFP.

In summary, we find that, on balance,

the improvements ADEQ is making to

its NSR program and other portions of

the SIP that are the subject of this

section outweigh the deficiencies

discussed above as compared to ADEQ's

existing SIP-approved NSR program. In

addition, we are unaware of any

reliance by ADEQ on the continuation

of any specific aspect of the permitrelated rules currently in the ADEQ

portion of the Arizona SIP for the

purpose of continued attainment or

maintenance of the NAAQS. Given all

these considerations, we propose to

conclude that our approval of the ADEQ

regulations and statute that are the

subject of this action into the Arizona

SIP would not interfere with any

applicable requirement concerning

attainment and RFP or any other

applicable requirement of the Act. 27

Conclusion. For the reasons set forth

above, we can approve the ADEQ SIP

revision as proposed in this action

under section 110(1) of the Act.

Section 193 of the Act, which was

added by the CAA Amendments of

1990, includes a savings clause that

provides, in pertinent part: "No control

requirement in effect, or required to be

adopted by an order, settlement

agreement, or plan in effect before

November 15, 1990, in any area which

is a nonattainment area for any air

pollutant may be modified after

27 Our analysis and conclusion here also apply to

our approval of R18-2-311 and R18-2-312, which

are not generally related to NSR permitting. We

note that these rules do not contain any substantive

changes in the procedures for performance tests or

test methods as compared with the analogous rules

in the current SIP. Similarly, our analysis and

conclusion here also extends to our approval of

A.R.S. § 49-107 into the SIP. The provisions in this

state statute relate specifically to local delegation of

state authority and thus would not interfere with

any applicable requirement concerning attainment

and RFP or any other applicable requirement of the

Act.

November 15, 1990, in any manner

unless the modification insures

equivalent or greater emission

reductions of such air pollutant."

We find that the provisions included

in ADEQ's NSR SIP submittal would

ensure equivalent or greater emission

reductions compared to the SIPapproved NSR program in the

nonattainment areas under ADEQ's

jurisdiction. In particular, the NSR

provisions in ADEQ's NSR SIP

submittal cover stationary sources in

areas that are nonattainment for the

PM10, PM 2.

5 and 1-hr SO 2 NAAQS.

ADEQ's current SIP-approved NSR

program was approved prior to EPA

establishing these NAAQS and the

current NSR provisions in the SIP do

not reference the current, recently SIPapproved Arizona air quality standards

that are comparable to these NAAQS. In

addition, ADEQ's updated NSR rules

and our action to approve them into the

SIP will expand ADEQ's review of

minor sources in nonattainment areas to

require review of smaller sources. We

therefore conclude that ADEQ's NSR

SIP submittal will provide for

equivalent or greater emissions

reductions as compared to the existing

SIP-approved ADEQ NSR program for

the nonattainment pollutants PM10,

PM 2.

5 and SO2.

Conclusion. For the reasons set forth

above, we can approve the submitted

NSR program under section 193 of the

Act.

H. Conclusion

For the reasons stated above and

explained further in our TSD, we find

that the submitted NSR rules satisfy

most of the applicable CAA and

regulatory requirements for minor NSR,

PSD, and nonattainment NSR permit

programs under CAA section

110(a)(2)(C) and parts C and D of title I

of the Act but also contain certain

deficiencies that prevent us from

proposing a full approval of the NSR SIP

submittal. Therefore, we are proposing a

limited approval and limited

disapproval of the submitted NSR rules.

We do so based also on our finding that,

while the rules do not meet all of the

applicable requirements, the rules

would represent an overall

strengthening of the SIP by clarifying

and enhancing the NSR permitting

requirements for major and minor

stationary sources under ADEQ's

jurisdiction in Arizona. In addition, we

are also proposing to remove the

existing statutes and rules listed in

Table 2 from the SIP, which are

outdated and mostly being superseded

by our proposed action. As discussed

above, we are proposing a partial

disapproval of two elements of ADEQ's

program, which have been vacated from

the PSD program (and is one case also

from the NA-NSR program) by the

courts. We are also proposing a limited

approval of ADEQ's nonattainment NSR

program for the Nogales and West

Central Pinal PM 2.5 nonattainment areas

and the West Pinal PM1o nonattainment

area under section 189(e) of the Act.

Finally, we are proposing a limited

approval and limited disapproval of two

ADEQ rules relating to test methods and

procedures and performance tests, and

proposing to approve into the SIP an

Arizona statutory provision relating to

local delegation of state authority.

III. Public Comment and Proposed

Action

Pursuant to section 110(k) of the CAA

and for the reasons provided above, EPA

is proposing a limited approval and

limited disapproval of revisions to the

ADEQ portion of the Arizona SIP that

govern preconstruction review and the

issuance of preconstruction permits for

stationary sources, including the review

and permitting of major sources and

major modifications under parts C and

D of title I of the CAA. Specifically, EPA

is proposing a limited approval and

limited disapproval of the new and

amended ADEQ regulations listed in

Table 1, above, as a revision to the

ADEQ portion of the Arizona SIP. We

are also proposing to remove the

existing statutes and rules listed in

Table 2 from the SIP, which are

outdated and mostly being superseded

by our proposed action. In addition, we

are also proposing to partially

disapprove two provisions of ADEQ's

NSR program that have been vacated by

the courts. We are proposing a limited

approval of ADEQ's nonattainment NSR

program in certain nonattainment areas

under section 189 of the Act related to

PM10 and PM 2.5 precursors. Finally, we

are proposing a limited approval and

limited disapproval of two ADEQ rules

relating to test methods and procedures

and performance tests, and proposing to

approve into the SIP an Arizona

statutory provision relating to local

delegation of state authority.

EPA is proposing this action because,

although we find that the new and

amended rules meet most of the

applicable requirements for such permit

programs and that the SIP revisions

improve the existing SIP, we have found

certain deficiencies that prevent full

approval, as explained further in this

preamble and in the TSD for this

rulemaking. The intended effect of our

proposed limited approval and limited

disapproval action is to update the

applicable SIP with current ADEQ

14060
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

regulations and to set the stage for

remedying deficiencies in these

regulations.

If finalized as proposed, our limited

disapproval action would trigger an

obligation on EPA to promulgate a

Federal Implementation Plan unless the

State of Arizona corrects the

deficiencies, and EPA approves the

related plan revisions, within two years

of the final action. Additionally, for

those deficiencies that relate to the

Nonattainment NSR requirements under

part D of title I of the Act, the offset

sanction in CAA section 179(b)(2)

would apply in the ADEQ

nonattainment areas 18 months after the

effective date of a final limited

disapproval, and the highway funding

sanctions in CAA section 179(b)(1)

would apply in these areas six months

after the offset sanction is imposed.

Neither sanction will be imposed under

the CAA if Arizona submits and we

approve, prior to the implementation of

the sanctions, SIP revisions that correct

the deficiencies that we identify in our

final action. The EPA intends to work

with ADEQ to correct the deficiencies

identified in this action in a timely

manner.

We will accept comments from the

public on this proposed action 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 ADEQ rules and Arizona statutory

provisions listed in Table 1 of this

preamble. The EPA has made, and will

continue to make, these documents

generally available electronically

through www.regulations.gov and/or in

hard copy at the appropriate EPA office

(see the ADDRESSES section of this

preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory

Planning and Review and Executive

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and

Regulatory Review

This proposed action is not a "significant regulatory action" under

the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58

FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is

therefore not subject to review under

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76

FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements unless the

agency certifies that the rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses,

small not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions.

This rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because SIP approvals or

disapprovals under section 110 and

subchapter I of the Clean Air Act do not

create any new requirements but simply

approve or disapprove requirements

that the State is already imposing.

Therefore, because EPA's proposed

limited approval/limited disapproval

does not create any new requirements,

I certify that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of State action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.

1531-1538, requires Federal agencies,

unless otherwise prohibited by law, to

assess the effects of their regulatory

actions on State, local, and tribal

governments and the private sector.

Federal agencies must also develop a

plan to provide notice to small

governments that might be significantly

or uniquely affected by any regulatory

requirements. The plan must enable

officials of affected small governments

to have meaningful and timely input in

the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal

intergovernmental mandates and must

inform, educate, and advise small

governments on compliance with the

regulatory requirements.

This proposed rule does not include

a Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more

to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector in any one year. Thus,

this rule is not subject to the

requirements of section 202 or 205 of

UMRA. This Federal action proposes to

approve and disapprove pre-existing

requirements under State or local law,

and imposes no new requirements.

This proposed rule is also not subject

to the requirements of section 203 of

UMRA because it contains no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or

uniquely affect small governments. This

proposed rule does not impose

regulatory requirements on any

government entity.

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 in the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132. In the spirit of

Executive Order 13132, and consistent

with EPA policy to promote

communications between EPA and State

and local governments, EPA specifically

solicits comment on this proposed

action from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination

With Indian Tribal Governments

Under Executive Order 13175 (65 FR

67249, November 9, 2000), EPA may not

issue a regulation that has tribal

implications, that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs, and that is not

required by statute, unless the federal

government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by tribal governments, or

EPA consults with tribal officials early

in the process of developing the

proposed regulation and develops a

tribal summary impact statement.

This proposed rule does not have

tribal implications, as specified in

Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive

Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

EPA specifically solicits additional

comment on this proposed rule from

tribal officials. The SIP is not approved

to apply on any Indian reservation land

or in any other area where EPA or an

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of

Indian country, the rule does not have

tribal implications and will not impose

substantial direct costs on tribal

governments or preempt tribal law as

specified by Executive Order 13175.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of

Children From Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as

14061
Federal Register/Vol. 80, No. 52/Wednesday, March 18, 2015/Proposed Rules

applying only to those regulatory

actions that concern health or safety

risks, such that the analysis required

under section 5-501 of the Executive

Order has the potential to influence the

regulation. This rule is not subject to

Executive Order 13045, because it

proposes to approve a State rule

implementing a Federal standard.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use

This rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13211, "Actions Concerning

Regulations That Significantly Affect

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use" (66

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is

not a significant regulatory action under

Executive Order 12866.

L National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-

113, 12 (10) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs

EPA to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS) in its regulatory

activities unless to do so would be

inconsistent with applicable law or

otherwise impractical. VCS are

technical standards (e.g., materials

specifications, test methods, sampling

procedures, and business practices) that

are developed or adopted by the VCS

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to

provide Congress, through annual

reports to OMB, with explanations

when the Agency decides not to use

available and applicable VCS. EPA

believes that VCS are inapplicable to

this action. Today's action does not

require the public to perform activities

conducive to the use of VCS.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal

Actions To Address Environmental

Justice in Minority Populations and

Low-Income Population

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal

executive policy on environmental

justice. Its main provision directs

federal agencies, to the greatest extent

practicable and permitted by law, to

make environmental justice part of their

mission by identifying and addressing,

as appropriate, disproportionately high

and adverse human health or

environmental effects of their programs,

policies, and activities on minority

populations and low-income

populations in the United States.

EPA has determined that this

proposed rule will not have

disproportionately high and adverse

human health or environmental effects

on minority or low-income populations

because it does not change the level of

environmental protection for any

affected populations.

Dated: March 4, 2015.

Jared Blumenfeld,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doe. 2015-06143 Filed 3-17-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0123; FRL-9924-54-

Region 7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; State of

Missouri, Construction Permits

Required

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve

revisions to the State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for the State of Missouri

submitted on October 2, 2013. This

proposed rulemaking will amend the

SIP to update the construction permits

rule to incorporate by reference recent

EPA actions related to plantwide

applicability limitations (PALs) for

greenhouse gases (GHGs) and to correct

the definition of "regulated NSR

pollutant." Other revisions include

modifying the notification period for

initial equipment start-up and clarifying

de minimis permit air quality analysis

requirements.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before April 17, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,

identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-

OAR-2015-0123, by one of the

following methods:

1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the

on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

2. Email: Higbee.paula@epa.gov.

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Paula

Higbee, Environmental Protection

Agency, Air Planning and Development

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,

Lenexa, Kansas 66219.

Instructions: Direct your comments to

Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2015-

0123. EPA's policy is that all comments

received will be included in the public

docket without change and may be

made available online at

www.regulations.gov, including any

personal information provided, unless

the comment includes information

claimed to be Confidential Business

Information (CBI) or other information

whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Do not submit through

www.regulations.gov or email

information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. The

www.regulations.gov Web site is an "anonymous access" system, which

means EPA will not know your identity

or contact information unless you

provide it in the body of your comment.

If you send an email comment directly

to EPA without going through

www.regulations.gov, your email

address will be automatically captured

and included as part of the comment

that is placed in the public docket and

made available on the Internet. If you

submit an electronic comment, EPA

recommends that you include your

name and other contact information in

the body of your comment and with any

disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA

cannot read your comment due to

technical difficulties and cannot contact

you for clarification, EPA may not be

able to consider your comment.

Electronic files should avoid the use of

special characters, any form of

encryption, and be free of any defects or

viruses.

Docket: All documents in the docket

are listed in the www.regulations.gov

index. Although listed in the index,

some information is not publicly

available, i.e., CBI or other information

whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

Certain other material, such as

copyrighted material, will be publicly

available only in hard copy form.

Publicly available docket materials are

available either electronically in

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

the Environmental Protection Agency,

Air Planning and Development Branch,

11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa,

Kansas 66219. The Regional Office's

official hours of business are Monday

through Friday, 8:00 to 4:30 excluding

legal holidays. The interested persons

wanting to examine these documents

should make an appointment with the

office at least 24 hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Paula Higbee, Environmental Protection

Agency, Air Planning and Development

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,

Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7028

or by email at Higbee.paula@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document "we," "us,"

or "our" refer to EPA. This section

provides additional information by

addressing the following:

I. What is being addressed in this document?

II. Background

III. Have the requirements for approval of a

SIP revision been met?

14062