New Mexico State Implementation Plan Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(2) for the 2006 Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) NAAQS

Docket ID EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0710

Technical Support Document September 28, 2012

Table of Contents:
I. Introduction

A. Section 110(a)(1) and (2)

B. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Compone nt of PSD Programs II. Additional Background

A. What are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards?

B. What is a SIP?

C. Additional Information III. SIP elements required under Section 110(a)(2) for the 2006 fine particulate matter NAAQS, the State submittals and EPA analysis
IV. EPA’s Recommendation
V. References

I. Introduction

In this technical support document (TSD), EP A is evaluating the submittal provided by the New Mexico Environment Department (NME D) to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) fo r the 2006 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or standards) for fine particulate matte r. More detail on thes e standards, section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act, and the submittal we are reviewing to determine if the New Mexico SIP satisfies the section 110(a)(2 ) requirements is provided in s ubsection A below. Throughout this document, “we,” “us,” and “our” means EPA. Section II of the TSD provides a descripti on of each element required under section 110(a)(2) of the Act, the State’s re sponse, and our analysis of the St ate’s response. Copies of the State’s submittal are in the docket for this rulemaking.
Section III of the TSD includes our recomme ndation for action on each of the elements
reviewed herein.
Section IV of the TSD contains a list of the guidance documen ts cited herein. Copies of the guidance documents referenced ar e in the docket for this rulemaking.

A. Section 110(a)(1) and (2)

On July 18, 1997, the EPA promulgated a ne w NAAQS for ozone (published in volume 62 of the Federal Register, beginning on p. 38856, denoted 62 FR 38856) and a new standard for fine particulate matter (62 FR 38652). For ozone , EPA revised the NAAQS to provide an 8-hour averaging period (versus the 1-hou r averaging period for the 1-hour ozone standard), and set thePage 2 of 33 level of the standard to 0.08 parts per million (ppm). The 1-hour ozone NAAQS was 0.12 ppm. For particulate matter (PM), EPA promulgated a new 24-hour and new annual standard for fine PM, which applies to particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (denoted as PM 2.5 ). The annual PM 2.5 standard was set at 15 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) and the 24-hour standard was set at 65 μ g/m 3

. Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act, states are required to submit SIPs that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement (the infrastructure) of a new or revised NAAQS within three y ears following the promulgation of the NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescrib e. Section 110(a)(2) lists the specific infr astructure elements that must be incorporated into the SIPs, including for example, requirements for air pollution control measures, and monitoring th at are designed to assure atta inment and maintenance of the NAAQS. A table listing all 14 infrastructure elemen ts is included in subsection D of section I of this proposed rulemaking. Thus states were required to submit such SIPs for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than September 21, 2009. On March 4, 2004, Earthjustice submitted a not ice of intent to su e related to EPA’s failure to issue findings of failure to submit re lated to the infrastructure requirements for the
1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA entered into a c onsent decree with Earthjustice which required EPA, among other things, to co mplete a Federal Regi ster notice announcing EPA’s determinations pursuant to section 110(k)( 1)(B) of the Act as to whether each state had made complete submissions to meet the requ irements of section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by December 15, 2007. Subsequently, EP A received an extension of the date to complete this Federal Register notice until March 17, 2008, based upon agreement to make the findings with respect to submissions made by Ja nuary 7, 2008. In accordance with the consent decree, EPA made completeness findings for each state based upon what the Agency received from each state as of January 7, 2008. With regard to the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, EPA entered into a consent decree with Earthjustice which requir ed EPA, among other things, to complete a Federal Register notice announcing EPA’s determinations pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(B) of the Act as to whether each state had made comp lete submissions to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS by October 5, 2008. On October 2, 2007, we issued “Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards,” Memorandum from William T. Harn ett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS). 1 The guidance addresses the SIP elements found in 110(a)(2) with the ex ception of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110(a)(2)(I). 2 Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) addresses interstate transport, and is being addressed separately. 3 Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to the nonattainment planning re quirements of part D, Title I of the Act, and

1 This and any other guidance documents referenced in this action are in the docket for this rulemaking.

2 The guidance addresses a total of 14 infrastructure elements because the 3 components of section 110(a)(2)(J) are being counted as 3 separate elements.

3 EPA published a finding on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147) that all States had failed to submit SIPs addressing interstate transport for the 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, as required by section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). Furthermore, there is a consent decree in place for seven states in the western United States, including New Mexico, to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with regard to the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS (74 FR 64076, December 7, 2009). Under the consent de cree, for each of these seven states, EP A is required to fully approve SIPs and/or promulgate FIPs that satisfy the four “prongs” of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) by specified dates. For the 1997
ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) are being addressed separately and are not
included in the infrastructure SIPs.Page 3 of 33 is also being addressed separately. 4 The guidance states that to th e extent that existing SIPs for ozone and PM already meet these requirements, St ates need only certify that fact to EPA. On September 25, 2009, we issued “Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(l) and (2) for the 2006 24- Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),” Memorandum also from W illiam T. Harnett, Director, AQPD, OAQPS. Each of these guidance memos addresses the SIP elements found in 110(a)(2). The guidance states that, to the extent that existing SIPs alre ady meet the requirements, states need only certify
that fact to us. On June 12, 2009, the Governor of New Mexico submitted a letter certifying that NMED
has evaluated the New Mexico SIP and found that the SIP does satisfy all the requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The June 12, 2009 submittal included a table with an explanation of how the current Ne w Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. On July 15, 2011, we found that New Mexico’s current SIP met all the requirements of secti on 110(a)(2) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS (see 76 FR 41698). For detailed information concerning the background for our previous approval, please see Docket I.D. No. EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0647 for that rulemaking. On July 6, 2011, WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club filed an amended complaint
related to EPA’s failure to take action on th e SIP submittal related to the “infrastructure” requirements for the 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS. On October 20, 2011, EPA entered into a consent decree with WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club which required EPA, among other things, to complete a Federal Register notice of the Agency’s pr oposed action either approving, disapproving, or approving in part and disapproving in pa rt New Mexico’s 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS Infrastructure SIP submittal addressing the applicable requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(A)-(H), (J)-(M), and section 110(a)(2)(D )(i) interstate transport requirements, by September 30, 2012.

B. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Component of PSD Programs

EPA has recently undertaken a seri es of actions pertaining to the regulation of GHGs that, although for the most part distinct from one anothe r, establish the overall framework for today’s proposed action on the New Mexico SIP. Four of these actions include, as they are commonly called, the “Endangerment Finding” and “Cause or Contribute Finding,” which EPA issued in a single final action, 5 the “Johnson Memo Reconsideration,” 6 the “Light-Duty Vehicle Rule,” 7 and

4 Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the 3- year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating n ecessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within 3 years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. Thes e requirements are: (i) Submissions re quired by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as requ ired in part D Title I of the CAA and (ii) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonatt ainment planning requirements of part D Title I of the CAA. Therefore, this action does not cover these specific SIP elements.

5 “Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.” 74 FR 66496 (December 15, 2009).

6 “Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting Programs.” 75 FR 17004 (April 2, 2010).

7 “Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule.” 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010).Page 4 of 33 the “Tailoring Rule.” 8 Taken together and in conjunc tion with the CAA, these actions established regulatory requirements for GHGs emitt ed from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines; determined that such regula tions, when they took effect on January 2, 2011, subjected GHGs emitted from stationary sour ces to PSD requirements; and limited the applicability of PSD requiremen ts to GHG sources on a phased-in basis. EPA took this last action in the Tailoring Rule, which, more speci fically, established a ppropriate GHG emission thresholds for determining the applicability of PSD requirements to GHG-emitting sources. In December 2010, EPA followed up on these actions by issuing the “PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,” 9 in which EPA withdrew its previous approval of SIP PSD programs in 24 states, including New Mexico, that apply to GHG-emitting sources below the thresholds in the final Tailoring Rule. The Tailoring Ru le and PSD SIP Narrowing Rule bot h discuss the states’ ability to provide assurances that they will have adequate resources to meet the new GHG PSD permitting requirements at statutory levels of emissions, and the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule affected EPA’s prior approval of portions of a state’s SIP that do not incorpor ate thresholds established under the Tailoring Rule. On Novemb er 10, 2010, New Mexico adopted revisions to the State’s PSD rules to implement the GHG thresholds established in EPA’s GHG Tailoring Rule and submitted the corresponding SIP revision to EPA on December 1, 2010. On April 14, 2011, EPA proposed approval of New Mexico’s GHG rules submitted on December 1, 2010 (76 FR 20907). Additionally, the NMED submitted a clarification letter to EPA on April 19, 2011, clarifying that the portions of the PSD pr ogram related to greenhouse gas permitting that remained approved after the promulgation of EP A’s PSD SIP Narrowing Rule satisfy sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (J) of the Act. As we discuss further in this TSD, Ne w Mexico currently has adequate resources to carry out the GHG co mponent of the currently approved PSD SIP program, which requires PSD permitting for sources emitting GHGs at or above the 75,000/100,000 tons per year (tpy) threshol d specified by the Tailoring Rule.

II. Additional Background

A. What are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards?

Section 109 of the Act requires EPA to es tablish NAAQS for pollutants that “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public heal th and welfare,” and to develop a primary and secondary standard for each NAAQS. The primary standard is designed to protect human health with an adequate margin of safety, and the sec ondary standard is design ed to protect public welfare and the environment. EPA has set NAAQS for six common air pollutants, referred to as criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide , lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. These standards present state and lo cal governments with the minimum air quality levels they must meet to comply with the Act. Also, these standards provide information to residents of the United States about the air quality in their communities.

8 “Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Gr eenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.” 75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010).

9 “Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in St ate Implementation Plans.” 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010).Page 5 of 33 B. What is a SIP?

The SIP is a set of air pollu tion regulations, control strategi es, other means or techniques, and technical analyses developed by the state, to ensure that the state meets the NAAQS. The SIP is required by section 110 and other provisions of the Act. These SIPs can be extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents and supporting information such as emissions inventories, monitoring networks, a nd modeling demonstrations. Each state must submit these regulations and cont rol strategies to EPA for appr oval and incorpor ation into the federally enforceable SIP. Each federally ap proved SIP protects air quality primarily by addressing air pollution at its point of origin.

C

. Additional Information

This rulemaking will not cover four substantive issues that are not integral to acting on a
state’s infrastructure SIP subm ission: (i) existing provisions re lated to excess emissions during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources, that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies addressing such excess emissions (“SSM”); (ii) existing provisions related to
“director's variance” or “director's discretion” that purport to permit revisions to SIP approved emissions limits with limited public process or without requiring furthe r approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (“director's discreti on”); (iii) existing provis ions for minor source NSR programs that may be inconsistent w ith the requirements of the CAA and EPA’s regulations that pertain to such programs (“minor source NSR”); and, (iv) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA’s “Final NSR Improvement Rule,” 67 FR 80186 (December 3 1, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (“NSR Reform”). Instead, EPA has indicated that it has other auth ority to address any such existing SIP defects in othe r rulemakings, as appropriate. A de tailed rationale for why these four substantive issues are not pa rt of the scope of infrastructure SIP rulemakings can be found in EPA’s July 13, 2011, final rule entitled, “Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 1997 8-hour
Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards” in the section entitled, “What is the scope of this final rulemaking ?” (see 76 FR 41075 at 41076-41079).

III. SIP elements required under Section 110( a)(2) for the 2006 fine particulate matter NAAQS, the State submittals and EPA analysis

The Federally approved SIP for each state is listed in 40 CFR 52. The first section in this subpart for any state is the “Identification of plan.” The Id entification of plan lists the EPAapproved provisions of the SIP for each state, as provided under section 110 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7410, and 40 CFR 51 to meet the NAAQS. The status of the New Mexico SIP is provided in 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart GG, sections 1620 to 1640. The Identification of plan for New Mexico is in section 1620; th is constitutes the applicable SIP for New Mexico, for purposes
of the Act.
Per the General Preamble to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (April 16, 1992 at 57 FR 13498), section 110(a)(2) sets forth elements th at a SIP must contain in order to be fully approved. 10 Below we examine the elements required in section 110(a)(2) and the

10 The discussion of section 110(a)(2), subsections (A) through (M) begins on p. 13556 of the General Preamble.Page 6 of 33 documentation provided by the Stat e of New Mexico. Where it is useful, we include tables showing the date that the applicable state rules were approved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP.

1. Enforceable emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires
SIPs to include enforceable emission limits and other control measures, means or techniques, as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as necessary or appropriate to meet the requirements of this chapter.

The State’s response : In its submittal, the State of New Mexico indicated that New Mexico’s
enforceable emission limitations and other cont rol measures are covered in the Air Quality Control Act and those provisions of the New Me xico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20- Environment Protection, Chapte r 2- Air Quality, listed in 40 CFR 52.GG, and source specific provisions codified at 40 CFR 52. GG. The State also asserted that the regulations authorized by Chapter 74- Environmental Improvement of Ne w Mexico’s state stat ute (1978 NMSA) are duly adopted by the Environmental Improvement Board, a nd where these provisions relate to section 110 requirements, SIP revisions have been submitted to and approved by EPA. The State also indicated that New Mexico has an EPA-approved air permitting program for both major and minor sources, which ensures that all applicab le requirements are included in the source’s permit.

EPA analysis : Section 110(a)(2)(A) require s that all measures and other elements in the SIP be
enforceable. This subsection also authorizes SI Ps to contain certain nont raditional techniques for reducing pollution – economic incen tives, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights. The EPA reads this language to require even these other means of achieving reductions to be
enforceable. 11 The Air Quality Control Act designate s the NMED as the State’s air pollution control agency and the Environmental Improveme nt Act provides the NMED with enforcement authority. We reviewed the Ne w Mexico SIP and found state rule s to implement and enforce the 1997 ozone and PM NAAQS, and limit or reduce emissions of these pollutants and their

precursors. 12 These rules include emission limits, control measures, as well as permits and fees. We are including a list of parts from Title 20, chapter 2 of the NMAC (denoted 20.2 NMAC) as relevant in meeting the requirements of secti on 110(a)(2)(A). These se ctions were approved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP (see Table 1 be low) and thus are federally enforceable.

20.2 NMAC Part 3 Ambient Air Quality Standards
Part 5 Source Surveillance
Part 7 Excess Emissions Part 8 Emissions Leaving New Mexico
Part 10 Woodwaste Burners Part 11 Asphalt Process Equipment
Part 12 Cement Kilns Part 13 Gypsum Processing Plants
Part 14 Particulate Emissions from Coal Burning Equipment

11 See 57 FR 13498, beginning on p. 13556.

12 NO

x and VOCs are precursors to ozone. PM can be emitted di rectly and secondarily formed; the latter is the result
of NO

x and SO 2 precursors combining with ammonia to form ammonium nitrate and ammonium sulfate.Page 7 of 33 Part 15 Pumice, Mica and Perlite Process Equipment Part 16 Nonferrous Smelters (New and Existing)- Particulate Matter
Part 17 Nonferrous Smelters (Existing)- Particulate Matter
Part 18 Oil Bu rning Equipment- Particulate Matter Part 19 Potash, Salt or Sodi um Sulfate Processing Equi pment- Particulate Matter
Part 20 Lime Ma nufacturing Plants- Pa rticulate Matter Part 21 Fugitive Particulat e Matter Emissions from Nonferrous Smelters Part 22 Fugitive Particulate Matt er Emissions from Roads within the Town of Hurley
Part 30 Kraft Mills
Part 31 Coal Burning Equipment- Sulfur Dioxide
Part 32 Coal Burning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide

Part 33 Gas Bu rning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide
Part 34 Oil Burning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide
Part 40 Sulfur ic Acid Production Units- Sulfur Dioxide , Acid Mist and Visible Emissions
Part 41 Nonferrous Smelters- Sulfur
Part 72 Construction Permits
Part 73 Notice of In tent and Emissions Inventory Requirements
Part 74 Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Part 75 Construction Permit Fees Part 98 General Conformity Part 99 Transportation Conformity

The Environmental Improvement Act, found in Chapter 74, Article 1 of the New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978 (denot ed NMSA 1978 74-1), created th e NMED and the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board (EIB). The New Mexico Air Qu ality Control Act codified at NMSA 1978 74-2, delegates authority to the EIB to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend and repeal regulations consistent wi th the Air Quality Control Act to attain and maintain NAAQS and prevent or abate air polluti on (see NMSA 1978 74-2-5(B)(1)). The Air Quality Control Act also designates the NMED as the State’s air pollution control agency and the Environmental Improvement Act provides the NMED with enforcem ent authority. The SIP rule at Title 20 of the New Mexico Administrative Code (denoted as 20 NMAC) describes NMED as the State’s air pollution control agency and its enforcement authority, referencing the 1978 NMSA (44 FR 21019, April 9, 1979; revised 49 FR 44101, November 2, 1984; recodified approved in 62 FR 50518, September 26, 1997).
Part 3 of 20.2 NMAC establishes the statewid e ambient air quality standards, including those for total suspended particulates, nitrog en dioxide, and sulfur dioxide. The general requirements for maintaining and reporting records on emissions are provided in part 5. Part 7 establishes the requirements fo r a source whose operation resu lts in excess emissions and provides for other enforcement provisions. Part 8 establishes requirements for emissions leaving
New Mexico. Part 10 establishes contro ls on the use of woodwaste burners. Parts 11-20 establish particul ate matter emission standards for asphalt process equipment; cement kilns; gypsum processing plants; coal burning equipment; pumice, mica, and perlite process equipment; nonferrous smelters; existi ng nonferrous smelters; oil burning equipment; potash, salt or sodium sulfate processing equipm ent; and lime manufacturing plants. Parts 21 and 22 establish fugitive particulate matter emi ssion standards for nonferrous smelters and for roads within the town of Hurley, New Mexico. Part 30 regulates emissions from kraft mills,Page 8 of 33 including particulate matter and to tal reduced sulfur. Part 31 establishes sulfur dioxide emission standards for coal burning equipment, while Parts 32-34 establish nitrogen dioxide emission standards for coal burning equipment, gas burning equipment, and oil burning equipment. Part 40 establishes requirements and standards for sulfuric acid production units to minimize
emissions of sulfur dioxide and acid mist. Pa rt 41 establishes requirements and standards for
nonferrous smelters to minimize sulfur emissions. Part 72 addresses construction permits required for new and modified stationary sources with a potential emission rate greater than 25 tons per year of any regulated air contaminant for
which there is a federal or state ambient air quality standard. Part 73 establishes emission inventory requirements and provides for notice of in tent requirements that apply to any owner or operator intending to construct a new stationary source or modify an existing stationary source with a potential emission rate greater than 10 tons per year of any regulated air contaminant.
Part 75 establishes constr uction permit fees. Part 74 addresses PSD permit procedures. Parts 98 and 99 establish the policy, criteria, and proced ures for demonstrating and assuring general conformity and transportation conformity to the New Mexico SIP. EPA approved New Mexico’s current provisi ons regarding excess emissions occurring during startup, shutdown, and malf unction (SSM) of operations at a facility on September 14, 2009 (74 FR 46910). EPA believes that a number of states have SSM SI P provisions which are contrary to the Act and inconsis tent with existing EPA guidance, 13 and the Agency plans to
conduct a SIP call in the future to address su ch SIP regulations. In the meantime, EPA encourages any State having an SSM SIP provision which is contrary to the Act and inconsistent with EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possi ble before a SIP call is implemented. We are also not evaluating existing state rules with regard to director’s discretion or variance provisions in this action, as we plan to take action in the future to address such state regulations. The rules listed above at 20.2 NMAC pa rts 3, 5, 7-8, 10-22, 30-34, 40-41, 72-75, and 98- 99 were approved by EPA for adoption into the Ne w Mexico SIP (see Table 1 below) and thus are enforceable by the State and EPA. We ar e proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A ) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

Table 1: New Mexico rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(A):

Relevant Section of New Mexico’s SIP EPA Approval/Federal Register 14
20.2.3 NMAC - Ambient Air Quality
Standards September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.5 NMAC - Source Surveillance September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.7 NMAC - Excess Emissions September 14, 2009 at 74 FR 46910 20.2.8 NMAC - Emissions Leaving New
Mexico September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.10 NMAC - Woodwaste Burners Se ptember 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

13 “State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regardin g Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown,” Memorandum from Steven A. Herman, Assi stant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated August 11, 1999.

14 This is the EPA approval date currently found in New Mexico’s Identification of Plan at 40 CFR 52.1620(c). This date reflects our most recent approval of revisions to the applicable New Mexico air regulations in the New Mexico
SIP.Page 9 of 33 20.2.11 NMAC - Asphalt Process Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.12 NMAC - Cement Kilns September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.13 NMAC - Gypsum Processing Plants September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.14 NMAC - Particulate Emissions from Coal Burning Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.15 NMAC - Pumice, Mica and Perlite Process Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.16 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters (New and Existing)- Particulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.17 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters (Existing)- Particulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.18 NMAC - Oil Burning EquipmentParticulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.19 NMAC - Potash, Salt or Sodium Sulfate Processing Equipment- Particulate

Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.20 NMAC - Lime Manufacturing PlantsParticulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.21 NMAC - Fugitive Particulate Matter
Emissions from Nonferrous Smelters September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.22 NMAC - Fugitive Particulate Matter
Emissions from Roads Within the Town of Hurley September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.30 NMAC - Kraft Mills September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 5051420.2.31 NMAC - Coal Burning EquipmentSulfur Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.32 NMAC - Coal Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.33 NMAC - Gas Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.34 NMAC - Oil Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.40 NMAC - Sulfuric Production UnitsSulfur Dioxide, Acid Mist and Visible
Emissions September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.41 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters- Sulfur September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.72 NMAC - Construction Permits September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.73 NMAC - Notice of Intent and Emissions Inventory Requirements August 12, 2010 at 75 FR 48860

20.2.74 NMAC - Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration September 26, 1997 at 75 FR 72688

20.2.75 NMAC - Construction Permit Fees September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.98 NMAC - General Conformity September 9, 1998 at 63 FR 48109 20.2.99 NMAC - Transportation Conformity March 20, 2000 at 65 FR 14877Page 10 of 33 2. Ambient air quality monitori ng and data analysis system : Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to include provisions for establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to EPA upon
request.

The State’s response : In its submittal, the NMED stat ed that New Mexico maintains and operates a multi-station network to measure ambient levels within the state for comparison to the NAAQS. All monitoring data is measured usin g EPA approved methods as either reference of Equivalent monitors. All monitors are subjec ted to the quality assurance requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix A, and are located at sites that have met the minimum siting requirements of Part 58, Appendix E. The data is submitted to EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) system in accordance with the schedule prescribed by 40 CFR Part 58. New Mexico SIP satisfies this particular elem ent of section 110(a)(2)(B).

EPA analysis : EPA historically has promulgated regula tions in 40 CFR 58 (A mbient Air Quality Surveillance), indicating the necessary data states n eed to collect and submit as part of their SIP. The New Mexico statewide air quality survei llance network was approved by EPA on August 6, 1981 (46 FR 40005). The air quality surveillance network undergoes annual review by EPA. On July 7, 2011, NMED submitted its 2011 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan (AAMNP) that included the plans for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA approved New Mexico’s 2011 AAMNP on January 13, 2012. 15 The NMED monitors that are not certified as meeting the federal requirements are identified as “non-regulatory” monitors. 16 The NMED website provides the
ozone and PM 2.5 monitor locations and posts past and current concentrations of PM 2.5 and ozone measured in the State’s network of monitors (see http://air.nmenv.state.nm.us/ ). The State submits air monitoring data to EPA quart erly and certifies the data annually. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the
2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

3. Program for enforcement of control measures : Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to include a program providing for enforcement of th e measures described in subparagraph (A), and the regulation of the modification and constructio n of any stationary source within the areas covered by the SIP as necessary to assure th at the NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D.

The State's response : In its submittal, NMED did not specifically address how the New Mexico SIP satisfies this particular element of section 110(a)(2)(C), but rather stated that NMED has established regulations governing the enforcem ent of control measures, including attainment plans and permitting programs that regulate construc tion and modification of stationary sources.

15 A copy of our approval letter is available in the docket for this rulemaking.

16 These include for example, special purpose monitors (SPMs). Special purpose monitoring is conducted on a frequent basis for a variety of reasons: as a tool to supplement state ambient air monitoring networks to obtain information on where to locate permanent monitoring stations, to provide additional data in support of pollutant formation and transport analyses, or to assess air quality in a particular location. These studies vary in duration from being temporary sites needed only during a portion of the year to long-term air pollution studies over a large area.Page 11 of 33 EPA analysis : We note the following parts within the New Mexico SIP as relevant to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

20.2 NMAC Part 3 Ambient Air Quality Standards
Part 5 Source Surveillance
Part 7 Excess Emissions Part 8 Emissions Leaving New Mexico
Part 10 Woodwaste Burners Part 11 Asphalt Process Equipment
Part 12 Cement Kilns Part 13 Gypsum Processing Plants
Part 14 Particulate Emissions from Coal Burning Equipment Part 15 Pumice, Mica and Perlite Process Equipment Part 16 Nonferrous Smelters (New and Existing)- Particulate Matter
Part 17 Nonferrous Smelters (Existing)- Particulate Matter
Part 18 Oil Bu rning Equipment- Particulate Matter Part 19 Potash, Salt or Sodi um Sulfate Processing Equi pment- Particulate Matter
Part 20 Lime Ma nufacturing Plants- Pa rticulate Matter Part 21 Fugitive Particulat e Matter Emissions from Nonferrous Smelters Part 22 Fugitive Particulate Matt er Emissions from Roads within the Town of Hurley
Part 30 Kraft Mills
Part 31 Coal Burning Equipment- Sulfur Dioxide
Part 32 Coal Burning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide

Part 33 Gas Bu rning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide
Part 34 Oil Burning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide
Part 40 Sulfur ic Acid Production Units- Sulfur Dioxide , Acid Mist and Visible Emissions
Part 41 Nonferrous Smelters- Sulfur
Part 72 Construction Permits
Part 73 Notice of In tent and Emissions Inventory Requirements
Part 74 Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Part 75 Construction Permit Fees Part 98 General Conformity Part 99 Transportation Conformity

Enforcement authority is provided by NMSA 1978 74-1 and NM SA 1978 74-2, which address general enforcement power; investigation and remediation agreements; civil and criminal penalties; compliance orders and emergency cease and desist orders; civil actions; a field citation program; and etc. Part 3 of 20.2 NMAC establishe s the statewide ambient air quality standards, including those for total suspe nded particulates, nitrogen diox ide, and sulfur dioxide. The general requirements for maintain ing and reporting records on emi ssions are provided in part 5. The requirements for a source whose operation results in an excess emission and other enforcement provisions are provided in part 7. Part 8 establishes requirements for emissions leaving New Mexico. Part 10 establishes c ontrols on the use of woodwaste burners.
Enforcement of emissions invent ory requirements are provided in part 73. Additional issues addressed in parts 11-22, 30- 34, 40-41, 72, 74-75, and 98-99 include allowable rates, compliancePage 12 of 33 schedules, control plan requirements, actual a nd allowable emissions, monitoring and testing requirements, and control schedules. These chapte rs and their SIP approval dates are provided in Table 3 below. These citations clarify the boundaries beyond which regul ated entities in New Mexico can expect enforcement action. The existing federal regulations require both major and minor NSR programs to address any pollutant for which there is a NAAQS and prec ursors to the formation of such pollutant when identified for regulation by the Administrato r. The major NSR program is composed of two different programs: prev ention of significant deteriora tion (PSD) and nonattainment new source review (nonattainment NSR). 17 The major NSR provisions of the Act are a combination of air quality planning and air pollution cont rol technology program requirements for new and modified stationary sources of air pollution. Nonattainment NSR applies to areas not in attainment of a NAAQS, and is implemented under the requirements of part D of title I of the CAA , and 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.165. In a nona ttainment area, any stationary pollutant source with the potential to emit 100 tons per year (tpy) or more of any regulated NSR pollutant is considered a major stationary source. S ources subject to nonattainment NSR are required by the CAA to obtain an air pollution permit before beginning construction. We are not evaluating nonattainment-related provisi ons, such as the nonattainment NSR program required by part D in 110(a)(2)(C) and measures for attainment requi red by section 110(a)(2)( I), as part of the 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIPs because these submitta ls are required beyond the date (3 years from NAAQS promulgation) that section 110(a)(2) in frastructure submittals are required. EPA will address the nonattainment NSR requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) through a separate rulemaking. The other component of the major NSR program, known as the PSD program, is implemented under the requirements of part C of title I of the CAA , and 40 CFR 51.160-51.164 and 51.166. The PSD program regulates the construc tion of any new major st ationary source or major modification at existi ng stationary sources located in areas meeting the NAAQS (“attainment” areas) and areas for which there is insufficient information to classify an area as
either attainment or nonattainme nt (“unclassifiable” areas). In areas subject to the PSD requirements, the cutoff pollutant level may be either 100 tpy or 250 tpy of any regulated NSR pollutant, depending upon the source. 18 These sources are required by the Act to obtain an air pollution permit before beginning construction. In addition, revisions to New Mexico’s PSD program were approved into the SIP on August 21, 1990 (55 FR 34013), May 2, 1991 (56 FR 20137), October 15, 1996 (61 FR 53639), March 10, 2003 (68 FR 11316), December 24, 2003 (68 FR 74483), September 5, 2007 (72 FR 50879), and November 26, 2010 (75 FR 72688). On September 28, 2012, EPA signed a proposed approva l of revisions to the New Mexico PSD program as revisions to the New Mexi co SIP. See docket EPA-R06-OAR-2011-0033. To meet the requirements of 110(a)(2)(C ) for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, EPA believes the State must have upda ted its PSD rules to treat NO

x as a precursor for ozone (70 FR 71612). Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166, the state’s ru les to implement the ozone standard must include: (1) the identification of NOx as a precur sor for ozone; (2) definition of the significance
level for NO

x as 40 tpy for PSD, with this significance le vel linked to ozone as the pollutant; and

17 We often refer to the PSD and nonattainment NSR programs together as the major NSR program because these programs regulate only major sources. The Act uses the te rms “major emitting facility” to refer to sources subject to the PSD program, and “major stationa ry source” to refer to sources subj ect to nonattainment NSR. See CAA sections 165, 169, 172(c)(5), and 302(j).

18 See section 169(1) of the Act for the types of sources in each of the 100 tpy and 250 tpy categories.Page 13 of 33 (3) a note or statement that “no de minimis air quality level may be provided for ozone. However, any net emissions increase of 100 tpy or more of VOC or NO

x subject to PSD would be required to perform an ambient impact analysis , including the gathering of ambient air quality data.” On November 26, 2010, EPA approved re visions to New Mexico’s PSD SIP for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to include NOx as an ozone precursor (75 FR 72688). To meet the requirements of 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, states were required to update their PSD programs and subm it the necessary SIP revisions to EPA by May 16, 2011 and July 20, 2012 pursuant to EPA’s NSR PM 2.5 Rule finalized May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321) and EPA’s PM 2.5 Increment – Significant Impact Leve ls (SILs) – Significant Monitoring Concentrations (SMC) Rule (75 FR 64864) fi nalized October 20, 2010, respectively. On May 23, 2011, the Governor submitted necessary revisions to the New Mexico SIP to amend the PSD program to meet the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS implementation requirements. To address the requirements of EPA’s May 16, 2008 NSR PM 2.5 Rule, New Mexico adopted rule revisions to establish (1) the requirement for NSR permits to address directly emitted PM 2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) significant emission rates for direct PM 2.5 and precursor pollutants (SO 2 and NO X ) and (3) the requirement that condensable PM be addressed in enforceable PM, PM 10 and PM 2.5 emission limits included in PSD permits. To a ddress the requirements of EPA’s October 20,

2010 PM 2.5 PSD Increment – SILs – SMC Rule, New Me xico updated its PSD rules to establish
the allowable PM 2.5 increments 19 , and the optional screening tools called significant impact levels (SILs), and significant monitori ng concentrations (SMCs). In a separate rulemaking, EPA proposes to approve the May 23, 2011 SIP revisions to New Mexico’s PSD permitting regulations that implement the provisions for PM 2.5 permitting because EPA found those rule revisions adequate and necessary to implement the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. We have proposed the New Mexico PSD program satisfies both the May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321) and October 20, 2010 PM 2.5 PSD rulemakings (75 FR 64864, effective December 20, 2010) and a complete analysis is provided in the TSD for the proposed action signed on September 28, 2102. See EPA Docket EPA-R 06-OAR-2011-0033. Table 2 below summarizes EPA’s proposed findings as to how the New Mexi co PSD program satisfies 110(a)(2)(C) for the

2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

Table 2: New Mexico PSD rules necessary to implement the PM 2.5 standard, pursuant to 40 CFR CFR 51.166
Requirement State Citation Revise the PSD Permitting program to apply to
emissions of direct PM 2.5 and its precursors consistent with 40 CFR 51.166 (b)(49)(i); (49) * * * (i) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality standard has been promulgated and any pollutant identified under this paragrap h (b)(49)(i) as a constituent In a separate rulemaking, EPA is proposing approval of the revision to 20.2.74.7 NMAC, definition of “Regulated NSR pollutant”, to apply the PSD permitting program to direct emissions of PM 2.5 and its precursors, consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i). See EPA-R06-

OAR-2011-0033.

19 Under section 165 (a)(3) of the Act, a PSD permit applicant must demonstrate that emissions from the proposed construction and operation of a facility “will not cause, or contribute to, air pollution in excess of any (A) maximum
allowable increase or maximum allowa ble concentration for any pollutant.....” The “maximum allowable increase” of an air pollutant that is allowed to occur above the app licable baseline concentration for that pollutant is known as the PSD increment. New Mexico revised their PSD program (20.2.74 NMAC) to include the allowable PSD
increments. For exam ple, for Class II areas, the allowable PM 2.5 PSD increment is 4 ug/m 3 annual arithmetic mean, and 9 ug/m 3 24-hour maximum, as outlined in Table 4 of 20.2.74.504 NMAC.Page 14 of 33 or precursor to such pollutant. Precursors identified by the Administrator for purposes of NSR are the following: ( a ) Volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides are precursors to ozone in all attainment and unclassifiable

areas. ( b ) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM 2.5 in all
attainment and unclassifiable areas. ( c ) Nitrogen oxides are presum ed to be precursors to

PM 2.5 in all attainment and unclassifiable areas, unless
the State demonstrates to the Administrator’s
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen oxides from sources in a specific area are not a significant contributor to that area’s ambient PM 2.5 concentrations. ( d

) Volatile organic compounds are presumed not to be precursors to PM 2.5 in any attainment or unclassifiable area, unless the State demonstrates to the
Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of volatile organic compounds from sources in a specific area are a significant contributor to that area’s
ambient PM 2.5 concentrations. Revise the PSD Permitting program to identify significant emission rates for PM 2.5 and its precursors consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i): (b) * * * (23)(i) Significant means, in reference to a net emissions increase or the potential of a source to emit any of the following pollutants, a rate of emissions that would equal or exceed any of the following rates:
Pollutant and Emissions Rate Carbon monoxide: 100 tons per year (tpy) Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpy Sulfur dioxide: 40 tpy Particulate matter: 25 tpy of particulate matter emissions. 15 tpy of PM 10 emissions

PM 2.5 : 10 tpy of direct PM2.5 emissions; 40 tpy of sulfur dioxide emissions; 40 tpy of nitrogen oxide emissions
unless demonstrated not to be a PM 2.5 precursor under paragraph (b)(49) of this section Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen
oxides Lead: 0.6 tpy Fluorides: 3 tpy Sulfuric acid mist: 7 tpy Hydrogen sulfide (H2S): 10 tpy Total reduced sulfur (including H2S): 10 tpy Reduced sulfur compounds (including H2S): 10 tpy Municipal waste combustor organics (measured as total tetra-through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans): 3.2 × 10 -6 megagrams per year (3.5 × 10
-

6 tons per year) Municipal waste combustor metals (measured as particulate matter): 14 megagrams per year (15 tons per year) Municipal waste combustor acid gases (measured as In a separate rulemaking, EPA is proposing approval of the revisions to 20.2.74.502 NMAC, Table 2 – Significant Emission Rates, as consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i). See EPAR06-OAR-2011-0033.Page 15 of 33 sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride): 36 megagrams per year (40 tons per year) Municipal solid waste landfill emissions (measured as nonmethane organic compounds): 45 megagrams per year (50 tons per year)

Revise the PSD Permitting Program to address
condensable emissions consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi).

(b)(49)(vi); (vi) Particulate matter (PM) emissions, PM 2.5 emissions,
and PM 10 emissions shall include gaseous emissions from a source or activity which condense to form particulate matter at ambient temperatures. On or after January 1, 2011 (or any earlier date established in the upcoming rulemaking codifying test methods), such condensable particulate matter shall be accounted for in applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations for PM, PM 2.5 and PM 10 in PSD permits. Compliance with emissions limitations for PM,

PM 2.5 and PM 10 issued prior to this date shall not be based on condensable particular matter unless required by the terms and conditions of the permit or the applicable implementation plan. Applicability determinations made prior to this date without accounting for condensable par ticular matter shall not be
considered in violation of this section unless the applicable implementation plan required condensable particular matter to be included.
And In a separate rulemaking, EPA is proposing approval of the revisions to 20.2.74.7 NMAC, definition of “Regulated NSR pollutant”, to adopt and implement the “condensables” provision consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi). See EPA-R06-OAR-2011-0033.

Adopting provisions to implement the PM 2.5 increment, including revisions to the definitions of “baseline area”, “major source baseline date”, “minor source baseline
date” In a separate rulemaking, EPA is proposing approval of
the revisions to definitions in 20.2.74.7 NMAC that were submitted to adopt and implement the PM 2.5 increment.

See EPA-R06-OAR-2011-0033.

Program for enforcement of control measur es and regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary source within the ar eas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that NAAQS are achieved, includ ing a permit program, as required by Parts C and D, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(C) :

Regarding a program for enforcement of cont rol measures, the Air Quality Control Act designates the NMED as the State’s air pollu tion control agency and the Environmental Improvement Act provides the NMED with authority to enforce the state’s environmental quality rules. The NMED established rules governing em issions of the criteria pollutants and their precursors throughout the State and these rules are in the federally enforceable SIP. The rules in 20.2 NMAC parts 3, 5, 7-8, 10-22, 30-34, 40-41, 72-75, and 98-99 include allowable emission rates, compliance, control plan requirements, actual and allowable emissions, monitoring and testing requirements, recordkeep ing and reporting requirements, a nd control schedules. ThesePage 16 of 33 rules clarify the boundaries beyond which regula ted entities in New Mexico can expect
enforcement action. To meet the requirement for having 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 that national ambient air quality standards are achieved, includi ng a permit program as required by Parts C and D of the CAA, generally, the St ate is required to have SIP-approved PSD, Nonattainment, and Minor NSR permitting programs adequate to implement the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. We are not evaluating nonattainment-rela ted provisions, such as the Nonattainment NSR (NNSR) program required by pa rt D in 110(a)(2)(C) and measures for a ttainment required by section 110(a)(2)(I), as part of the infrastructure SIPs for this NAAQS because these submittals are required beyond the date (3 ye ars from NAAQS promulga tion) that section 110 infrastructure SIP submittals are required. PSD programs apply in areas that are meeting the NAAQS, referred to as areas in attainment, and in areas for which there is in sufficient information to designate as either attainment or nonattainment, referred to as unclassifiable areas. New Mexico’s PSD program was conditionally approved into the SIP on Fe bruary 27, 1987 (52 FR 5964) and fully approved on August 15, 2011 (76 FR 41698). In addition, revisi ons to New Mexico’s PSD program were approved into the SIP on August 21, 1990 ( 55 FR 34013), May 2, 1991 (56 FR 20137), October 15, 1996 (61 FR 53639), March 10, 2003 (68 FR 11316), December 24, 2003 (68 FR 74483), September 5, 2007 (72 FR 50879), November 26, 2010 (75 FR 72688) and July 20, 2011 (76 FR 43149). Additionally, on June 11, 2009 and May 23, 2011, New Mexico submitted to EPA SIP revisions that revise the state’s PSD and NNSR permitting regulations to address the permitting requirements associated with the NAAQS for 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5, respectively

. EPA approved the portions of the June 11, 2009 s ubmittal associated with implementing NO

x as a precursor (75 FR 72688) as necessary to implement the 1997 ozone standard. EPA has proposed approval of the May 23, 2011 revision in a Fe deral Register notice signed September 28, 2012, as these elements are necessary for implementation of the PM 2.5 standard. Specific details regarding our proposed approval of these submittals is available in a separate rulemaking and can
be found in the Docket ID EPA-R06-OAR-2011-0033.

PM 2.5 PSD Permitting :

To implement the PSD permitting component of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, states were required to submit the necessary SIP revisions to EPA by May 16, 2011 and July 20, 2012 pursuant to EPA’s NSR PM 2.5 Rule finalized May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321) and

EPA’s PM 2.5 Increment – Significant Impact Leve ls (SILs) – Significant Monitoring Concentrations (SMC) Rule (75 FR 64864) fi nalized October 20, 2010, respectively. On May 23, 2011, the Governor submitted necessary revisions to the New Mexico SIP to amend the PSD program to meet the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS implementation requirements. To address the requirements of EPA’s May 16, 2008 NSR PM 2.5 Rule, New Mexico adopted rule revisions to establish (1) the requirement for NSR permits to address directly emitted PM 2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) significant emission rates for direct PM 2.5 and precursor pollutants (SO 2 and NO X ) and (3) the requirement that condensable PM be addressed in enforceable PM, PM 10 and PM 2.5 emission limits included in PSD permits. To a ddress the requirements of EPA’s October 20,

2010 PM 2.5 PSD Increment – SILs – SMC Rule, New Mexico updated its PSD rules (please seePage 17 of 33 Table 2 in this TSD) to establish the allowable PM 2.5 increments, and the optional screening tools called significant impact levels (SILs), and si gnificant monitoring con centrations (SMCs).

GHG PSDPermitting:

New Mexico has the authority to issue pe rmits under the SIP-approved PSD program to sources of GHG emissions (75 FR 82536, page 82536, December 30, 2010). 20 The Tailoring Rule established thresholds that phase in the applicability of PSD requirements to GHG sources, starting with the larg est GHG emitters, and were designe d to relieve the overwhelming
administrative burdens and costs associated with the dramatic increase in permitting burden that would have resulted from appl ying PSD requirements to GHG em ission increases at or above only the mass-based statutory thresholds of 100/250 tpy generally applicable to all PSDregulated pollutants starting on January 2, 2011. However, EPA recognized that even after it finalized the Tailoring Rule, many SIPs with approved PSD programs would, until they were revised, continue to apply PSD at the statutory thresholds, even though the states would not have sufficient resources to implement the PSD pr ogram at those levels. EPA consequently implemented its “PSD SIP Narrowing Rule” and narrowed its approval of those provisions of previously approved SIPs of 24 states, includi ng New Mexico, that appl y PSD to GHG emission increases from sources emitting GHGs below the Tailoring Rule thresholds (75 FR 82536, December 30, 2010). Through the PSD SIP Narro wing Rule, EPA withdrew its previous approvals of those programs to the extent th e SIPs apply PSD to increases in GHG emissions from GHG-emitting sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. The portions of the PSD programs regulating GHGs from GHG-emitting sources with emission increas es at or above the Tailoring Rule thresholds remained approved. The effect of EPA narrowing its approval in this manner is that the provisions of previously a pproved SIPs that apply PSD to GHG emissions increases from sources emitting GHGs below the Ta iloring Rule thresholds have the status of having been submitted by the state but not yet acted upon by EPA (75 FR 82536, December 30, 2010). On November 10, 2010, New Mexico adopted re visions to the State’s PSD rules to implement the GHG thresholds established in EPA’s GHG Tailoring Rule and submitted the corresponding SIP revision to EPA on December 1, 2010. On April 14, 2011, EPA proposed approval of New Mexico’s GHG rules submitted on December 1, 2010 (76 FR 20907). On August 19, 2011, EPA approved New Mexico’s GHG rules submitted on December 1, 2010 (see 76 FR 43149 dated July 20, 2011).

20 On June 24, 2010, the State submitted a letter to EPA st ating that current New Mexico rules require regulating GHGs at the existing 100/250 tpy threshold, rather than at the higher thresholds set in the Tailoring Rule because the State does not have the authority to apply the meaning of the term “subject to regulation” established in the Tailoring Rule. New Mexico also submitted a letter on Se ptember 14, 2010, in response to the proposed GHG SIP Call again confirming that EPA correc tly classified New Mexico as a St ate with authority to apply PSD requirements to GHGs. The September 14, 2010, letter also identifies that NMED is pursuing rulemaking activity to define the terms “greenhouse gas” and “subject to regulation.” These two letters are in the docket for this rulemaking. As explained elsewhere in this rulemaking, on November 10, 2010, New Mexico adopted revisions to the State’s PSD rules to implement the GHG thresholds es tablished in EPA’s GHG Tailoring Rule and submitted the corresponding SIP revision to EPA on December 1, 2010. On April 14, 2011, EPA proposed approval of New
Mexico’s GHG rules submitted on D ecember 1, 2010 (76 FR 20907). EPA approved the December 1, 2010 submittal on August 19, 2011 (76 FR 43149).Page 18 of 33 Minor Source Permitting:

Section 110(a)(2)(C) creates “a general duty on States to include a program in their SIP that regulates the modification a nd construction of any st ationary source as necessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved” (70 FR 71612, 71677). EPA provides states with discretion in implementing their Minor NSR programs ( 71 FR 48696, 48700). The “considerably less detailed” regulations for mi nor NSR are provided in 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.164. EPA has determined that New Mexico’s Minor NSR program adopted pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act regulates emissions of all regulated air contaminants for which there is a NAAQS (20.2.72.200 NMAC). New Mexico’s Minor NS R permitting requirements are found at 20.2.72 NMAC and were approved into the SIP on May 14, 1973 (38 FR 12702). 21 In this action, EPA is proposing to approve New Mexico’s infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement of section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP that regulates
the modification and construction of any stationary source as n ecessary to assure that the NAAQS are achieved. It is important to stress that EPA is not pr oposing to approve or di sapprove the State’s existing Minor NSR program itself to the extent th at it is inconsistent with EPA’s regulations governing this program. EPA belie ves that a number of states may have Minor NSR provisions that are contrary to the existing EPA regulations for this program. EPA intends to work with
states to reconcile state Minor NSR programs with EPA’s regulatory provisions for the program. The statutory requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable flexibility in designing Minor NSR programs, and EPA believe s it may be time to revisit the regulatory requirements for this program to give the states an appropriate level of flexibility to design a program that meets their particular air quality concerns, while assuring reasonable consistency across the country in protecting the NAAQS with respect to ne w and modified minor sources. Based on the above, we are proposing to find th at the current New Mexico SIP (see Table 3 below) meets the requirements of sec tion 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

Table 3: New Mexico rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(C):

Relevant Section of New Mexico’s SIP EP A Approval/Federal Register Citation 20.2.3 NMAC - Ambient Air Quality
Standards September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.5 NMAC - Source Surveillance September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.7 NMAC - Excess Emissions September 14, 2009 at 74 FR 46910 20.2.8 NMAC - Emissions Leaving New
Mexico September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.10 NMAC - Woodwaste Burners Se ptember 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.11 NMAC - Asphalt Process Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.12 NMAC - Cement Kilns September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.13 NMAC - Gypsum Processing Plants September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.14 NMAC - Particulate Emissions from Coal Burning Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.15 NMAC - Pumice, Mica and Perlit e September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

21 Revisions to New Mexico’s minor source permitting prog ram were most recently appr oved by EPA into the SIP on September 26, 1997 (62 FR 50514).Page 19 of 33 Process Equipment 20.2.16 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters (New and Existing)- Particulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.17 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters (Existing)- Particulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.18 NMAC - Oil Burning EquipmentParticulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.19 NMAC - Potash, Salt or Sodium Sulfate Processing Equipment- Particulate

Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.20 NMAC - Lime Manufacturing PlantsParticulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.21 NMAC - Fugitive Particulate Matter
Emissions from Nonferrous Smelters September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.22 NMAC - Fugitive Particulate Matter
Emissions from Roads Within the Town of Hurley September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.30 NMAC - Kraft Mills September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 5051420.2.31 NMAC - Coal Burning EquipmentSulfur Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.32 NMAC - Coal Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.33 NMAC - Gas Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.3.34 NMAC - Oil Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.40 NMAC - Sulfuric Production UnitsSulfur Dioxide, Acid Mist and Visible
Emissions September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.41 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters- Sulfur September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.72 NMAC - Construction Permits September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.73 NMAC - Notice of Intent and Emissions Inventory Requirements August 12, 2010 at 75 FR 48860

20.2.74 NMAC - Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration July 20, 2011 at 76 FR 43149 EPA signed a proposed approval of revisions to the New Mexico SIP for PSD Permitting of

PM 2.5 on September 28, 2012 20.2.75 NMAC - Construction Permit Fees September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.98 NMAC - General Conformity September 9, 1998 at 63 FR 48109 20.2.99 NMAC - Transportation Conformity March 20, 2000 at 65 FR 14877

4. Interstate transport, and interstate and international pollution abatement : Section 110(a)(2)(D) is divided into two components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110(a )(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires SIPs to include provisi ons prohibiting any sour ce or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment, interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state, or from interfering with measures required toPage 20 of 33 prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibi lity in another state. For the

2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, the contribute to nonattainment/interf ere with maintenance and visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i ) will be addressed separately and are not included in the infrastructure SIPs. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) re quires SIPs to include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, re lating to interstate an d international pollution
abatement.

The State's response : In its submittal, the State of New Mexico indicated that in September 2007, New Mexico adopted and submitted to EPA a SIP revision pertaining only to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). The state also indicated that New Mexico does not have any PM nonattainment
areas nor is the state within cl ose proximity to any PM nonattainment areas. The closest PM nonattainment area to New Mexico is approximate ly 600 miles away in northwestern Utah. The
state concluded that no revisi ons to the state’s 2007 SIP re vision for 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) are necessary at this time. Additionally, the state indicates that it is not currently subject to requirements under sections 115 and 126.

EPA analysis: PSD and interstate transport, pursuan t to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components, 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110(a )(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires SIPs to include provisi ons prohibiting any sour ce or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment, interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state, or from interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibi lity in another state. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisi ons insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. PSD and interstate transport, pursuan t to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): One of the four elements (or prongs) in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires a SIP to contain adequate provisions prohibiting emissions that interf ere with any other state’s required measures to prevent significant deterioration of its air quality. This is the only elem ent of 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on which EPA is proposing action in this rulemaking. EP A’s 2009 Guidance made recommendations for SIP submissions to meet this requirement with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. The 2009 Guidance states that the PSD permitting program is the primary measure that each state must include to prevent interference with any other state’s required measures to prevent significant deterioration of its air quality in accordance with section 110(a )(2)(D)(i)(II). As discussed in this TSD, the New Mexico PSD program has been approved into the SIP. New Mexico has provided necessary revisions to its PSD program to implement the PM 2.5 standards and EPA has proposed approval of thes e revisions. Therefore, EPA is proposing that
the New Mexico SIP meets the basic re quirements for implementing the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. We are proposing to find the SIP has adequate ly addressed section 110( a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA, for the element that requires that the SI P prohibit air pollutant emissions from sources within a state from interfering wi th measures required to preven t significant deterioration of air quality in any other state. The remaining three elements of secti on 110(a)(2)(D)(i): (1) do not significantly
contribute to nonattainment of the relevant NAAQS in any other state for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS; (2) interference with the maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state; (3)Page 21 of 33 interference with measures required to protect visi bility in any other stat e will be evaluated and addressed in future rulemakings.
Interstate and internatio nal transport, pursuant to section 11 0(a)(2)(D)(ii) : Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act requir es compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatemen t. Section 115(a) addresses endangerment of public health or welfare in foreign countries from pollution emitted in the United States. Pursuant to section 115, the Administrator has neith er received nor issued a formal notification that emissions from New Mexico are endangering pub lic health or welfare in a foreign country. Section 126(a) of the Act requires new or modi fied sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from such sources. Under sec tion 126(a)(1)(A), SIPs must require notification to nearby, affected states of “major proposed new (or modified) sources” when the source is subject to PSD. New Mexico’s SIP approve d PSD program rules at 20.2.74.400 NMAC satisfy the requirements of section 126(a)(1)(A) by pr oviding that the NMED must send notice of the proposed action on PSD permits to, among others, “any state ... whose lands may be affected by
emissions from the source or modification.” The State also has no pending obligations under
section 126 of the Act. EPA is proposing to find that the New Mexi co SIP (see Table 4) meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

Table 4: New Mexico rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), as determined by
EPA:
Relevant Section of New Mexico’s SIP EP A Approval/Federal Register Citation

20.2.74.400 NMAC - Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration November 26, 2010 at 75 FR 72688

5. Adequate personnel, funding, and authority : Section 110(a)(2)(E ) requires states to provide for adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority under state law to carry out its SIP
and related issues.

The State’s response : In its submittal for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, the State of New Mexico indicated that New Mexico state statute, NMSA 1978, section 74-7-5 requires the state’s Environmental Improvement Board to comply with the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and its associated standards, regulatio ns and state implementing directives.

EPA analysis : Each SIP must show that the state has legal authority to ca rry out the plan (40 CFR 51.230). The Department of the Environment Act pr ovides that the secretary of the NMED “shall... employ and fix the compensation of those persons necessary to di scharge his duties...” See NMSA 1978 9-7A-6(B). The NM ED is also authorized to r eceive State appropriations to implement environmental programs. See gene rally, NMSA 1978 9-7A. There are federal sources of funding for the implementation of the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, through, for example, the CAA sections 103 and 105 grant funds. The NMED receives federal funds on an annual basis, under sections 103 and 105 of the Act, to support its air quality programs. Additionally, the State provides funds equal to 40 percent of the 105 grant fees it receives. Fees collected for the Title V and non-Title V permit programs, and ot her inspections, maintenance and renewalsPage 22 of 33 required of other air pollution sources also provide necessary funds to help implement the State’s air programs. Information on permitting fees is provided in the discussion for section 110(a)(2)(L) below. The Air Quality Control Act designates the NMED as the State air pollution control agency for all purposes under federal legislation relating to air pollution and provides the NMED with the power “to accept, receive and admi nister grants or other funds or gifts from public and private agencies, including the fe deral government, or from any person ...” See NMSA 1978 74-2-5.1(F). The Air Quality Control Act de legates authority to the EIB to adopt, promulgate, publish, amend and repeal regulations cons istent with the Air Quality Cont rol Act to attain and maintain national ambient air quality standards and prev ent or abate air pollution (see NMSA 1978 74-2- 5(B)(1)). The Environmental Improvement Ac t codified at NMSA 1978 74-1, provides the NMED with the power, “to enfor ce the rules, regulations and or ders promulgated by the board ...” (see NMSA 1978 74-1-6(F)). The Air Quality Control Act also gives the NMED the duty to “develop and present to the environmental improve ment board or the local board a plan for the regulation, control, prevention or abatement of air pollution ...” and gives the EIB the authority to adopt such a plan (see NMSA 1978 74-2- 5.1(H) and NMSA 1978 74-2-5(B)(2)) . The New Mexico statutes were approved into the New Mexico SIP on May 31, 1972 (37 FR 10881) and subsequent revisions were la st approved into the SIP on November 2, 1984 (49 FR 44101). Therefore, the State has demonstrated it has adeq uate authority under its rules and regulations to carry out its SIP obligations with re spect to the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS. To address adequate funding, the Air Quality Control Act names the NMED as the state air pollution control agency for all purposes under federal legisl ation relating to air pollution and provides the NMED with the power, “to accept, recei ve and administer gran ts or other funds or gifts from public and private agencies, including the federal government, or from any person ....” (see NMSA 1978 74-2-5.1(F)). In addition, th e NMED annually receives Federal funds, authorized pursuant to secti ons 103 and 105 of the Act. The section 103 funds support specific, non-recurring projects w ithin the air program, thus the amount of funding can vary widely from year to year. The section 105 funds support th e foundation of the State’s air quality program, including the air monito ring network and annual air quality program activities. The section 105 funding levels are relatively cons istent, varying not more than about 18% from year to year. 22
The 105 funds require a 40% match from the State, while the 103 funds do not require a match. In fiscal year 2011 (FY11), New Mexico received $1,152,263 in 105 funds and successfully completed all of their ai r program obligations. Finally, this section of the Act, in part, requires that a state provide for necessary assurances that they have adequate personnel to implement the SIP. New Mexico under State statute is required to employ su fficient personnel to carry out this SIP. The Department of the Environment Act provides that the secretar y of the NMED “shall... employ and fix the compensation of those persons necessary to di scharge his duties...” See NMSA 1978 9-7A6(B). This provision assures th at New Mexico is statutorily required to retain adequate personnel to implement this SIP. Regarding adequate authority to issue permits under the SIP approved PSD program to sources of GHGs, EPA in its final PSD SI P Narrowing Rule, promulgated December 30, 2010 (75 FR 82536), withdrew its previous approval of New Mexico’s PSD program to the extent it applies PSD to GHG-emitting sources below the th resholds in the final PSD Tailoring Rule. The

22 For FY09, FY10, and FY11New Mexico received $1,243,792; $1 ,499,889; and $1,152,263 in 105 funds for each fiscal year, respectively.Page 23 of 33 PSD Tailoring Rule, which EPA promulgate d June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31514), implemented thresholds establishing applicability of th e PSD permitting program to GHG-emitting sources only if they emit GHGs in amounts above th e 75,000/100,000 tpy of carbon dioxide equivalent (denoted CO2e). Thus sources in affected states, including New Mexico, will not be subject to federal or state requirements to obtain permits at the lower 100/250 tpy level. The Tailoring Rule thresholds were designed to relieve the ove rwhelming administrative burdens and costs associated with the dramatic increase in permitting burden that would have resulted from applying PSD at the statutory leve ls (100/250 tpy) on January 2, 2011. On November 10, 2010, New Mexico adopted re visions to the State’s PSD rules to implement the GHG thresholds established in EPA’s GHG Tailoring rule and submitted the corresponding SIP revision to EPA on December 1, 2010. On April 14, 2011, EPA proposed approval of New Mexico’s GHG rules submitted on December 1, 2010 (76 FR 20907). On August 19, 2011, EPA approved New Mexico’s GHG rules submitted on December 1, 2010 (see 76 FR 43149). We are therefore proposing that the New Mexi co SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, including the requirements of the GHG component of the PSD program.

6. Stationary source emissions monitoring and reporting : Section 110(a)(2 )(F) requires, as may be prescribed by the Administrator, (i) th e installation, maintenance and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or ope rators of stationary
sources to monitor emissions from such source s, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts
of emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the State agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this Act, which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.

The State's response : In its submittal for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, the State of New Mexico
indicated that the New Mexico regulatory requirements have been codified in 20.2.72 NMAC ( Construction Permits ), 20.2.70 NMAC ( Operating Permits ), and 20.2.79 NMAC ( PermitsNonattainment Areas ). The State indicated that requirements in 20.2.7.73 NMAC ( Notice of Intent and Emission Inventory Requirements ) provide for the reporting of emissions inventories in a format established by the NMED on a schedul e set forth in the regula tion. Furthermore, the State indicated that maintenance plans for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS submitted by New Mexico abide by the requirements of the CAA section 11 0(a)(1). New Mexico also asserted that
enforceable emission limitations and other cont rol measures are covered in the State’s Air Quality Control Act and those provisions of 20.2 NMAC. The State indi cates that 20.2.5 NMAC ( Source Surveillance ) establishes the general requirements for maintaining and reporting records on emissions, including recordkeeping, data subm issions, and public access to emission data.

EPA analysis : New Mexico’s regulations at 20.2 NMAC parts 5, 7-8, 10-20, 30-34, 40-41, and 72-74 require monitoring for compliance, re cordkeeping and reporting, and provide for enforcement with respect to all the NAAQS and their precursors. These source monitoring program requirements generate data for ozone and PM 2.5 and their precursor s. See Table 5
below. Under the New Mexico SIP rules, the NMED is required to analyze the emissions data from point, area, mobile, and biogenic (natural) sources. The NMED uses this data to trackPage 24 of 33 progress towards maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources and general emission levels, and dete rmine compliance with New Mexico and EPA requirements. The State’s emissions da ta are available on the NMED website ( http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us ). These rules have been approved by EPA into the SIP. A list of these rules and Federal Register citations is provided below. The National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is EPA’s central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air Emissions Repor ting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data (73 FR 76539). The AERR shortened the time states had to report emi ssions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit emissions data. Al l states are required to submit a comprehensive emissions inventory (EI) every three years and report emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA’s online Emissions Inventory Sy stem (EIS). States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and the precursors that form them – NOx, SO 2 , ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, PM, and VOCs. Many states al so voluntarily report emissions of hazardous air pollutants. EPA compiles the emissions data , supplementing it where n ecessary, and releases it to the general public through the website www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html

. There are two additional requirements that New Mexico must meet regarding emissions inventories: the EI requireme nt for nonattainment areas, and the requirement to submit annual
EI data to EPA’s NEI database. Because nona ttainment NSR is outside the scope of this rulemaking, we are not addressing New Mexico’s EI for nonattainment areas in this proposed action. Regarding the requirement to submit annual EI data to EPA, the NMED is current with their submittals to the NEI database; the 2010 data for larger sources was submitted to EPA in
2011. The State’s emissions data are also ava ilable on EPA’s AirData website, which provides access to air pollution data for the entire United States and can produce reports and maps of air pollution data based on criteria specified by the user (see www.epa.gov/air/data/index.html ). We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. We note the following parts within the State SI P as relevant to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F):

20.2 NMAC
Part 5 Source Surveillance
Part 7 Excess Emissions Part 8 Emissions Leaving New Mexico
Part 10 Woodwaste Burners Part 11 Asphalt Process Equipment
Part 12 Cement Kilns Part 13 Gypsum Processing Plants
Part 14 Particulate Emissions from Coal Burning Equipment Part 15 Pumice, Mica and Perlite Process Equipment Part 16 Nonferrous Smelters (New and Existing)- Particulate Matter
Part 17 Nonferrous Smelters (Existing)- Particulate Matter
Part 18 Oil Bu rning Equipment- Particulate Matter Part 19 Potash, Salt or Sodi um Sulfate Processing Equi pment- Particulate Matter
Part 20 Lime Ma nufacturing Plants- Pa rticulate Matter
Part 30 Kraft MillsPage 25 of 33 Part 31 Coal Burning Equipment- Sulfur Dioxide
Part 32 Coal Burning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide

Part 33 Gas Bu rning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide
Part 34 Oil Burning Equipment- Nitrogen Dioxide
Part 40 Sulfur ic Acid Production Units- Sulfur Dioxide , Acid Mist and Visible Emissions
Part 41 Nonferrous Smelters- Sulfur
Part 72 Construction Permits
Part 73 Notice of In tent and Emissions Inventory Requirements
Part 74 Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration

Table 5: New Mexico rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(F):

Relevant Section of New Mexico’s SI P EPA Approval/Federal Register

20.2.5 NMAC - Source Surveillance September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.7 NMAC - Excess Emissions September 14, 2009 at 74 FR 46910 20.2.8 NMAC - Emissions Leaving New
Mexico September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.10 NMAC - Woodwaste Burners Se ptember 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.11 NMAC - Asphalt Process Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.12 NMAC - Cement Kilns September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.13 NMAC - Gypsum Processing Plants September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.14 NMAC - Particulate Emissions from Coal Burning Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.15 NMAC - Pumice, Mica and Perlite Process Equipment September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.16 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters (New and Existing)- Particulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.17 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters (Existing)- Particulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.18 NMAC - Oil Burning EquipmentParticulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.19 NMAC - Potash, Salt or Sodium Sulfate Processing Equipment- Particulate

Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.20 NMAC - Lime Manufacturing PlantsParticulate Matter September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.30 NMAC - Kraft Mills September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 5051420.2.31 NMAC - Coal Burning EquipmentSulfur Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.32 NMAC - Coal Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.33 NMAC - Gas Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.34 NMAC - Oil Burning EquipmentNitrogen Dioxide September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.40 NMAC - Sulfuric Production UnitsSulfur Dioxide, Acid Mist and Visible September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514Page 26 of 33 Emissions 20.2.41 NMAC - Nonferrous Smelters- Sulfur September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514 20.2.72 NMAC - Construction Permits September 26, 1997 at 62 FR 50514

20.2.73 NMAC - Notice of Intent and Emissions Inventory Requirements August 12, 2010 at 75 FR 48860

20.2.74 NMAC - Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration November 26, 2010 at 75 FR 72688

7. Emergency power : Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and substantial enda ngerment to public healt h, including adequate contingency plans to implement the emerge ncy episode provisions in their SIPs.

The State's response : In its submittal for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS, the State of New Mexico indicated that New Mexico has adopted an Ai r Pollution Episode Contingency Plan (56 FR 38074, August 12, 1991), 23 that covers air pollution epis odes and the occurrence of an emergency due to the effects of the pollutants on the health of persons. New Mexico also indicated that they plan to revise their Air Pollution Episode Conti ngency Plan to include significant harm levels for PM 2.5 once EPA finalizes a rule establishing these.

EPA analysis : The NMED has authority to formulat e contingency plans for environmental emergencies, pursuant to the Air Quality Control Act and has authority to issue cease and desist orders as provided in NMSA 1978 74-2-10, which provides enforcement authority. We compared the State’s Air Pollution Epis ode Contingency Plan to 40 CFR 51 Subpart H – Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Epis odes and Appendix L to Part 51 - Example Regulations for Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes. Subpart H provides a classification system for episode plans. Each re gion in a state is classified separately with respect to each of the following pollutants: sulfur dioxide, PM, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone (40 CFR 51.150). An area classified as a Priority I region for ozone has ambient concentrations greater than 195 micrograms per cubic meter (denoted μg/m 3 ) or 0.10 ppm for a 1-hour maximum. The regulations do not establish Prio rity II regions for ozone. Areas that do not meet the criteria for Priority I for ozone are classified Priority III. For PM, a Priority I region has ambient con centrations greater than 95 μg/m 3 annual geometric mean or 325 μg/m 3 for a 24-hour maximum. A Priority II region is any area which is not a Priority I region and has ambient concentrations between 60–95 μg/m3 annual geometric mean or 150–325 μg/m 3
for a 24-hour maximum. A Priority IA Region is any area which is Priority I primarily because of emissions from a single point sour ce. Areas that do not meet the cr iteria for Priority I or II are classified Priority III. Table 6 below summarizes the classification for ozone and PM. Note that a classification scheme for 8-hour ozone is not addressed under Subpart H and while the table does not identify whether PM refers to PM 10 or PM 2.5 , the date of promulgation for Subpart H

23 The State erred in providing the date and Federal Register citation for EPA’s approval of New Mexico’s Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan (56 FR 38074). The date and Federal Register citation the State provided in their submittal is for EPA’s approval of Albuquerque-Ber nalillo County’s Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan, submitted on April 14, 1989,and applies only within the boundaries of Bernalillo County (including the City of Albuquerque). EPA approved New Mexico’s Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan on August 21, 1990 (correct citation is 55 FR 34013).Page 27 of 33 would support PM 10 (November 7, 1986, 51 FR 40668), as amended on July 20, 1993 (see 58 FR 38822).

Table 6: Classification of Regions for Ep isode Plans for Ozone and Particulate Matter (40 CFR 51.150) Parameter Priority I Priority II Priority III

Ozone Ambient concentrations > 195 μg/m 3 (0.10 ppm)
1-hour maximum Not defined Areas which do not
meet the criteria for Priority I

Particulate

matter Ambient concentrations > 95 μg/m 3 annual geometric mean; 325 μg/m 3

24-hour maximum Ambient
concentrations between 60-95 μg/m 3
annual geometric mean; 150-325 μg/m 3

24-hour maximum. Areas which do not
meet the criteria for Priority I or II

The significant harm level (SHL) for the 8- hour ozone NAAQS will remain unchanged as 0.6 parts per million (ppm) ozone, 2-hour average, as indicated in 40 CFR 51.151. EPA believes that the existing ozone-related provisions of 40 CFR Subpart H remain appropriate. Therefore, EPA expects that for purposes of the 1997 8- hour ozone NAAQS, states need only to confirm that they have existing emergency episode pl an provisions consistent with EPA’s existing regulatory requirements. 24
The New Mexico Air Pollution Episode C ontingency Plan addresses the pollutants specified under 40 CFR 51.150. Using 2006-2010 cer tified ambient air quality monitoring data, 25 we determined that areas within New Mexico meet the classificati on for Priority 1 for 1- hour ozone and Priority III for part iculate matter. We found that the provisions in New Mexico’s Air Pollution Episode Contingency Plan are consistent with those of 40 CFR 51.151 and 152, and Appendix L to Part 51. The State's Air Po llution Episode Contingency Plan was approved into the New Mexico SIP (see 55 FR 34013, Augus t 21, 1990). As discussed in section II, subsection A, today we are also proposing to make a CFR codification technical correction to
amend the table titled “EPA Approved Nonregulatory Prov isions And Quasi-Regulatory
Measures In The New Mexico SIP” under 40 CFR 52.1620(e), to include an entry for the New Mexico Air Pollution Episode Contingency Pl an approved by EPA into the SIP on August 21, 1990 (55 FR 34013, 40 CFR 52.1639(a)). EPA is pr oposing to make this CFR codification
technical correction because it clarifies that EPA previously approved the State’s air pollution episode provisions into the New Mexico SIP. While the State has appropriate gene ral emergency powers to address PM 2.5 related episodes, SHLs for PM 2.5 are not provided under Subpart H, nor have SHLs for the 1997 PM 2.5 standards been proposed by EPA. The New Me xico SIP has not been revised to address contingency plans for PM 2.5 . To evaluate whether the Ne w Mexico SIP provides adequate contingency plans for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS, EPA used guidance issued in 2009 for the 2006

24 October 2, 2007 Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone
and PM 2.5 NAAQS, Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, OAQPS.

25 The ozone and PM data are available through AQS. The AQS data for PM are provided in the docket for this rulemaking.Page 28 of 33 PM 2.5 NAAQS. 26, 27 The 2009 Guidance for PM 2.5 recommends that a st ate with at least one
monitored 24-hour PM 2.5 value exceeding 140.4 μg/m 3 since 2006 establish an emergency episode plan and contingency measures to be impl emented should such level be exceeded again. Additionally, the 2009 Guidance for PM 2.5 recommends that if no area of a state has exceeded this 140.4 μg/m 3 level since 2006 and the state ha s appropriate general emergency powers to address PM 2.5 related episodes, then no specific emergency episode plans are necessary at this time given the existing m onitored levels. The 2006-2010 data for New Mexico 28
do not exceed 140.4 μg/m 3 and have consistently remained below the level of 140.4 μg/m 3 . In fact, these data indicate that New Mexico’s PM 2.5 levels have stayed below 55 μg/m 3 . In addition, Subpart H at 51.153 provides for reeval uation of episode plans and requires that, “States should periodically reevalua te priority classifications of a ll Regions or portion of Regions
within their borders. The reevaluation must cons ider the three most recent years of air quality
data. If the evaluation indicates a change to a higher priority classification, appropriate changes in the episode plan must be made as expeditious ly as practicable.” New Mexico’s data does not indicate a change to a higher priority, but suggests that emergency episode plans for the PM 2.5 NAAQS are not needed at this time. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) with resp ect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

8. Future SIP revisions : Section 110(a)(2 )(H) requires states to have the authority to revise their SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved methods for attaining NAAQS, or in response to an EPA finding th at the SIP is substantially inadequate.

The State’s response : In its submittal, the NMED addre ssed how the New Mexico SIP satisfies this particular requirement of section 110(a)(2)(H) as follows:.

New Mexico is a compilation of regulations, pl ans, and submittals that act to improve and maintain air quality in accordance with national st andards. The authority to develop or revise the SIP is based on the authority to adopt new regul ations, revise existing regulations, and conduct
business in a manner to meet th e NAAQS. New Mexico state stat ute § 74-7-5 gives the board authority to perform these functions. § 74-7-5 al so provides the board the authority to adopt regulations to abate, control, and prohibit ai r pollution throughout Ne w Mexico in accordance with the provisions of State Rules Act [Chapt er 14, Article 4, NMSA 1978]. Nothing in New Mexico's statutory or regulatory authority prohibits the State from revising the SIP in the event of a revision to the NAAQS

EPA analysis : The Air Quality Control Act and the Environmental Improvement Act authorize the NMED as the primary agency in the state concerned with environm ental protection and enforcement of regulations, including but not limited to air quality (NMSA 1978 74-1 and NMSA 1978 74-2). The Air Quality Control Act gives the NMED the authority to “develop and

26 “Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standard s (NAAQS)”, September 29, 2009 memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division to Regional Air Division Directors.

27 On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS from 65 μ g/m 3 to 35 μ g/m 3 (see 71 FR 61144).

28 The ozone and PM data are available through AQS. The 2006-2011 AQS data for PM 2.5 are provided in the docket for this rulemaking.Page 29 of 33 present to the environmental improvement board a plan for the control, regulation, prevention or abatement of air pollution...,” a nd authorizes the EIB to adopt such a plan (see NMSA 1978 74- 2-5.1(H) and NMSA 1978 74-2-5(B)(2)). The Air Quality Control Act also authorizes the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board to “adopt, promulgate, publish, amend and repeal regulations consistent with the Air Quality C ontrol Act to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standards a nd prevent and abate air polluti on .... ,” and the Environmental Improvement Act authorizes the NMED to en force such rules, regulations and orders promulgated by the EIB (see NMSA 1978 74-2- 5(B)(1) and NMSA 1978 74-1-6(F)). Furthermore, the Air Quality Control Act require s the NMED to, “... advise, consult, contract with and cooperate with local authorities, other states, th e federal government and other interested persons or groups in regard to matters of common intere st in the field of air quality control...” (see NMSA 1978 74-2-5.2(B )). Thus, New Mexico has the authority to revise its SIP, as may be necessary to account for revisions of the NAAQS, adopt more effective methods of attaining the NAAQS, and respond to EPA SIP calls. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H) with resp ect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

9. Consultation, public notice, and PSD and visibility protection : 29 Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires states to provide a pr ocess for consultation with local governments and Federal Land Managers carrying out NAAQS implementation requi rements pursuant to section 121 relating to consultation. Section 110(a)(2 )(J) further requires states to notify the public if NAAQS are exceeded in an area and to enhance public awaren ess of measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances. Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires Stat es to meet applicable requirements of Part C related to prevention of significant dete rioration and visibi lity protection.

The State's response : Regarding PSD and visibility protec tion, New Mexico indicated that the State has adopted 20.2.74 NMAC ( Permits- Prevention of Significant Deterioration ) following the requirements outlined in 40 CFR 52 under se ction 161 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.A. section 7471). The State indicated that these provisions were approved by EPA as part of the SIP.

EPA analysis : Regarding consultation with government officials and public notification, the Air Quality Control Act, codified at NMSA 1978 74- 2, provides that “no re gulations or emission control requirement shall be adopted until after a public hearing by the environmental improvement board or the local board” and provi des that, “at the hearing, the environmental improvement board or the local boa rd shall allow all interested pe rsons reasonable opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments orally or in writing and to examine witnesses testifying at the hearing” (see NMSA 1978 74-2-6(B) and (D)). In addition, the Air Quality Control Act provides that the NMED shall have the pow er and duty to “advise, consult, contract with and cooperate with local authorities, other stat es, the federal government and ot her interested persons or groups in regard to matters of common interest in the field of air qualit y control...” (see 1978 74-2- 5.2(B)). The State’s PSD rules at 20.2.74.400 NMAC mandate that the NMED shall provide for public participation and notification regarding perm itting applications to any other state or local air pollution control agen cies, local government officials of the city or county where the source will be located, and FLMs whose lands may be affected by emissions from the source or

29 Section 110(a)(2)(J) is divided into three components: Consultation with government officials; public notification; and PSD and visibility protection.Page 30 of 33 modification. The State’s PSD rules at 20.2.74.403 NMAC require the NMED to consult with FLMs regarding permit applications for sources impacting Class I Federal areas. 30 Furthermore,
the State of New Mexico has committed in the SIP to consult continually with the FLMs on the review and implementation of the visibility program, and the State recognizes the expertise of the FLM in monitoring and new source review applicabili ty analyses for visibility and has agreed to notify the FML of any advance notification or ear ly consultation with a major new or modifying source prior to the submissi on of the permit application. 31 The State’s Transportation Conformity rules at 20.2.99.116 and 20.2.99.124 NMAC require that interagency consultation and opportunity for public involv ement be provided before ma king transportation conformity determinations and before adop ting applicable SIP revisions on transportation-related SIPs. 32
These rules are in the Federally-approved SIP. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of this por tion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2)(J) further requ ires states to notify the pub lic if NAAQS are exceeded in an area and to enhance public awareness of measur es that can be taken to prevent exceedances. Provisions regarding public notif ication of instances or areas in which any primary NAAQS was exceeded were approved into the New Mexico SIP on August 24, 1983 (48 FR 38466). In addition, the NMED air monitoring website provid es live air quality data for each of the monitoring stations in New Mexico. 33 The website also provides information on the health effects of ozone, particulate matter, and other cr iteria pollutants. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of this porti on of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the

2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS. Regarding PSD and visibility protection, se ction 110(a)(2)(J) requires States to meet applicable requirements of Part C related to PSD and visibility pr otection. As detailed in the subsection addressing the requi rements of section 110(a)(2)( C) above, New Mexico’s PSD program was conditionally approved into th e SIP on February 27, 1987 (52 FR 5964). New
Mexico has since then met the conditions of our conditional approval, so we are proposing to convert our conditional approval into a full approval. The State’s PSD program is in the SIP (52 FR 5964, 53 FR 44191, 55 FR 43013, 56 FR 20137, 61 FR 53639, 68 FR 11316, 68 FR 74483, 72 FR 50879, and 75 FR 72688). EPA approved New Mexico’s Visibility Protection Plan and approved a Long-Term Strategy for Visibility Pr otection into the New Mexico SIP on January 27, 2006 (71 FR 4490). With regard to the applicab le requirements for visibility protection, EPA recognizes that states are subj ect to visibility and regiona l haze program requirements under
sections 169A and 169B of the Act. In the event of the establis hment of a new NAAQS, however, these visibility and regional haze progr am requirements do not change. Thus, we find
that there is no new visibili ty obligation triggered under se ction 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. We are proposing th at the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2 )(J) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

10. Air quality modeling a nd submission of data : Section 110(a)(2)(K ) requires that SIPs provide for performing air quality modeling for predicting effect s on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant and submissi on of such data to EPA upon request.

30 See 75 FR 72688, published November 26, 2010 and 72 FR 50879, published September 5, 2007.

31 See 71 FR 4490, published January 27, 2006.

32 See 65 FR 14877.

33 Please see http://air.nmenv.state.nm.us/

.Page 31 of 33 The State’s response : The State indicated that New Me xico has developed Air Dispersion Modeling Guidelines that follow EPA guidelines for air dispersion modeling and that also include some internal policy language.

EPA analysis : The NMED has the power and duty, under the Air Quality Control Act to “develop facts and make investigations and st udies,” thereby providing for the functions of environmental air quality assessment (NMSA 1978 74-2-5). Modeling and emissions reductions measures have been submitted by the State and approved into the SIP. For example, we reference the air modeling and control measures submitted within the Attainment Demonstration for the San Juan County Early Action Compact Ar ea, approved by EPA and adopted into the SIP on August 17, 2005 (70 FR 48285). 34 Additionally, New Mexico has the ability to perform modeling for the primary and secondary PM 2.5 standards on a case-by-case permit basis consistent with their SIP-approved PSD rules and consistent with EPA guidance and EPA’s Guideline on Air Quality Models at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix W.

This section of the Act also requires that a SIP provide for the submission of data related to such air quality modeling to the EPA upon reque st. The Air Quality Control Act authorizes NMED to cooperate with the federal government in regard to matters of common interest in the field of air quality control, thereby allowing it to make this submission to the EPA (see NMSA 1978 74-2-5.2(B)). We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) with resp ect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

11. Permitting fees : Section 110(a)(2)(L) requ ires SIPs to require each major stationary source to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of re viewing, approving, implementing and enforcing a permit.

The State's response : The State indicated that th e fee requirements of 20.2.71 NMAC ( Operating Permit Emission Fees ) and 20.2.75 NMAC ( Construction Permit Fees ) were approved by EPA as meeting the CAA requirement s and were incorporated into New Mexico’s SIP (11/25/97, 62 FR 50514). Th e State also indicates that New Mexico’s Title V operating permit program in 20.2.70 NMAC was appr oved by EPA in 1997 (11/25/97, 62 FR 50514). 35

EPA analysis : The Air Quality Control Act provides the EIB with the legal authority for establishing an emission fee schedule and a c onstruction permit fee sc hedule to recover the reasonable costs of acting on permit applicatio ns, implementing, and enforcing permits (NMSA

34 The docket for this San Juan County rulemaking action is available through www.regulations.gov . The docket ID
is EPA-R06-OAR-2005-NM-0002.

35 The date and Federal Register citation provided by New Mexico is for the rulemaking in which we made a CFR codification error in 40 CFR 52.1620(c) by in correctly including entries in the table titled “EPA Approved New Mexico Regulations” for part 70 ( Operating Permits ) and part 71 ( Operating Permit Emission Fees ) of 20.2 NMAC. As explained in section II, subsection B of this TSD, part 70 and part 71 of 20.2 NMAC constitute New Mexico’s Title V permitting program and the associated permitting fees, respectively. New Me xico’s Title V permitting program is outside the scope of the New Mexico SIP, and parts 70 and 71 of 20.2 NMAC are State regulations that have not been approved into the New Mexico SIP. As explained in section II, subsection B, today EPA is also proposing to make CFR technical corrections by amending 40 CFR 52.1620(c) and 40 CFR 52.1640(c)(66)(i)(B), to make clear that New Mexico’s Title V permitting program has not been approved by EPA into the New Mexico SIP.Page 32 of 33 1978 74-2-7). New Mexico’s Permit Fee System was approved by EPA into the SIP on July 17, 1991 (56 FR 32511). New Mexico’s Permit Fee System implements a fee system for all preconstruction air permits issued by NMED. Ne w Mexico’s regulations for construction permit fees are found at 20.2.75 NMAC. Operating pe rmits, also known as Title V operating permit programs (see footnote 22, on p. 6 above) and associated fees legally are not part of the SIP, but were approved by EPA on November 26, 1996 (61 FR 60032) as part of the New Mexico Title V Program. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

12. Consultation/participation by affected local entities : Section 110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.

The State’s response : In its submittal, the NMED addre ssed how the New Mexico SIP satisfies this particular requirement of section 110(a)(2)(M) as follows:

New Mexico state statute § 74-2-5.2 "State air po llution control agency; specific duties and powers of the department," requires advising; consulti ng; contracting with and cooperating with local authorities, other states, the federal government and other interested persons or groups in regard to matters of common interest in the field of air quality control; and initiation of cooperative action between a local authority and the department, between one local authority and another or among any combination of local authorities and the department for control of air pollution in areas having related air pollution problems that overlap the boundaries of political subdivisions; and entering into agreements and compacts with adjoining states a nd Indian tribes, where appropriate. The State's public participation requirements and procedures fulfill the requirements for consultation with local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.

EPA analysis : As described under the section ad dressing the requirements of element 110(a)(2)(J) above, regarding consultation with g overnment officials and public notification, the Air Quality Control Act provides that, “no regulations or emissi on control requirement shall be adopted until after a public hearing by the envi ronmental improvement boa rd or the local board” and provides that, “at the heari ng, the environmental improvement board or the local board shall allow all interested persons reas onable opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments orally or in writing and to examine witnesses testifyi ng at the hearing” (see NMSA 1978 74-2-6(B) and (D)). In addition, the Air Qualit y Control Act provides that the NMED shall have the power and duty to “advise, consult, contract with and cooperate with local authorities, other states, the federal government and other interested person s or groups in regard to matters of common
interest in the field of air quality control...” (see NMSA 1978 74-2-5.2(B)). New Mexico’s PSD regulations at 20.2.74.400 NMAC mandate that the NMED shall provide for public participation and notification regarding permitting applications to any other state or local air pollution control agencies, local government officials of the city or county where the source will be located, and FLMs whose lands may be affected by emissi ons from the source or modification. New Mexico’s Transportation Conformity re gulations at 20.2.99.116 and 20.2.99.124 NMAC require that interagency consultation a nd opportunity for public involveme nt be provided before makingPage 33 of 33 transportation conformity determinations and before adopting applic able SIP revisions on transportation-related SIPs. 36 These rules are in the fe derally-approved SIP. We are proposing that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with resp ect to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

IV. EPA’s Recommendation

We reviewed New Mexico’s submittal , SIP, and air quality data for PM 2.5 for compliance with the requirements of sections 11 0(a)(1) and (2) of the Act for the 2006 PM 2.5 standard. We recommend that EPA propose to approve the subm ittal provided by the State of New Mexico to
demonstrate that the New Mexico SIP meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act with respect to the 2006 PM 2.5 standard. The submittal addresses the infrastructure elements specified in the CAA section 110(a)(2), necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2006 fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) NAAQS.

We recommend approval of the New Mexico SIP for the following elements : Emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) Ambient air quality monitoring/dat a system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) Program for enforcement of contro l measures: Section 110(a)(2)(C) Interstate transport: Section 110(a) (2)(D)(ii) Adequate resources: Section 110(a)(2)(E) Stationary source monitoring system: Section 110(a)(2)(F) Emergency power: Section 110(a)(2)(G) Future SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H) Consultation with government of ficials: Section 110(a)(2)(J)
Public notification: Section 110(a)(2)(J) PSD and visibility protectio n: Section 110(a)(2)(J) Air quality and modeling/da ta: Section 110(a)(2)(K) Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) Consultation/particip ation by affected local enti ties: Secti on 110(a)(2)(M)

V. References

1. Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour
Ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, Memorandum from William T. Ha rnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, OAQPS, to Air Division Directors; dated October 2, 2007.

2. Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Section 110(a)(1) and (2 ) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) NAAQS, Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, OAQPS, to Regional Air Divi sion Directors, da ted September 29, 2009.

36 See 65 FR 14877.