```

[Federal Register: September 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 170)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 53907-53908]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02se10-24]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0521; FRL-9196-2]

 
Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Maricopa 
County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Maricopa County 
portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions 
concern particulate matter (PM) emissions from fugitive dust sources 
such as construction sites and related activities, unpaved roads, 
unpaved parking lots, and disturbed soils on vacant lots. We are 
approving local rules that regulate these emission sources under the 
Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking 
comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 4, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2010-0521, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be 
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. http://www.regulations.gov is an 
``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not know your identity or 
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. 
If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If 
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA 
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all 
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may 
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location 
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an 
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415) 
947-4115, steckel.andrew@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates 
that they were adopted by the local air agency, the Maricopa County Air 
Quality Department (MCAQD) and submitted by the Arizona Department of 
Air Quality (ADEQ).

                                            Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Local agency                Rule No.             Rule title              Adopted          Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQD...........................               310  Fugitive Dust From Dust-          01/27/10          04/12/10
                                                     Generating Operations.
MCAQD...........................            310.01  Fugitive Dust From Non-           01/27/10          04/12/10
                                                     Traditional Sources of
                                                     Fugitive Dust.
MCAQD...........................  ................  Appendix C--Fugitive              03/27/08          07/10/08
                                                     Dust Test Methods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 8, 2010, EPA determined that the Rule 310 and 310.01 
submittals from Maricopa County met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 
part 51 appendix V; these criteria must be met before formal EPA review 
begins.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    There are prior versions of Rule 310, Rule 310.01 and Appendix C in 
the SIP. On August 21, 2007, EPA approved and incorporated within the 
SIP the April 7, 2004 adopted versions of Rule 310, Rule 310.01, and 
Appendix C (see 72 FR 46564). Maricopa County submitted, through the 
ADEQ, the March 26, 2008 adopted versions of Rule 310, Rule 310.01, and 
Appendix C to EPA on July 10, 2008. We have not acted on these versions 
of the rules. The January 27, 2010 version of Rules 310 and 310.01, the 
subject of this proposal, however, incorporates the 2008 revisions as 
well as these latest 2010 amendments. Consequently, for this proposal, 
we reviewed all amendments and the rules as a whole. In the case of 
Appendix C, we reviewed the submitted March 27, 2008 version since 
there was no subsequent submittal.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?

    PM contributes to effects that are harmful to human health and the 
environment, including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory 
and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung function, visibility 
impairment, and damage to vegetation and ecosystems. Section 110(a) of 
the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control PM 
emissions. Rule 310 is designed to limit the emissions of fugitive dust 
or particulate matter from activity related to land-clearing, 
earthmoving, construction, demolition, bulk material hauling, temporary 
staging areas and

[[Page 53908]]

unpaved parking lots, haul and access roads, vehicle track-out, and 
disturbed soil associated with these activities. Rule 310.01 is a rule 
designed to limit the emissions of fugitive dust or particulate matter 
from disturbed surfaces and vehicle use in open areas and vacant lots, 
unpaved roadways and parking lots, livestock activities, erosion-caused 
deposition of bulk material on paved roadways, and easements, rights-
of-way, and access roads for utilities.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act) and 
must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). In 
addition, SIP rules must implement Reasonably Available Control 
Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control Technology 
(RACT), in moderate PM nonattainment areas, and Best Available Control 
Measures (BACM), including Best Available Control Technology (BACT), in 
serious PM nonattainment areas (see CAA sections 189(a)(1) and 
189(b)(1)). The MCAQD regulates a PM nonattainment area classified as 
serious (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 310 and Rule 310.01 must 
implement BACM.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability and RACM or BACM requirements consistently include the 
following:
    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations; Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal 
Register Notice,'' (Blue Book), notice of availability published in the 
May 25, 1988 Federal Register.
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    3. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57 
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    4. ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment 
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas 
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of 
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August 
16, 1994).
    5. ``PM-10 Guideline Document,'' EPA 452/R-93-008, April 1993.
    6. ``Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information 
Document for Best Available Control Measures,'' EPA 450/2-92-004, 
September 1992.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and 
guidance. Our Technical Support Documents (TSD) on each rule has our 
detailed review and evaluation.

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules

    We have no recommendation at this time.

D. Public Comment and Final Action

    Because EPA believes the submitted rules fulfill all relevant 
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve them as described in 
section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public 
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new 
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final 
approval action that will incorporate these rules into the federally 
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

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

    Dated: August 23, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2010-21959 Filed 9-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```