Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; Nogales PM10, 58962-58966 [2012-23118]

Download as PDF 58962 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA Approval date Additional explanation Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Statewide ........... 12/7/07, 6/6/08, 4/26/10 ..... 9–25–12 [Insert page number where the document begins]. Statewide ........... 4/26/10, 5/24/11 ................. 9–25–12 [Insert page number where the document begins]. This action addresses the following CAA elements or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). This action addresses the following CAA elements or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D), E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). * * * * * BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0458; FRL–9730–8] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area Plan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: EPA is approving a state implementation plan revision submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality to address the moderate area PM10 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers) planning requirements for the Nogales nonattainment area. Consistent with this final action, EPA is approving the following plan elements as meeting the requirements of the Clean Air Act: The Nogales nonattainment area 2008 and 2011 emission inventories; the demonstration that the Nogales nonattainment area is attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM10, but for international emissions sources in Nogales, Mexico; the demonstration that reasonably available control measures sufficient to meet the standard have been implemented in the nonattainment area; the reasonable further progress demonstration; the demonstration that implementation of measures beyond those needed for attainment meet the contingency measure requirement; and, the motor vehicle emissions budget for the purposes of determining the conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects with this PM10 plan. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:11 Sep 24, 2012 Effective Date: This rule is effective on October 25, 2012. Docket: EPA has established docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0458 for this action. The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at 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 at either location (e.g., confidential business information or 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: Jerry Wamsley, Air Planning Office, AIR–2, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901, telephone number: (415) 947–4111, or email address, wamsley.jerry@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean EPA. We are providing the following table of contents for ease of locating information in this proposal. DATES: [FR Doc. 2012–23497 Filed 9–24–12; 8:45 am] Jkt 226001 Table of Contents I. EPA’s Proposed Action II. Arizona’s Submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan A. Arizona’s Submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan and Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements B. Revisions to the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget C. Revisions to the 2008 and 2011 Emissions Inventories’ Mobile Source Emissions Estimates III. Public Comments IV. EPA’s Final Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. EPA’s Proposed Action On June 27, 2012, EPA proposed to approve the proposed state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) on May PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 29, 2012 to address the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) requirements for areas classified as ‘‘moderate’’ nonattainment for the PM10 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), in this case, Nogales, Arizona. ADEQ submitted a plan for the Nogales nonattainment area (NA) entitled Proposed State Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area, referred to as the ‘‘Nogales 2012 Plan’’ here and in our proposal. See 77 FR 38400; (June 27, 2012). Specifically, under CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA proposed to approve the following elements of the Nogales 2012 Plan: (1) The 2008 base year and 2011 emissions inventories as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3); (2) The demonstration of attainment but for international emissions as meeting the requirements of CAA section 179B(a)(1); (3) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior to the CAA’s 1994 attainment deadline as meeting the reasonably available control measure/ reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT) requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C); (4) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry to meet the reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179B(a)(2); (5) The implementation of post-1994 paving projects as meeting the contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 179B(a)(2); and, (6) The 2011 attainment year motor vehicle emissions budget if revised to include road construction PM10, because, as revised, it is derived from the section 179B demonstration and meets the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR 93, subpart A. To summarize our proposal, first, we described the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS and its application to the Nogales NA and E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM 25SER1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES how this resulted in the designation and classification of the Nogales NA as a moderate PM10 nonattainment area under the CAA. Then, we described, in general terms, the CAA planning requirements for moderate PM10 nonattainment areas, such as the Nogales NA, and touched briefly upon the 1993 Nogales PM10 Plan, which identified emissions sources from Nogales, Mexico as the principal sources of PM10 affecting ambient concentrations in Nogales, Arizona. See 77 FR 38401; (June 27, 2012). Second, we presented Arizona’s Nogales 2012 Plan, submitted by ADEQ on May 29, 2012, and described the ADEQ’s concurrent request that EPA ‘‘parallel process’’ its review and proposed action on this plan. Then, we provided a brief description of the location and geography of the Nogales NA. The Nogales NA is located within Santa Cruz County in southern Arizona, approximately 60 miles south of Tucson, and covers 76.1 square miles. The southernmost boundary of the Nogales NA and Santa Cruz County is the United States (U.S.)/Mexico border. Adjacent to the U.S./Mexico border, the city of Nogales, Arizona is the largest city and population center in the Nogales NA. Directly across the U.S./ Mexico border from Nogales, Arizona is the much larger city of Nogales, Mexico.1 See 77 FR 38401–38402; (June 27, 2012). Third, we discussed in detail the CAA and statutory requirements for moderate PM10 nonattainment areas as applied to the Nogales NA, given the area’s air quality is influenced by international sources of PM10 emissions from Nogales, Mexico.2 Specifically, in lieu of a demonstration that the area would actually attain the PM10 NAAQS, section 179B of the CAA allows Arizona to submit a demonstration that the Nogales NA would have attained the PM10 NAAQS but for international transport of PM10 from Mexico. Under CAA section 179B, however, other SIP requirements, such as RACM and contingency measures, among other requirements, continue to apply to PM10 nonattainment areas even if the area qualifies for relief from the attainment 1 In 2010, Nogales, Arizona had 20,017 inhabitants (U.S. Census Bureau 2010) and Nogales, Mexico had 212,533 inhabitants (Instituto Nacional de Estadistica Geografia e Informatica, (INEGI) 2010). 2 In particular, we described our preliminary interpretations of the applicable statutory provisions as set forth in the following guidance documents: The ‘‘General Preamble to Title I of the Clean Air Act’’ at 57 FR 132498; (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070; (April 28, 1992); and ‘‘The Addendum to the General Preamble’’ at 59 FR 41998; (August 16, 1994). VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:11 Sep 24, 2012 Jkt 226001 demonstration requirement. See 77 FR 38402–38404; (June 27, 2012). The primary criterion we applied for determining attainment of the PM10 NAAQS but for international emissions was 40 CFR part 50, appendix K. Under 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, a nonattainment area meets the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) is equal to or less than one. To demonstrate that the Nogales NA has met the PM10 standard ‘‘but for’’ emissions from Mexico, Arizona’s analysis had to show that no more than three exceedances over its specific three-year analysis period, 2007–2009, based on data completeness and every day sampling, would have occurred on the U.S. side of the border, setting aside contributions from Mexican sources of PM10. See 77 FR 38404; (June 27, 2012). In the fourth section of our proposal, we reviewed the Nogales 2012 Plan and its constituent parts against the applicable CAA statutory and regulatory requirements. Emissions Inventories. The 2008 base year and 2011 emissions inventories were reviewed for compliance with the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3). For the reasons set forth in the proposed rule, we concluded that the inventories are comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories of actual emissions from all sources in the nonattainment area and therefore meet the requirements of section 172(c)(3). See 77 FR 38404–38405; (June 27, 2012). Section 179B or ‘‘But For’’ Demonstration. Arizona’s demonstration of attainment but for international emissions for the Nogales NA was reviewed for compliance with section 179B(a)(1). To summarize briefly Arizona’s demonstration, Arizona reviewed local population growth data, Nogales, Mexico and Nogales NA emissions inventories, the ambient PM10 data, and local meteorological data, and through its analyses, Arizona found that the Ambos Nogales area’s meteorology and topography influence the observed exceedances of PM10 NAAQS and there is a definite south-to-north directional component to the ambient air quality data underlying the exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS. Finally, daily and hourly analyses of the most recent three years of quality assured and State certified ambient PM10 data from 2007–2009 and associated meteorological data showed that no more than two, and likely none, of the 29 exceedances would have occurred in the Nogales NA, but for PM10 emissions from Mexico. Based on these two exceedances, data PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 58963 completeness, and every day sampling for the 2007–2009 timeframe, the calculated maximum expected annual exceedance rate is 0.7 exceedances per year. The standard used to demonstrate attainment of the PM10 NAAQS, ‘‘but for’’ international emissions, is that the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 mg/m3 must be equal to or less than one. Therefore, we proposed to determine that Arizona has met this standard and to approve its section 179B analysis and demonstration of attainment but for international emissions for the Nogales NA. See 77 FR 38405–38416; (June 27, 2012). RACM/RACT. The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior to the CAA’s 1994 attainment deadline were reviewed under the RACM/RACT requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C). Based on that review, we concluded that the implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior to the 1994 attainment deadline met the RACM/RACT requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C). See 77 FR 38416–38417; (June 27, 2012). Reasonable Further Progress. The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry were reviewed under the RFP demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179B(a)(2). Based on that review, we concluded that the implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry met the RFP demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179B(a)(2). See 77 FR 38417–38418; (June 27, 2012). Contingency Measures. The implementation of post-1994 paving projects were reviewed under the contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 179B(a)(2). Based on that review, we concluded that the implementation of post-1994 paving projects met the contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 179B(a)(2). See 77 FR 38417–38418; (June 27, 2012). Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget. Finally, the 2011 attainment year motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) was reviewed against the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and of 40 CFR 93, subpart A. Based on that review, we concluded that the MVEB, if it included road construction dust when submitted in its final form, would meet the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM 25SER1 58964 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations today. The Final Nogales 2012 Plan includes the revised MVEB. Under EPA’s ‘‘parallel processing’’ procedure, EPA proposes rulemaking action on a proposed SIP revision concurrently with the State’s public review process. If the State’s proposed SIP revision is changed, EPA will evaluate that subsequent change and may publish another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no significant change is made, EPA will propose a final rulemaking on the SIP revision after II. Arizona’s Submittal of the Final responding to any submitted comments. 2012 Nogales Plan Final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only after the final SIP revision We proposed approval of the Nogales has been fully adopted by ADEQ and 2012 Plan based on the public draft submitted formally to EPA for approval version of the plan submitted to us by as part of the Arizona SIP. See 40 CFR ADEQ as an enclosure to a letter requesting EPA to ‘‘parallel process’’ the part 51, appendix V. Because we anticipated the need to plan prior to its submittal in final and include road construction dust within adopted form as a revision to the the MVEB, noted this need in our Arizona SIP. We indicated in our proposal, and provided a 30-day public proposal that, while we could propose comment period concerning this action, we would not take final action revision to include road construction on the Nogales 2012 Plan until the plan dust, we are not re-proposing approval had been fully adopted by ADEQ and of the revised MVEB included in the submitted formally to EPA for approval as part of the Arizona SIP.3 As discussed Final Nogales 2012 Plan. Prior to its August 24, 2012 submittal of the Final in more detail below, on August 24, 2012, ADEQ adopted and submitted the Nogales 2012 Plan, the State provided a 30-day public review and comment Final 2012 State Implementation Plan period of the revised MVEB including Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area, road construction dust and brake and dated August 24, 2012, herein referred tire wear emissions. In sum, these to as ‘‘Final Nogales 2012 Plan’’. This revisions to the Nogales PM10 MVEB plan is the subject of today’s final have been presented to the public for as action. many as 60 days and neither we nor A. Arizona’s Submittal of the Final ADEQ have received public comment. Nogales 2012 Plan and Clean Air Act As submitted by Arizona in the Final Procedural Requirements Nogales 2012 Plan, the MVEB revisions are discussed below. In our review of the Nogales 2012 Plan, dated May 29, 2012, and in our B. Revisions to the Motor Vehicle proposal, we noted the need for Arizona Emissions Budget to include road construction dust within We proposed to approve the MVEB the plan’s MVEB and notified ADEQ for the Nogales NA contingent upon prior to the close of its initial 30-day ADEQ’s inclusion of road construction public comment period on the Nogales PM10 in the MVEB. As we noted in the 4 In addition, ADEQ 2012 Plan. proposed rule, road construction PM10 identified the need to revise the MVEB should be included in the MVEB to include vehicle brake and tire wear because, as the second largest source of emissions along with the previously PM10 emissions generated within the included vehicle exhaust and entrained Nogales NA, road construction PM10 is road dust emissions. Thus, in response a significant contributor to the overall to our comments and its own review of Nogales NA PM10 inventory.5 See 40 the MVEB, ADEQ revised the MVEB in CFR 93.122(e). While road construction the Nogales 2012 Plan to include road dust was included within the 2008 and construction dust and vehicle brake and 2011 emissions inventories provided by tire wear emissions, and on July 24, ADEQ, these emissions were not 2012 provided for a 30-day public included in the MVEB for the Nogales review of this revised MVEB. On August 2012 Plan as submitted by ADEQ on 24, 2012, ADEQ then adopted and May 29, 2012. submitted the Final Nogales 2012 Plan As noted above, ADEQ revised the on which we are taking final action MVEB in the Final Nogales 2012 Plan to include road construction dust (see 3 See footnote two of the proposed rule at 77 FR Table 1 below) and to include brake and 38401; (June 27, 2012). emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES of 40 CFR 93, subpart A. See 77 FR 38418–38419; (June 27, 2012). Within our proposal, we anticipated the necessity for ADEQ to revise the MVEB to include road construction dust emissions; therefore, we required a second public comment period before Arizona could provide its final submittal containing the revised MVEB. The State’s final submittal and the revised MVEB are discussed further in the next section. 4 See correspondence from Lisa Hanf, EPA to Eric Massey, ADEQ, dated June 21, 2012. VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:11 Sep 24, 2012 Jkt 226001 5 See PO 00000 77 FR 38419 (June 27, 2012). Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 tire wear emissions (see discussion in next section of this document). TABLE 1—2011 NOGALES NA PM10 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGET [tons] Source category PM10 Unpaved Road Dust ............. Road Construction Dust ....... Paved Road Dust ................. On-road Gasoline and Diesel Vehicle Emissions, including Brake, Tire Wear, and Vehicle Exhaust ................ 864.9 267.0 121.4 Total ............................... 1,274.3 21.0 Source: Table 7.1 of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan and ‘‘2008 and 2011 p.m.10 Emissions Inventories for the Nogales NA, Santa Cruz County, Arizona’’ in Appendix B of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan. Because Arizona included road construction dust as we recommended in our proposed approval of the Nogales 2012 Plan, we are taking final action to approve the Nogales NA PM10 MVEB at 1,274.3 tons. For our broader discussion of the Nogales 2012 Plan and how the MVEB meets statutory requirements, please see the proposed rule at 77 FR 38418—38419. C. Revisions to the 2008 and 2011 Emissions Inventories’ Mobile Source Emissions Estimates In reviewing the mobile source emissions estimates within the 2008 and 2011 emissions inventories for the MVEB in the Final Nogales 2012 Plan, ADEQ discovered that vehicle brake and tire wear emissions were not included in the 2008 and 2011 emissions inventories or the corresponding MVEB presented in the Nogales 2012 Plan, submitted May 29, 2012.6 As a result, the 2008 and 2011 emissions inventories did not include the seven tons per year of PM10 emissions attributed to vehicle brake and tire wear. ADEQ revised the Nogales NA emissions inventories and MVEB accordingly for the Final Nogales 2012 Plan and thereby increased the Nogales NA PM10 inventory total from 1,524 to 1,531 tons in 2008 and from 1,521 to 1,528 tons in 2011, an increase of less than 0.5 percent across the Nogales NA emissions inventories. While including brake and tire wear emissions is important for accuracy and compiling the MVEB, the material effect on any subsequent analyses using emissions inventory data in the Final 6 See Appendices 1 and 2 containing the MOVES model output files within Nogales NA 2008 and 2011 Emissions Inventories within Appendix B of the Nogales 2012 Plan. E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM 25SER1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations Nogales 2012 Plan is inconsequential. For example, in 2008, adding brake and tire wear emissions to the Nogales NA emissions inventory increases its largest share of the total Ambos Nogales regional emissions inventory by less than 0.1 percent, from 35.97 to 36.07 percent.7 Therefore, it remains accurate for the purposes of analysis to assign to the Nogales NA a maximum of 36 percent of total Ambos Nogales regional PM10 emissions; consequently, no revisions are required for the section 179B demonstration and supporting analyses presented within the Final Nogales 2012 Plan. By revising the Nogales NA emissions inventories for 2008 and 2011 and revising the MVEB resulting from the 2011 emissions inventory, ADEQ has corrected the oversight of not including the brake and tire wear emissions in the previously presented emissions inventories. The MVEB provided in Arizona’s Final Nogales 2012 Plan submittal accurately includes all onroad sources of PM10 as estimated within the 2011 Nogales NA emissions inventory. Also, the revised 2008 and 2011 emissions inventories for the Nogales NA within the Final Nogales 2012 Plan provide a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from all sources within the nonattainment area. III. Public Comments EPA’s proposed rule provided a 30day public comment period. During this period, we received no comments on our proposal. Furthermore, Arizona received no comments during its 30-day comment period presenting the revised MVEB for public review, prior to its submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES IV. EPA’s Final Action Under CAA section 110(k), and for the reasons set forth in our June 27, 2012 proposed rule and summarized herein, EPA is approving the Final 2012 State Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area (‘‘Final Nogales 2012 Plan’’), submitted by ADEQ on August 24, 2012, for the Nogales, Arizona ‘‘moderate’’ PM10 7 The previous Nogales NA 2008 emissions inventory of 1,524 tons divided by 4,237 tons, representing total Ambos Nogales regional PM10 emissions, provides the 35.97 percent share. The revised Nogales NA 2008 emissions inventory of 1,531 tons divided by 4,244 tons, representing total Ambos Nogales regional PM10 emissions, provides the 36.07 percent share. The 2008 Nogales, Mexico share remains constant at 2,713 tons as part of estimating the Ambo Nogales regional total. See Appendix A of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan for the detailed review and comparison of Nogales NA and Nogales, Mexico emissions inventories from which these figures are taken. VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:11 Sep 24, 2012 Jkt 226001 nonattainment area. Specifically, EPA is approving the following elements of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan: (1) The 2008 base year and 2011 emissions inventories as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3); (2) The demonstration of attainment but for international emissions as meeting the requirements of CAA section 179B(a)(1); (3) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior to the CAA’s 1994 attainment deadline as meeting the RACM/RACT requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C); (4) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry to meet the RFP demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179B(a)(2); (5) The implementation of post-1994 paving projects as meeting the contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 179B(a)(2); and, (6) The 2011 attainment year motor vehicle emissions budget because it is derived from the section 179B demonstration and meets the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and of 40 CFR 93, subpart A. Even with our approval of Arizona’s demonstration that the Nogales NA is attaining the PM10 NAAQS but for international transport from Mexico, this final action approving the Final Nogales 2012 Plan does not constitute a redesignation to attainment because we have not determined that the area has met the CAA requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E). The classification and designation status in 40 CFR part 81 remains moderate nonattainment for the Nogales NA until such time as EPA determines that Arizona has met the CAA requirements for redesignating the Nogales NA to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. V. 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. See 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 those choices meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves a state plan as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 58965 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 disproportionate human health or environmental effects with practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive Order 12898, (59 FR 7629; (February 16, 1994)). In addition, this action 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. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM 25SER1 58966 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 26, 2012. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: August 24, 2012. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart D—Arizona 2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(150) to read as follows: ■ § 52.120 Identification of plan. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES * * * * * (c) * * * (150) The following plan was submitted on August 24, 2012, by the Governor’s designee. (i) [Reserved] (ii) Additional material. (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. (1) ‘‘Final 2012 State Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area,’’ dated August 24, 2012, including VerDate Mar<15>2010 13:11 Sep 24, 2012 Jkt 226001 Appendices A–K, adopted on August 24, 2012. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2012–23118 Filed 9–24–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R08–OAR–2007–1034; FRL–9732–1] Disapproval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Utah; Revisions To Open Burning Regulations Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: EPA is disapproving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Utah on December 10, 1999. This revision to R307–202 Emission Standards: General Burning authorizes the State to extend the time period for open burning. EPA is disapproving the submitted revision because it does not meet the requirements of section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). This action is being taken under section 110 of the CAA. SUMMARY: This final rule is effective October 25, 2012. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2007–1034. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Freeman, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202– DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 1129, (303) 312–6602, freeman.crystal@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Definitions For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain words or initials as follows: (i) The initials AQS mean or refer to Air Quality System. (ii) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise. (iii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. (iv) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. (v) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan. (vi) The words Utah or State mean the State of Utah. Table of Contents I. Background II. Response to Comments III. Section 110(l) of the CAA IV. Final Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background On December 10, 1999, the State of Utah submitted a SIP revision to Rule R307–202 Emission Standards: General Burning. This rule contains the following provisions: definitions and exclusions, community waste disposal, general prohibitions, permissible burning—without permit, permissible burning with permit, and special conditions. The proposed revision is found within the ‘permissible burning with permit’ in section R307–202–5(3)(e)(i). The revision extends the time period during which open burning could be authorized. The current burning period in the rule is from March 30 to May 30, the revision would extend the beginning of the burning period to March 1. This would allow an additional 30 days to the open burning period. The revision to the rule is based on a request from the Washington County Mayors Association to change the beginning date to accommodate areas of the State that were dry enough to burn earlier in the year. In our analysis of ambient air quality monitoring data, as described in our June 19, 2012 (77 FR 36443) proposed rule, EPA found that the relaxation of the open burning rule could contribute to further degradation of air quality within the State of Utah. Specifically, the analysis demonstrates that further degradation of air quality could occur in Utah’s PM2.5 nonattainment areas where E:\FR\FM\25SER1.SGM 25SER1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 25, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58962-58966]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23118]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0458; FRL-9730-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona; 
Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a state implementation plan revision 
submitted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality to address 
the moderate area PM10 (particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal ten 
micrometers) planning requirements for the Nogales nonattainment area. 
Consistent with this final action, EPA is approving the following plan 
elements as meeting the requirements of the Clean Air Act: The Nogales 
nonattainment area 2008 and 2011 emission inventories; the 
demonstration that the Nogales nonattainment area is attaining the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM10, but for 
international emissions sources in Nogales, Mexico; the demonstration 
that reasonably available control measures sufficient to meet the 
standard have been implemented in the nonattainment area; the 
reasonable further progress demonstration; the demonstration that 
implementation of measures beyond those needed for attainment meet the 
contingency measure requirement; and, the motor vehicle emissions 
budget for the purposes of determining the conformity of transportation 
plans, programs, and projects with this PM10 plan.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on October 25, 2012.
    Docket: EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0458 for 
this action. The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at 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 at either location (e.g., 
confidential business information or 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: Jerry Wamsley, Air Planning Office, 
AIR-2, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-
3901, telephone number: (415) 947-4111, or email address, 
wamsley.jerry@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we'', 
``us'' or ``our'' are used, we mean EPA. We are providing the following 
table of contents for ease of locating information in this proposal.

Table of Contents

I. EPA's Proposed Action
II. Arizona's Submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan
    A. Arizona's Submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan and Clean 
Air Act Procedural Requirements
    B. Revisions to the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
    C. Revisions to the 2008 and 2011 Emissions Inventories' Mobile 
Source Emissions Estimates
III. Public Comments
IV. EPA's Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. EPA's Proposed Action

    On June 27, 2012, EPA proposed to approve the proposed state 
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Arizona Department 
of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) on May 29, 2012 to address the Clean 
Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements for areas classified as 
``moderate'' nonattainment for the PM10 national ambient air 
quality standard (NAAQS), in this case, Nogales, Arizona. ADEQ 
submitted a plan for the Nogales nonattainment area (NA) entitled 
Proposed State Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 
Nonattainment Area, referred to as the ``Nogales 2012 Plan'' here and 
in our proposal. See 77 FR 38400; (June 27, 2012). Specifically, under 
CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA proposed to approve the following elements 
of the Nogales 2012 Plan:
    (1) The 2008 base year and 2011 emissions inventories as meeting 
the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3);
    (2) The demonstration of attainment but for international emissions 
as meeting the requirements of CAA section 179B(a)(1);
    (3) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement 
projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior to the CAA's 
1994 attainment deadline as meeting the reasonably available control 
measure/reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT) 
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C);
    (4) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement 
projects at the Ports of Entry to meet the reasonable further progress 
(RFP) demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 
179B(a)(2);
    (5) The implementation of post-1994 paving projects as meeting the 
contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 
179B(a)(2); and,
    (6) The 2011 attainment year motor vehicle emissions budget if 
revised to include road construction PM10, because, as 
revised, it is derived from the section 179B demonstration and meets 
the requirements of CAA section 176(c) and 40 CFR 93, subpart A.
    To summarize our proposal, first, we described the 24-hour 
PM10 NAAQS and its application to the Nogales NA and

[[Page 58963]]

how this resulted in the designation and classification of the Nogales 
NA as a moderate PM10 nonattainment area under the CAA. 
Then, we described, in general terms, the CAA planning requirements for 
moderate PM10 nonattainment areas, such as the Nogales NA, 
and touched briefly upon the 1993 Nogales PM10 Plan, which 
identified emissions sources from Nogales, Mexico as the principal 
sources of PM10 affecting ambient concentrations in Nogales, 
Arizona. See 77 FR 38401; (June 27, 2012).
    Second, we presented Arizona's Nogales 2012 Plan, submitted by ADEQ 
on May 29, 2012, and described the ADEQ's concurrent request that EPA 
``parallel process'' its review and proposed action on this plan. Then, 
we provided a brief description of the location and geography of the 
Nogales NA. The Nogales NA is located within Santa Cruz County in 
southern Arizona, approximately 60 miles south of Tucson, and covers 
76.1 square miles. The southernmost boundary of the Nogales NA and 
Santa Cruz County is the United States (U.S.)/Mexico border. Adjacent 
to the U.S./Mexico border, the city of Nogales, Arizona is the largest 
city and population center in the Nogales NA. Directly across the U.S./
Mexico border from Nogales, Arizona is the much larger city of Nogales, 
Mexico.\1\ See 77 FR 38401-38402; (June 27, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2010, Nogales, Arizona had 20,017 inhabitants (U.S. 
Census Bureau 2010) and Nogales, Mexico had 212,533 inhabitants 
(Instituto Nacional de Estadistica Geografia e Informatica, (INEGI) 
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Third, we discussed in detail the CAA and statutory requirements 
for moderate PM10 nonattainment areas as applied to the 
Nogales NA, given the area's air quality is influenced by international 
sources of PM10 emissions from Nogales, Mexico.\2\ 
Specifically, in lieu of a demonstration that the area would actually 
attain the PM10 NAAQS, section 179B of the CAA allows 
Arizona to submit a demonstration that the Nogales NA would have 
attained the PM10 NAAQS but for international transport of 
PM10 from Mexico. Under CAA section 179B, however, other SIP 
requirements, such as RACM and contingency measures, among other 
requirements, continue to apply to PM10 nonattainment areas 
even if the area qualifies for relief from the attainment demonstration 
requirement. See 77 FR 38402-38404; (June 27, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In particular, we described our preliminary interpretations 
of the applicable statutory provisions as set forth in the following 
guidance documents: The ``General Preamble to Title I of the Clean 
Air Act'' at 57 FR 132498; (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070; (April 
28, 1992); and ``The Addendum to the General Preamble'' at 59 FR 
41998; (August 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The primary criterion we applied for determining attainment of the 
PM10 NAAQS but for international emissions was 40 CFR part 
50, appendix K. Under 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, a nonattainment area 
meets the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS when the expected number of 
days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) is equal to or less than 
one. To demonstrate that the Nogales NA has met the PM10 
standard ``but for'' emissions from Mexico, Arizona's analysis had to 
show that no more than three exceedances over its specific three-year 
analysis period, 2007-2009, based on data completeness and every day 
sampling, would have occurred on the U.S. side of the border, setting 
aside contributions from Mexican sources of PM10. See 77 FR 
38404; (June 27, 2012).
    In the fourth section of our proposal, we reviewed the Nogales 2012 
Plan and its constituent parts against the applicable CAA statutory and 
regulatory requirements.
    Emissions Inventories. The 2008 base year and 2011 emissions 
inventories were reviewed for compliance with the requirements of CAA 
section 172(c)(3). For the reasons set forth in the proposed rule, we 
concluded that the inventories are comprehensive, accurate, and current 
inventories of actual emissions from all sources in the nonattainment 
area and therefore meet the requirements of section 172(c)(3). See 77 
FR 38404-38405; (June 27, 2012).
    Section 179B or ``But For'' Demonstration. Arizona's demonstration 
of attainment but for international emissions for the Nogales NA was 
reviewed for compliance with section 179B(a)(1). To summarize briefly 
Arizona's demonstration, Arizona reviewed local population growth data, 
Nogales, Mexico and Nogales NA emissions inventories, the ambient 
PM10 data, and local meteorological data, and through its 
analyses, Arizona found that the Ambos Nogales area's meteorology and 
topography influence the observed exceedances of PM10 NAAQS 
and there is a definite south-to-north directional component to the 
ambient air quality data underlying the exceedances of the 
PM10 NAAQS. Finally, daily and hourly analyses of the most 
recent three years of quality assured and State certified ambient 
PM10 data from 2007-2009 and associated meteorological data 
showed that no more than two, and likely none, of the 29 exceedances 
would have occurred in the Nogales NA, but for PM10 
emissions from Mexico. Based on these two exceedances, data 
completeness, and every day sampling for the 2007-2009 timeframe, the 
calculated maximum expected annual exceedance rate is 0.7 exceedances 
per year. The standard used to demonstrate attainment of the 
PM10 NAAQS, ``but for'' international emissions, is that the 
expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average 
concentration above 150 [micro]g/m\3\ must be equal to or less than 
one. Therefore, we proposed to determine that Arizona has met this 
standard and to approve its section 179B analysis and demonstration of 
attainment but for international emissions for the Nogales NA. See 77 
FR 38405-38416; (June 27, 2012).
    RACM/RACT. The implementation of paving projects and capital 
improvement projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior 
to the CAA's 1994 attainment deadline were reviewed under the RACM/RACT 
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C). 
Based on that review, we concluded that the implementation of paving 
projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry within 
the Nogales NA prior to the 1994 attainment deadline met the RACM/RACT 
requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C). 
See 77 FR 38416-38417; (June 27, 2012).
    Reasonable Further Progress. The implementation of paving projects 
and capital improvement projects at the Ports of Entry were reviewed 
under the RFP demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 
179B(a)(2). Based on that review, we concluded that the implementation 
of paving projects and capital improvement projects at the Ports of 
Entry met the RFP demonstration requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) 
and 179B(a)(2). See 77 FR 38417-38418; (June 27, 2012).
    Contingency Measures. The implementation of post-1994 paving 
projects were reviewed under the contingency measure requirements of 
CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 179B(a)(2). Based on that review, we 
concluded that the implementation of post-1994 paving projects met the 
contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 
179B(a)(2). See 77 FR 38417-38418; (June 27, 2012).
    Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget. Finally, the 2011 attainment year 
motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) was reviewed against the 
requirements of CAA section 176(c) and of 40 CFR 93, subpart A. Based 
on that review, we concluded that the MVEB, if it included road 
construction dust when submitted in its final form, would meet the 
requirements of CAA section 176(c) and

[[Page 58964]]

of 40 CFR 93, subpart A. See 77 FR 38418-38419; (June 27, 2012).
    Within our proposal, we anticipated the necessity for ADEQ to 
revise the MVEB to include road construction dust emissions; therefore, 
we required a second public comment period before Arizona could provide 
its final submittal containing the revised MVEB. The State's final 
submittal and the revised MVEB are discussed further in the next 
section.

II. Arizona's Submittal of the Final 2012 Nogales Plan

    We proposed approval of the Nogales 2012 Plan based on the public 
draft version of the plan submitted to us by ADEQ as an enclosure to a 
letter requesting EPA to ``parallel process'' the plan prior to its 
submittal in final and adopted form as a revision to the Arizona SIP. 
We indicated in our proposal that, while we could propose action, we 
would not take final action on the Nogales 2012 Plan until the plan had 
been fully adopted by ADEQ and submitted formally to EPA for approval 
as part of the Arizona SIP.\3\ As discussed in more detail below, on 
August 24, 2012, ADEQ adopted and submitted the Final 2012 State 
Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area, dated August 24, 
2012, herein referred to as ``Final Nogales 2012 Plan''. This plan is 
the subject of today's final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See footnote two of the proposed rule at 77 FR 38401; (June 
27, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Arizona's Submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan and Clean Air Act 
Procedural Requirements

    In our review of the Nogales 2012 Plan, dated May 29, 2012, and in 
our proposal, we noted the need for Arizona to include road 
construction dust within the plan's MVEB and notified ADEQ prior to the 
close of its initial 30-day public comment period on the Nogales 2012 
Plan.\4\ In addition, ADEQ identified the need to revise the MVEB to 
include vehicle brake and tire wear emissions along with the previously 
included vehicle exhaust and entrained road dust emissions. Thus, in 
response to our comments and its own review of the MVEB, ADEQ revised 
the MVEB in the Nogales 2012 Plan to include road construction dust and 
vehicle brake and tire wear emissions, and on July 24, 2012 provided 
for a 30-day public review of this revised MVEB. On August 24, 2012, 
ADEQ then adopted and submitted the Final Nogales 2012 Plan on which we 
are taking final action today. The Final Nogales 2012 Plan includes the 
revised MVEB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See correspondence from Lisa Hanf, EPA to Eric Massey, ADEQ, 
dated June 21, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPA's ``parallel processing'' procedure, EPA proposes 
rulemaking action on a proposed SIP revision concurrently with the 
State's public review process. If the State's proposed SIP revision is 
changed, EPA will evaluate that subsequent change and may publish 
another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no significant change is 
made, EPA will propose a final rulemaking on the SIP revision after 
responding to any submitted comments. Final rulemaking action by EPA 
will occur only after the final SIP revision has been fully adopted by 
ADEQ and submitted formally to EPA for approval as part of the Arizona 
SIP. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
    Because we anticipated the need to include road construction dust 
within the MVEB, noted this need in our proposal, and provided a 30-day 
public comment period concerning this revision to include road 
construction dust, we are not re-proposing approval of the revised MVEB 
included in the Final Nogales 2012 Plan. Prior to its August 24, 2012 
submittal of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan, the State provided a 30-day 
public review and comment period of the revised MVEB including road 
construction dust and brake and tire wear emissions. In sum, these 
revisions to the Nogales PM10 MVEB have been presented to 
the public for as many as 60 days and neither we nor ADEQ have received 
public comment. As submitted by Arizona in the Final Nogales 2012 Plan, 
the MVEB revisions are discussed below.

B. Revisions to the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

    We proposed to approve the MVEB for the Nogales NA contingent upon 
ADEQ's inclusion of road construction PM10 in the MVEB. As 
we noted in the proposed rule, road construction PM10 should 
be included in the MVEB because, as the second largest source of 
PM10 emissions generated within the Nogales NA, road 
construction PM10 is a significant contributor to the 
overall Nogales NA PM10 inventory.\5\ See 40 CFR 93.122(e). 
While road construction dust was included within the 2008 and 2011 
emissions inventories provided by ADEQ, these emissions were not 
included in the MVEB for the Nogales 2012 Plan as submitted by ADEQ on 
May 29, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 77 FR 38419 (June 27, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, ADEQ revised the MVEB in the Final Nogales 2012 
Plan to include road construction dust (see Table 1 below) and to 
include brake and tire wear emissions (see discussion in next section 
of this document).

      Table 1--2011 Nogales NA PM10 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
                                 [tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Source category                           PM10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unpaved Road Dust.......................................           864.9
Road Construction Dust..................................           267.0
Paved Road Dust.........................................           121.4
On-road Gasoline and Diesel Vehicle Emissions, including            21.0
 Brake, Tire Wear, and Vehicle Exhaust..................
                                                         ---------------
    Total...............................................         1,274.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Table 7.1 of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan and ``2008 and 2011
  p.m.10 Emissions Inventories for the Nogales NA, Santa Cruz County,
  Arizona'' in Appendix B of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan.

    Because Arizona included road construction dust as we recommended 
in our proposed approval of the Nogales 2012 Plan, we are taking final 
action to approve the Nogales NA PM10 MVEB at 1,274.3 tons. 
For our broader discussion of the Nogales 2012 Plan and how the MVEB 
meets statutory requirements, please see the proposed rule at 77 FR 
38418--38419.

C. Revisions to the 2008 and 2011 Emissions Inventories' Mobile Source 
Emissions Estimates

    In reviewing the mobile source emissions estimates within the 2008 
and 2011 emissions inventories for the MVEB in the Final Nogales 2012 
Plan, ADEQ discovered that vehicle brake and tire wear emissions were 
not included in the 2008 and 2011 emissions inventories or the 
corresponding MVEB presented in the Nogales 2012 Plan, submitted May 
29, 2012.\6\ As a result, the 2008 and 2011 emissions inventories did 
not include the seven tons per year of PM10 emissions 
attributed to vehicle brake and tire wear. ADEQ revised the Nogales NA 
emissions inventories and MVEB accordingly for the Final Nogales 2012 
Plan and thereby increased the Nogales NA PM10 inventory 
total from 1,524 to 1,531 tons in 2008 and from 1,521 to 1,528 tons in 
2011, an increase of less than 0.5 percent across the Nogales NA 
emissions inventories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Appendices 1 and 2 containing the MOVES model output 
files within Nogales NA 2008 and 2011 Emissions Inventories within 
Appendix B of the Nogales 2012 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While including brake and tire wear emissions is important for 
accuracy and compiling the MVEB, the material effect on any subsequent 
analyses using emissions inventory data in the Final

[[Page 58965]]

Nogales 2012 Plan is inconsequential. For example, in 2008, adding 
brake and tire wear emissions to the Nogales NA emissions inventory 
increases its largest share of the total Ambos Nogales regional 
emissions inventory by less than 0.1 percent, from 35.97 to 36.07 
percent.\7\ Therefore, it remains accurate for the purposes of analysis 
to assign to the Nogales NA a maximum of 36 percent of total Ambos 
Nogales regional PM10 emissions; consequently, no revisions 
are required for the section 179B demonstration and supporting analyses 
presented within the Final Nogales 2012 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The previous Nogales NA 2008 emissions inventory of 1,524 
tons divided by 4,237 tons, representing total Ambos Nogales 
regional PM10 emissions, provides the 35.97 percent 
share. The revised Nogales NA 2008 emissions inventory of 1,531 tons 
divided by 4,244 tons, representing total Ambos Nogales regional 
PM10 emissions, provides the 36.07 percent share. The 
2008 Nogales, Mexico share remains constant at 2,713 tons as part of 
estimating the Ambo Nogales regional total. See Appendix A of the 
Final Nogales 2012 Plan for the detailed review and comparison of 
Nogales NA and Nogales, Mexico emissions inventories from which 
these figures are taken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By revising the Nogales NA emissions inventories for 2008 and 2011 
and revising the MVEB resulting from the 2011 emissions inventory, ADEQ 
has corrected the oversight of not including the brake and tire wear 
emissions in the previously presented emissions inventories. The MVEB 
provided in Arizona's Final Nogales 2012 Plan submittal accurately 
includes all on-road sources of PM10 as estimated within the 
2011 Nogales NA emissions inventory. Also, the revised 2008 and 2011 
emissions inventories for the Nogales NA within the Final Nogales 2012 
Plan provide a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual 
emissions from all sources within the nonattainment area.

III. Public Comments

    EPA's proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment period. During 
this period, we received no comments on our proposal. Furthermore, 
Arizona received no comments during its 30-day comment period 
presenting the revised MVEB for public review, prior to its submittal 
of the Final Nogales 2012 Plan.

IV. EPA's Final Action

    Under CAA section 110(k), and for the reasons set forth in our June 
27, 2012 proposed rule and summarized herein, EPA is approving the 
Final 2012 State Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 Nonattainment Area 
(``Final Nogales 2012 Plan''), submitted by ADEQ on August 24, 2012, 
for the Nogales, Arizona ``moderate'' PM10 nonattainment 
area. Specifically, EPA is approving the following elements of the 
Final Nogales 2012 Plan:
    (1) The 2008 base year and 2011 emissions inventories as meeting 
the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3);
    (2) The demonstration of attainment but for international emissions 
as meeting the requirements of CAA section 179B(a)(1);
    (3) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement 
projects at the Ports of Entry within the Nogales NA prior to the CAA's 
1994 attainment deadline as meeting the RACM/RACT requirements of CAA 
sections 172(c)(1), 179B(a)(2), and 189(c)(1)(C);
    (4) The implementation of paving projects and capital improvement 
projects at the Ports of Entry to meet the RFP demonstration 
requirement of CAA sections 172(c)(2) and 179B(a)(2);
    (5) The implementation of post-1994 paving projects as meeting the 
contingency measure requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 
179B(a)(2); and,
    (6) The 2011 attainment year motor vehicle emissions budget because 
it is derived from the section 179B demonstration and meets the 
requirements of CAA section 176(c) and of 40 CFR 93, subpart A.
    Even with our approval of Arizona's demonstration that the Nogales 
NA is attaining the PM10 NAAQS but for international 
transport from Mexico, this final action approving the Final Nogales 
2012 Plan does not constitute a redesignation to attainment because we 
have not determined that the area has met the CAA requirements for 
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E). The classification and 
designation status in 40 CFR part 81 remains moderate nonattainment for 
the Nogales NA until such time as EPA determines that Arizona has met 
the CAA requirements for redesignating the Nogales NA to attainment for 
the PM10 NAAQS.

V. 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. See 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 those choices meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves a state plan 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 disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive 
Order 12898, (59 FR 7629; (February 16, 1994)).

In addition, this action 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.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and

[[Page 58966]]

the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 
the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 
60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is 
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 26, 2012. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: August 24, 2012.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX.

    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:



PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart D--Arizona

0
2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(150) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (150) The following plan was submitted on August 24, 2012, by the 
Governor's designee.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
    (1) ``Final 2012 State Implementation Plan Nogales PM10 
Nonattainment Area,'' dated August 24, 2012, including Appendices A-K, 
adopted on August 24, 2012.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-23118 Filed 9-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.