Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Stationary Sources; New Source Review, 25213-25221 [2017-10946]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
emissions) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
This proposed rulemaking action does
not include action on section
110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA which pertains
to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, title I of the
CAA, because this element is not
required to be submitted by the 3-year
submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
of the CAA, and will be addressed in a
separate process if necessary.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA 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 CAA. 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 proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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 CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule to
approve portions of Delaware’s
December 14, 2015 SIP for section
110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 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, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 26, 2017.
John A. Armstead,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2017–11085 Filed 5–31–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0255; FRL–9963–08Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Stationary
Sources; New Source Review
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of
regulatory revisions to the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) portion of the applicable state
implementation plan (SIP) for the State
of Arizona. These revisions are
primarily intended to make corrections
to ADEQ’s SIP-approved rules for the
issuance of New Source Review (NSR)
permits for stationary sources, with a
focus on preconstruction permit
requirements under the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) for major sources and
major modifications. On November 2,
2015, we took final action on a SIP
submittal from ADEQ that significantly
updated ADEQ’s SIP-approved NSR
permitting program. However, that
action identified several deficiencies in
ADEQ’s program that needed to be
corrected. This proposed action will
correct a substantial portion of the
deficiencies we identified in that 2015
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25213
action. We are seeking comment on our
proposed action and plan to follow with
a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
July 3, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2017–0255, at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
R9airpermits@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be removed or edited from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
Beckham, EPA Region 9, (415) 972–
3811, beckham.lisa@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, the terms
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. Which rules did the State submit?
B. Are there previous versions of the rules
in the Arizona SIP?
C. What is the purpose of the EPA’s
proposed rule?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation
A. How is the EPA evaluating the State’s
rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Review of Rules Requested To Be
Removed From the SIP
D. Remaining NSR Deficiencies
E. Federal Implementation Plan for GHGs
and ADEQ’s PSD Program
F. The EPA’s Recommendations To Further
Improve the State’s Rules
G. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria
under Sections 110(l) and 193 of the
Clean Air Act?
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
25214
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
H. Conclusion
III. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For this document, we are giving
meaning to certain words or initials as
follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials ADEQ mean or refer
to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(iii) The initials A.R.S. mean or refer
to the Arizona Revised Statutes.
(iv) The initials BACT mean or refer
to Best Available Control Technology.
(v) The initials CFR mean or refer to
Code of Federal Regulations.
(vi) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(vii) The initials FIP mean or refer to
Federal Implementation Plan.
(viii) The initials GHG mean or refer
to greenhouse gas.
(ix) The initials IBR mean or refer to
incorporation by reference.
(x) The initials NAAQS mean or refer
to National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
(xi) The initials NA–NSR mean or
refer to Nonattainment New Source
Review.
(xii) The initials NSR mean or refer to
New Source Review.
(xiii) The initials PAL mean or refer to
Plantwide Applicability Limits.
(xiv) The initials PM10 mean or refer
to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or
equal to 10 micrometers (coarse
particulate matter).
(xv) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer
to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or
equal to 2.5 micrometers (fine
particulate matter).
(xvi) The initials PSD mean or refer to
Prevention of Significant Deterioration.
(xvii) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
(xviii) The initials SMC mean or refer
to significant monitoring concentration.
(xix) The words State or Arizona
mean the State of Arizona, unless the
context indicates otherwise.
(xx) The initials TSD mean or refer to
the technical support document for this
action.
(xxi) The initials VOC mean or refer
to volatile organic compound.
I. The State’s Submittals
A. Which rules did the State submit?
On April 28, 2017, ADEQ submitted
regulatory revisions for the ADEQ
portion of the Arizona SIP to the EPA.
This SIP revision submittal, which is
the subject of this action and is referred
to herein as the ‘‘April 2017 NSR
submittal,’’ contains revisions to
ADEQ’s preconstruction review and
permitting program requirements. These
revisions are intended to correct
deficiencies in ADEQ’s SIP-approved
NSR program related to the
requirements under both part C
(prevention of significant deterioration
or PSD) and part D (nonattainment new
source review or NA–NSR) of title I of
the Act, which apply to major stationary
sources and major modifications of such
sources. The preconstruction review
and permitting programs are often
collectively referred to as ‘‘New Source
Review’’ or NSR.
Table 1 lists the rules in the April
2017 NSR submittal, all of which we are
proposing for SIP approval in this
action, along with the rules’ effective
dates under State law. The submitted
rules are from the Arizona
Administrative Code, Title 18—
Environmental Quality, Chapter 2—
Department of Environmental Quality—
Air Pollution Control, Articles 1 through
4.
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL IN THIS ACTION
Rule
Title
R18–2–101
R18–2–201
R18–2–203
R18–2–217
R18–2–218
R18–2–330
R18–2–332
R18–2–401
R18–2–402
R18–2–403
R18–2–404
R18–2–405
(except 20) ..
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
R18–2–406
R18–2–407
R18–2–408
R18–2–410
R18–2–411
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
R18–2–412 .....................
Definitions ........................................................................................................................................
Particulate Matter: PM10 and PM2.5 ................................................................................................
Ozone ..............................................................................................................................................
Designation and Classification of Attainment Areas .......................................................................
Limitation of Pollutants in Classified Attainment Areas ..................................................................
Public Participation ..........................................................................................................................
Stack Height Limitation ...................................................................................................................
Definitions ........................................................................................................................................
General ............................................................................................................................................
Permits for Sources Located in Nonattainment Areas ...................................................................
Offset Standards .............................................................................................................................
Special Rule for Major Sources of VOC or Nitrogen Oxides in Ozone Nonattainment Areas
Classified as Serious or Severe.
Permit Requirements for Sources Located in Attainment and Unclassifiable Areas .....................
Air Quality Impact Analysis and Monitoring Requirements ............................................................
Innovative Control Technology .......................................................................................................
Visibility and Air Quality Related Value Protection .........................................................................
Permit Requirements for Sources that Locate in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas and Cause
or Contribute to a Violation of Any National Ambient Air Quality Standard.
PALs ................................................................................................................................................
On May 9, 2017, ADEQ’s April 2017
NSR submittal was determined to meet
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part
51, appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
The proposed revisions will apply to
all areas and sources of Arizona where
ADEQ has jurisdiction. Currently,
ADEQ has permitting jurisdiction for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
State effective date
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
the following stationary source
categories in all areas of Arizona:
smelting of metal ores, coal-fired
electric generating stations, petroleum
refineries, Portland cement plants, and
portable sources. ADEQ also has
permitting jurisdiction for major and
minor sources in the following counties:
Apache, Cochise, Coconino, Gila,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
March
March
March
March
March
March
March
March
March
March
March
March
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
March
March
March
March
March
21,
21,
21,
21,
21,
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
2017.
March 21, 2017.
Graham, Greenlee, La Paz, Mohave,
Navajo, Santa Cruz, Yavapai, and Yuma.
Finally, ADEQ has permitting
jurisdiction over major sources in Pinal
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
25215
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
County 1 and the Rosemont Copper
Mine in Pima County.
B. Are there previous versions of the
rules in the Arizona SIP?
Table 2 lists the existing rules in the
Arizona SIP that would be superseded
or removed from the Arizona SIP as part
of our proposed action. If the EPA were
to take final action as proposed herein,
these rules generally would be replaced
in the SIP by the submitted set of rules
listed in Table 1.
TABLE 2—SIP RULES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL FROM ARIZONA SIP IN THIS ACTION
EPA approval
date
Rule
Title
R9–3–301(I) and (K) ......
R9–3–304(H) ..................
R18–2–101 .....................
Installation Permits: General ...............................................................................
Installation Permits in Attainment Areas .............................................................
Definitions ............................................................................................................
R18–2–201
R18–2–203
R18–2–217
R18–2–218
R18–2–330
R18–2–332
R18–2–401
R18–2–402
R18–2–403
R18–2–404
R18–2–405
Particulate Matter: PM10 and PM2.5 .....................................................................
Ozone: One-hour Standard and Eight-hour Averaged Standard ........................
Designation and Classification of Attainment Areas ...........................................
Limitation of Pollutants in Classified Attainment Areas .......................................
Public Participation ..............................................................................................
Stack Height Limitation ........................................................................................
Definitions ............................................................................................................
General ................................................................................................................
Permits for Sources Located in Nonattainment Areas ........................................
Offset Standards ..................................................................................................
Special Rule for Major Sources of VOC or Nitrogen Oxides in Ozone Nonattainment Areas Classified as Serious or Severe.
Permit Requirements for Sources Located in Attainment and Unclassifiable
Areas.
Air Quality Impact Analysis and Monitoring Requirements .................................
PALs ....................................................................................................................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
R18–2–406 .....................
R18–2–407 .....................
R18–2–412 .....................
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. What is the purpose of the EPA’s
proposed rule?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
47
48
79
80
79
79
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
19326
19878
56655
67319
56655
56655
67319
67319
67319
67319
67319
67319
67319
67319
67319
11/2/2015
80 FR 67319
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
80 FR 67319
80 FR 67319
A. How is the EPA evaluating the State’s
rules?
The EPA has reviewed the provisions
submitted for SIP approval by ADEQ
that are the subject of this action for
compliance with the CAA’s general
requirements for SIPs in CAA section
110(a)(2), EPA’s regulations for
stationary source permitting programs
in 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, and the
CAA requirements for SIP revisions in
CAA section 110(l) and 193.
With respect to procedures, CAA
sections 110(a) and 110(l) require that
revisions to a SIP be adopted by the
state after reasonable notice and public
hearing. EPA has promulgated specific
procedural requirements for SIP
revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F.
These requirements include publication
of notices, by prominent advertisement
in the relevant geographic area, a public
comment period of at least 30 days, and
an opportunity for a public hearing.
Based on our review of the public
process documentation included in the
April 2017 NSR submittal, we find that
ADEQ has provided sufficient evidence
of public notice and opportunity for
comment and public hearing prior to
adoption and submittal of these rules to
the EPA.
With respect to substantive
requirements, we have reviewed the
ADEQ provisions that are the subject of
our current action in accordance with
the CAA and applicable regulatory
requirements, focusing primarily on
those that apply to PSD permit programs
under part C of title I of the Act and
Nonattainment NSR permit programs
under part D of title I of the Act. The
submitted rules are intended to correct
a substantial portion of the deficiencies
in ADEQ’s NSR program that we
identified in our November 2, 2015 final
action and a separate June 22, 2016 final
action issued by the EPA, discussed
below.
On November 2, 2015 (80 FR 67319),
the EPA published a final limited
approval and limited disapproval of
revisions to the ADEQ portion of the
Arizona SIP (referred to hereinafter as
‘‘our 2015 NSR action’’).2 Our 2015 NSR
action updated ADEQ’s SIP-approved
NSR permitting program, but identified
deficiencies that need to be corrected for
the EPA to grant full approval of
ADEQ’s NSR program. Thus, our 2015
NSR action would trigger an obligation
on the EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) to address
the deficiencies that were the basis for
our limited disapproval action unless
the State of Arizona corrects the
2 We also finalized other actions, which included
a partial disapproval related to the fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) significant monitoring concentration,
and limited approvals, without corresponding
limited disapprovals, related to section 189(e) of the
Act.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to propose to update the Arizona SIP by
approving the rule revisions submitted
in ADEQ’s 2017 NSR submittal, to
discuss the basis for our proposed
approval action, and to provide notice
of and seek public comment on our
proposed action. We present our
evaluation of the rules submitted by
ADEQ in its April 2017 NSR submittal,
which are identified in Table 1 above,
as compared with applicable
requirements under the CAA and EPA
regulations, particularly with respect to
the PSD and NA–NSR requirements
applicable to major sources and major
modifications. We provide our
reasoning in general terms below, and
include our more detailed analysis in
the Technical Support Document for
this action (TSD), which is available in
the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
This proposed rule also discusses our
proposal to approve ADEQ’s request
that we remove older, outdated rules
from the Arizona SIP and our rationale
for doing so.
1 ADEQ has delegated implementation of the
major source program to the Pinal County Air
Quality Control District.
05/05/1982
05/03/1983
11/23/2014
11/2/2015
09/23/2014
09/23/2014
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
11/2/2015
Federal Register
citation
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
25216
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
deficiencies, and the EPA approves the
related plan revisions, within two years
of that final action. In addition, to avoid
sanctions under section 179 of the Act,
ADEQ has 18 months from December 2,
2015, the effective date of our 2015 NSR
action, to correct those deficiencies
related to part D of title I of the Act.
On June 22, 2016 (81 FR 40525), the
EPA also published a separate but
related final limited disapproval action
for ADEQ’s NA–NSR program, as
ADEQ’s program did not fully address
fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
precursors as required by section 189(e)
of the Act (referred to hereinafter as
‘‘our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action’’).
This action triggered an obligation on
the EPA to promulgate a FIP to address
this deficiency unless the State of
Arizona corrects the deficiency, and the
EPA approves the related plan revisions,
within two years of the final action. In
addition, to avoid sanctions under
section 179 of the Act, ADEQ has 18
months from the July 22, 2016 effective
date of our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action
to correct the deficiency as it relates to
part D of title I of the Act.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria?
Please see our 2015 NSR action,
including our proposed action on March
18, 2015 (80 FR 14044), for a detailed
discussion of the approval criteria for
the NSR program and how ADEQ’s NSR
rules reviewed in that action generally
meet the approval criteria despite
certain deficiencies that require
correction for the EPA to fully approve
ADEQ’s NSR program. In this action, we
are focusing our review on the revisions
that ADEQ made to correct the
deficiencies we identified in our 2015
NSR action and our 2016 PM2.5
precursor action. We also reviewed
other revisions ADEQ made in the rules
submitted in ADEQ’s April 2017 NSR
action to ensure that the revised
language was consistent with applicable
requirements of the Act and EPA
regulations.
We are proposing approval of ADEQ’s
2017 NSR submittal because it would
correct numerous deficiencies and is
otherwise consistent with the
requirements for NSR programs and the
Act. If approved, this action would not
correct all the deficiencies in ADEQ’s
NSR program previously identified by
the EPA, but it would correct those
deficiencies that would potentially lead
to sanctions under section 179 of the
Act because of our 2015 NSR action.
ADEQ expects to correct the remaining
deficiencies in a subsequent SIP
submittal. Our detailed analysis of
ADEQ’s 2017 NSR submittal is provided
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
in the TSD for this action. Here we
briefly discuss the previously identified
deficiencies that this action, if finalized,
would correct.
1. Deficiencies Corrected Related to
Public Availability of Information
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that
ADEQ’s NSR program did not ensure,
for all sources subject to NSR review,
that certain requirements related to
public availability of information were
met. Specifically, ADEQ’s program did
not ensure that the information
submitted by the owner or operator and
ADEQ’s analysis of effects of air quality
would be available for public inspection
in at least one location in the affected
area. See 40 CFR 51.161(b)(1). To
address this deficiency, ADEQ revised
its public notice requirements to ensure
that the necessary documents will be
available for public inspection in the
‘‘area affected’’ by the action, including
the Director’s analysis of the effects on
ambient air quality. See revised R18–2–
330(D) and (F).
2. Deficiencies Corrected Related to
Stack Height Provisions
Regarding requirements for stack
heights and good engineering practice,
in our 2015 NSR action, we found that
ADEQ’s NSR program did not
adequately address the following
requirements. First, we found that
ADEQ’s NSR program did not meet the
public hearing requirements in 40 CFR
51.164 and 51.118(a) because the
referenced procedures were not in the
SIP or submitted for SIP approval.
ADEQ addressed this issue by revising
R18–2–332 to reference the SIPapproved public notice requirements in
R18–2–330. See revised R18–2–332(E).
We found that ADEQ’s rules did not
contain language that met the exception
to the stack height provisions provided
in 40 CFR 51.118(b). In addition, R18–
2–332 incorrectly referenced July 1,
1975 instead of July 1, 1957. ADEQ’s
current SIP submittal has corrected
these deficiencies; see revised R18–2–
332(B)(1) and (B)(2). We also
determined that ADEQ’s NSR program
did not contain a requirement that
owners or operators seeking to rely on
the equation in 40 CFR 51.100(ii)(2)(i)
produce evidence that the equation was
relied on in establishing an emission
limitation. ADEQ’s currently submitted
rules have added this requirement; see
revised R18–2–332(C)(2)(a). Finally,
ADEQ’s NSR program previously
contained a provision at R18–2–332(D)
which provided additional provisions
for sources ‘‘seeking credit because of
plume impaction which results in
concentrations in violation of national
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ambient air quality standards or
applicable maximum allowable
increases.’’ This provision is not
contained in the federal regulations and
appeared to allow for the use of stack
heights beyond good engineering
practice (GEP) stack height, as defined
in 40 CFR 51.100(ii), which we
identified as a deficiency in our 2015
NSR action. ADEQ has now addressed
this deficiency by removing this
provision from R18–2–332.
3. Deficiencies Corrected Related to the
CAA NA–NSR Program
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that
ADEQ’s NSR program often referred to
Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ’s
regulations where the federal
regulations refer to 40 CFR part 60, 61,
or 63; or, similarly, sections 111 or 112
of the Act (see 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xiii)—lowest achievable
emission rate, and (a)(1)(xl)—best
available control technology).3 Articles
9 and 11 are where ADEQ incorporates
by reference the federal regulations in
40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 (which the
EPA implements under sections 111 and
112 of the Act). However, these Articles
were not in the SIP, had not been
submitted for SIP approval, and did not
necessarily contain provisions
equivalent to all the subparts in parts
60, 61, and 63. In its current submittal,
ADEQ has revised its rules to remove
the references to Article 9 and 11 and
instead reference the requirements in 40
CFR part 60, 61, or 63; sections 111 and
112; and/or the new source performance
standard or national emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants. See the
revised R18–2–101(21), R18–2–401(11)
and R18–2–406(A)(4).
We also determined in our 2015 NSR
action that ADEQ’s SIP-approved NSR
rules governing nonattainment NSR
contained several definitions that were
not at least as stringent as the
corresponding federal definition. In its
April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ has
revised its definitions for consistency
with the federal definitions in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1). Specifically, ADEQ
corrected the definitions for stationary
source in revised R18–2–101(140),
major stationary source in revised R18–
2–401(13), net emissions increase in
revised R18–2–101(88), significant in
revised R18–2–101(131) and R18–2–
405(B), allowable emissions in revised
R18–2–101(13), federally enforceable in
3 Our 2015 NSR action also identified the
definition for ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii) as being part of this deficiency.
However, upon further review, that determination
was in error as the federal definition does not
reference part 60, 61, 63 or sections 111 and 112
of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
revised R18–2–101(53), regulated NSR
pollutant in revised R18–2–101(122),
and projected actual emissions in
revised R18–2–401(23).
40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(G) requires
that credit for emission reductions can
be claimed only to the extent that the
reviewing authority has not relied on it
in issuing any permit under regulations
approved pursuant to 40 CFR part 51,
subpart I, or the state has not relied on
it in demonstration of attainment or
reasonable further progress. In our 2015
NSR action, we found that ADEQ’s NSR
program generally addresses this
requirement at R18–2–404(H), but also
needed to include references to minor
NSR requirements, which are to be
approved as part of ADEQ’s NSR
regulations under subpart I. In its April
2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ added a
reference to its minor NSR rule R18–2–
334, but not its registration program in
R18–2–302.01. We determined that this
is acceptable as sources in the
registration program cannot use
emission reductions to obtain a
registration. That is, as ADEQ explained
in its April 2017 NSR submittal, R18–
2–302.01 does not provide for the
imposition of minor NSR emission
limits; rather, those limits would only
be imposed on a source that was denied
registration and required to obtain a
permit meeting the minor NSR
requirements (which are in R18–2–334).
See revised R18–2–404(H).
We determined in our 2015 NSR
action that ADEQ’s NSR program
contained an apparent typographical
error in R18–2–402 by including an
incorrect cross reference that did not
meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.165(a)(6) that ensures owners and
operators document and maintain a
record of certain applicability-related
information. In its current submittal,
ADEQ has corrected this error; see
revised R18–2–402(F)(1)(c).
Additionally, we previously found that
ADEQ’s NSR program did not require
owners or operators to make
information required under 40 CFR
51.165(a)(6) available for review upon
request by the Director or the public, as
required by 40 CFR 51.165(a)(7).
ADEQ’s current submittal has added
this requirement; see revised R18–2–
402(F)(7).
40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i) requires that
increases in emissions be offset by
reductions in emissions using a ratio of
emission decreases to emission
increases of at least 1 to 1. ADEQ’s rules
contained this requirement in R18–2–
404, but we found in our 2015 NSR
action that it could have been
interpreted as establishing the ratio as
increases to decreases, instead of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
decreases to increases. In addition, R18–
2–404(A) referred to additional offset
requirements in R18–2–405, but did not
refer to the offset requirement in other
parts of R18–2–404. ADEQ has corrected
these deficiencies in its current SIP
submittal; see revised R18–2–402(A).
40 CFR 51.165(a)(11) requires
emission offsets to be obtained for the
same regulated NSR pollutant, unless
interprecursor offsetting is permitted for
a particular pollutant, as further
specified in the rule. We found in our
2015 NSR action that ADEQ’s rules did
not contain a specific requirement that
offsets must be for the same regulated
pollutant. In its April 2017 NSR
submittal, ADEQ has clarified its rules
consistent with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11).
See revised R18–2–404(A). In addition,
ADEQ added an option to R18–2–404(A)
to use interprecursor trading for ozone
that is consistent with new revisions to
40 CFR 51.165(a)(11)(i).
40 CFR 51.165(b) requires that SIPs
have a preconstruction program that
satisfies the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act for any new
major stationary source or major
modification that would locate in an
attainment area, but would cause or
contribute to a violation of a national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
in any adjacent area. ADEQ’s rules
contained provisions for 40 CFR
51.165(b) in R18–2–406 that generally
met this requirement. However, we
found in our 2015 NSR action that
ADEQ’s regulations referred to the
State’s primary or secondary ambient air
quality standards, and thus did not fully
meet the requirements in 40 CFR
51.165(b)(1) and (2) as ADEQ’s program
did not ensure such standards would
apply to areas outside of Arizona. In this
current SIP submittal, ADEQ has
addressed this issue by revising its
program to instead refer to the NAAQS,
which are applicable in all areas. These
program requirements were removed
from R18–2–406 and included in the
new R18–2–411—Permit Requirements
for Sources that Locate in Attainment or
Unclassifiable Areas and Cause or
Contribute to a Violation of any
National Ambient Air Quality Standard.
See revised R18–2–101(85), R18–2–
401(27), and newly adopted R18–2–411.
In our 2015 NSR action, we found
certain deficiencies in ADEQ’s rules
regarding requirements for Plantwide
Applicability Limits (or Actuals PALs),
which have been corrected in ADEQ’s
2017 NSR submittal. First, ADEQ’s
provisions for PALs did not specify that
modifications under a PAL do not need
approval through the nonattainment
major NSR program as required by 40
CFR 51.165(f)(1)(iii)(B), as only the PSD
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25217
program was mentioned. ADEQ’s
current submittal has added language to
include this provision, see revised R18–
2–412(A)(2)(b). ADEQ’s NA–NSR
program did not contain a definition for
major emissions unit as is required by
40 CFR 51.165(f)(2)(iv). ADEQ has now
added this term at R18–2–401(12). 40
CFR 51.165(f)(9)—ADEQ’s PAL
provisions at R18–2–412(H) contained
an incorrect reference, and R18–2–
412(H)(5) used ‘‘eliminated’’ where the
federal regulation uses ‘‘established.’’
ADEQ has now corrected these
deficiencies; see revised R18–2–
412(H)(4) and (H)(5). ADEQ’s program
also contained incorrect cross-references
in meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.165(f)(10), as follows: PAL renewal
provisions at R18–2–412(I)(1) needed to
contain a reference to subsection (D) of
R18–2–412 instead of (F), and R18–2(I)(4)(a) needed to reference subsection
(E) of R18–2–412. ADEQ’s current SIP
submittal shows that it has made these
corrections; see revised R18–2–412(I)(1)
and (I)(4)(a).
Finally, section 173(a)(4) of the Act
requires that NA–NSR permit programs
shall provide that permits to construct
and operate may be issued if ‘‘the
Administrator has not determined that
the applicable implementation plan is
not being adequately implemented for
the nonattainment area in which the
proposed source is to be constructed or
modified.’’ We found in our 2015 NSR
action that ADEQ’s program did not
contain this provision. ADEQ’s current
SIP submittal has added this
requirement. See revised R18–2–
403(A)(4).
4. Deficiencies Corrected Related to the
CAA PSD Program
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that
ADEQ’s NSR rules often referred to
Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ’s
regulations where the federal
regulations refer to 40 CFR parts 60, 61,
or 63; or, similarly, sections 111 or 112
of the Act (see 40 CFR
51.166(b)(1)(iii)(aa), (b)(12), (b)(16)(i),
(b)(17), (b)(47)(ii)(c), (b)(49)(ii),
(i)(1)(ii)(aa), and (j)). Articles 9 and 11
are where ADEQ incorporates by
reference the federal regulations in 40
CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 (which EPA
implements under sections 111 and 112
of the Act). However, these Articles
were not in the SIP, had not been
submitted for SIP approval, and do not
necessarily contain provisions
equivalent to all the subparts in parts
60, 61, and 63. In its current SIP
submittal, ADEQ has revised its rules to
remove the references to Article 9 and
11 and instead reference the
requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 61, or
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
25218
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
63; and/or sections 111 and 112. See
revised R18–2–101(53)(a), (124)(b); R18–
2–401(11); R18–2–101(21); R18–2–
402(G)(2); and R18–2–406(A)(4).
ADEQ adopted the PSD increments,
or maximum allowable increases, in
R18–2–218—Limitation of Pollutants in
Classified Attainment Areas. However,
we determined in our 2015 NSR action
that in other rules ADEQ used
‘‘increment’’ or ‘‘incremental ambient
standard’’ where it appeared the intent
is to refer to the standards established
in R18–2–218 and identified in ADEQ’s
rules as the ‘‘maximum allowable
increases.’’ ADEQ’s April 2017 NSR
submittal addresses this issue by
generally revising these references to
‘‘maximum allowable increases.’’ See
revised R18–2–406(E), R18–2–
412(G)(2)(b), R18–2–101(51).4
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that
ADEQ’s program did not ensure that
sources subject to the PSD program
would be reviewed for compliance with
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS of 12.0 mg/m3,
which was effective March 18, 2013 (see
78 FR 3086). See 40 CFR
51.166(b)(2)(iii)(i)(2), (b)(35), (d),
(g)(3)(ii), (k), and (m)(1). This new
NAAQS is required to be implemented
for PSD sources (unless otherwise
grandfathered under provisions at 40
CFR 51.166(i)(10)) beginning with the
effective date of the NAAQS. In its April
2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ revised its
program to more broadly reference the
NAAQS, ensuring that this requirement
is met. See the revised R18–2–
218(F)(5)(b)(ii), R18–2–401(27), R18–2–
406(A)(5) and R18–2–407(B).
In our 2015 NSR action, we noted that
ADEQ’s PSD program, at R18–2–406(A),
contained a reference to rule R18–2–
408, but R18–2–408 was not in the SIP
and had not been submitted for SIP
approval. ADEQ included R18–2–408 in
the April 2017 NSR submittal, and we
are proposing to approve it into the SIP.
In our 2015 NSR action, we
determined that ADEQ’s definitions
applicable to the PSD program did not
fully meet 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1), which
requires each state plan to contain
specific definitions for the PSD
program. We have reviewed the revised
definitions included in the current SIP
submittal as compared with the federal
PSD definitions in 40 CFR 51.166(b) and
have found that ADEQ’s submittal
contains the definitions necessary to
implement a PSD program. ADEQ made
revisions that corrected the following
definitions from 40 CFR 51.166(b):
4 ADEQ also needs to correct this issue in R18–
2–319(A)(3) and R18–2–320(B)(6) per our 2015 NSR
action. While ADEQ has recently revised these rules
to address this issue, they were not included in the
April 2017 NSR submittal.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
Major stationary source—see revised
R18–2–101(75) and R18–2–401(13), net
emissions increase—see revised R18–2–
101(88), stationary source—see revised
R18–2–101(140), major source baseline
date—see revised R18–2–218(B)(2)(b),
baseline area—see revised R18–2–
218(D), allowable emissions—see
revised R18–2–101(13)(b), federally
enforceable—see revised R18–2–
101(53), complete—see revised R18–2–
401(4), significant—see revised R18–2–
101(131), projected actual emissions—
see revised R18–2–401(23), and
regulated NSR pollutant—see revised
R18–2–101(124).
Regarding restrictions on area
classifications (as Class I, II or III), we
found in our 2015 NSR action that
ADEQ’s rules did not completely meet
the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(e)
and section 162(a) of the Act, which
require certain areas in existence on
August 7, 1977 to be designated as Class
I areas. ADEQ’s rules impermissibly
limited the consideration of boundary
changes to such Class I areas to those
made prior to March 12, 1993. ADEQ
has now corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18–2–217(B). ADEQ’s rules
also did not contain a provision
consistent with the federal regulatory
requirement for Class I area
redesignations prior to August 7, 1977 at
40 CFR 51.166(e)(2). ADEQ has now
corrected this deficiency, see revised
R18–2–217(C). In addition, ADEQ’s
rules did not include a provision that is
fully consistent with the requirements
related to designating areas as Class II
areas in 40 CFR 51.166(e)(3). ADEQ
corrected this deficiency, see the revised
R18–2–217(D).
Regarding requirements for exclusions
from increment consumption, we
determined in our 2015 NSR action that
ADEQ’s rules contained provisions that
allowed for certain temporary emissions
to be excluded from increment
consumption that did not conform with
the requirements in 40 CFR
51.166(f)(1)(v) and (f)(4). ADEQ needed
to remove the Director’s discretion to
extend the time allowed for temporary
emissions, and to broaden the reference
to the State ambient air quality
standards to apply to any air quality
control region. In its current SIP
submittal, ADEQ has corrected these
deficiencies; see revised R18–2–
218(F)(5).
Regarding requirements for
redesignating areas as Class I, II or II, in
our 2015 NSR action, we found that
ADEQ’s program incorrectly applied the
provisions in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(1) only
to attainment and unclassifiable areas.
However, this portion of the PSD
program applies to all areas of the State,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
including nonattainment areas. This
deficiency has been corrected in the
current SIP submittal; see revised R18–
2–217(A). ADEQ’s rules also previously
contained provisions for allowing the
State to redesignate certain areas under
40 CFR 51.166(g), but they did not
adequately meet the public participation
requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(2)(i).
ADEQ has now corrected this
deficiency; see revised R18–2–217(F)(1).
In addition, ADEQ’s provisions for
classifying areas to Class III did not
clearly identify which areas may be
designated as Class III as specified in 40
CFR 51.166(g)(3). ADEQ has now
corrected this deficiency; see revised
R18–2–217(G). Concerning 40 CFR
51.166(g)(3)(ii), ADEQ’s rules
improperly allowed for redesignation to
be approved by the Governor’s designee.
This was inconsistent with 40 CFR
51.166(g)(3)(ii), which specifically
requires the Governor’s approval. ADEQ
has now corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18–2–217(F) and (G). In
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.166(g)(3)(iii), ADEQ rules R18–2–217
also contained a reference to ‘‘maximum
allowable concentration’’ which
incorrectly referenced R18–2–218, and
referenced only the State’s ambient air
quality standards, which do not
generally apply in areas outside of
Arizona. In the current SIP submittal,
ADEQ has corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18–2–217(G)(4). Also, ADEQ’s
rules did not meet all the public notice
requirements for redesignations under
40 CFR 51.166(g)(3)(iv). ADEQ’s current
submittal has corrected this deficiency;
see revised R18–2–217(G).
At the time of our 2015 NSR action,
ADEQ’s rules provided an exemption
for certain portable stationary sources
with a prior permit that contains
requirements equivalent to the PSD
requirements in 40 CFR 51.166 (j)
through (r). While this requirement was
generally consistent with 40 CFR
51.166(i)(1)(iii), we found that ADEQ’s
rules impermissibly expanded this
exemption to portable sources that have
been issued nonattainment NSR permits
and PAL permits. ADEQ has corrected
this deficiency. See revised R18–2–
406(E).
In our 2015 NSR action, we
determined that ADEQ’s rules did not
clearly meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.166(k)(1) because the relevant rule
provision contained an ‘‘or’’ that could
be interpreted as allowing a source to
demonstrate it will not contribute to an
increase above the significance levels in
an adjacent nonattainment area in lieu
of the demonstration required for the
NAAQS and increments. In addition,
R18–2–406(A)(5)(a) requires that a
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
person applying for a PSD permit
demonstrate that the project would not
cause a violation of any maximum
allowable increase over the baseline
concentration in ‘‘any attainment or
unclassifiable area,’’ but ADEQ’s
definition for ‘‘attainment area’’ in the
SIP limited attainment areas to those ‘‘in
the state.’’ ADEQ has corrected these
deficiencies in its current SIP submittal.
See revised R18–2–406(A)(5) and R18–
2–101(19).
We determined in our 2015 NSR
action that ADEQ’s rules did not
specifically address the requirements of
40 CFR 51.166(n)(1) and (3), which
require that (1) the owner or operator of
a proposed source or modification
submit all information necessary to
perform any analysis or make any
determination required under
procedures established in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.166, and (2) upon
request of the state, the owner or
operator also provide specified
information concerning air quality
impacts and growth. ADEQ has
corrected these deficiencies in its
current SIP submittal; see revised R18–
2–406(L).
Regarding requirements for sources
impacting Class I areas, in our 2015 NSR
action, we found that ADEQ’s rules did
not fully address the requirements in 40
CFR 51.166(p)(1) that relate to
notifications to EPA, although existing
SIP requirements in R9–3–304(H)
partially addressed the requirements.
ADEQ now has corrected this issue by
submitting R18–2–410 for SIP approval,
which contain these requirements at
R18–2–410(C)(1). In addition, we found
in our 2015 NSR action that while
ADEQ’s rules generally included the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(p)(3) at
R18–2–406, ADEQ’s rule contained the
phrase ‘‘no significant adverse impacts,’’
which is inconsistent with the federal
regulation, which requires a
demonstration of ‘‘no adverse impacts.’’
ADEQ has now corrected this
deficiency; see revised R18–2–410(D).
ADEQ’s program also contained
outdated maximum allowable increases
for Class I areas that were not consistent
with 40 CFR 51.166(p)(4). ADEQ has
corrected this deficiency in the current
SIP submittal; see revised R18–2–
410(F).
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that
certain PSD public participation
requirements were not adequately
addressed; these issues have been
corrected in ADEQ’s April 2017 NSR
submittal. First, ADEQ’s rules did not
ensure that materials available during
the public comment period are available
in each region in which the proposed
source would be constructed as required
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(ii). ADEQ has
now corrected this deficiency. See R18–
2–330(D). ADEQ’s rules also did not
require ADEQ to notify the public of (1)
the degree of increment consumption
that is expected from the source or
modification, or (2) the Director’s
preliminary determination, as required
by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iii). ADEQ has
corrected this deficiency. See revised
R18–2–402(I). ADEQ’s NSR program
also did not require ADEQ to make
public comments and the written
notification of its final determination
available in the same location as the
preliminary documents as required by
40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) and (viii). ADEQ
has also corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18–2–402(I).
Regarding information required to be
provided by the source, in our 2015
NSR action, we found that ADEQ’s rules
contained a typographical error, which
did not ensure owners and operators
would document and maintain records
of certain applicability-related
information as required by 40 CFR
51.166(r)(6). ADEQ corrected this
deficiency; see revised R18–2–
402(F)(6)(b). In addition, we found that
ADEQ’s submittal did not require
owners or operators to make
information required under 40 CFR
51.166(r)(6) available for review upon
request by the Director or the public as
required by 40 CFR 51.166(r)(7). ADEQ
has corrected this deficiency in its
current SIP submittal; see revised R18–
2–402(F)(7).
In our 2015 NSR action, we identified
a number of deficiencies in ADEQ’s
rules specifying the requirements for
plantwide applicability limits (PALs),
which have been corrected in its April
2015 NSR submittal. The issues are
similar to the issues discusses above for
PALs provisions for the NA–NSR
program. First, ADEQ’s program did not
include a definition for major emissions
unit as required by 40 CFR
51.166(w)(2)(iv). ADEQ has added the
definition at R18–2–401(12). ADEQ’s
PAL provisions at R18–2–412(H)
contained an incorrect reference, and
R18–2–412(H)(5) used ‘‘eliminated’’
where the federal regulation uses
‘‘established’’, which prevented ADEQ’s
rules from meeting 40 CFR 51.166(w)(9).
ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies;
see revised R18–2–412(H)(4) and (5).
ADEQ’s PAL renewal provisions also
contained incorrect references related to
the requirements in 40 CFR
51.166(w)(10). ADEQ has now corrected
those references; see revised R18–2–
412(I)(1) and (4).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25219
5. Other Revisions and Changes to the
EPA’s NSR Program and/or ADEQ’s
NSR Program
Our review of ADEQ’s April 2017
NSR submittal also considered whether
ADEQ’s submittal was consistent with
other changes made to federal NSR
program requirements following our
2015 action. These changes include: The
removal of vacated elements from the
PSD program related to GHGs (August
19, 2015 at 80 FR 50199); revisions to
the public noticing provisions for
permitting (October 18, 2016 at 81 FR
71613); SIP requirements for PM2.5
nonattainment areas (August 24, 2016 at
81 FR 58010); and the 2015 ozone
standard (October 26, 2015 at 80 FR
65292). As discussed in further detail in
our TSD, we have determined that
ADEQ’s program, as updated by the
current SIP submittal, meets the
required elements of these regulatory
revisions except for one disapproval
issue that is already the subject of a
limited disapproval in our 2016 PM2.5
precursor action. ADEQ intends to
correct this deficiency in a separate SIP
submittal. That is, no new disapproval
issues have been identified that are
associated with these changes to the
federal NSR requirements.
Additionally, in our 2015 NSR action
we finalized a partial disapproval of
ADEQ’s program related to the
significant monitoring concentration
(SMC) for PM2.5 at 40 CFR
51.166(i)(5)(i)(c). Our disapproval action
did not require ADEQ to revise its
program, as our action prevented this
portion of ADEQ’s program from
becoming approved into the SIP.
However, in its current SIP submittal,
ADEQ has updated its program to be
consistent with the PM2.5 SMC, and our
current action includes our proposed
approval of that change.
C. Review of Rules Requested To Be
Removed From the SIP
In Table 2 of this preamble, we
identified the ADEQ rules we are
proposing to remove from the SIP as
part of this action. Except for R9–2–
301(I) and (K) and R9–3–304(H), the
ADEQ rules we are proposing to replace
are older versions of the ADEQ rules in
the April 2017 NSR submittal. The older
versions proposed for removal from the
SIP contain deficiencies that ADEQ
needed to correct. R9–3–301(I) and (K)
and R9–3–304(H) are significantly older
rules that were approved into the SIP in
1982 and 1983 that have since been
repealed by ADEQ under State law, and
the corresponding updated provisions
are included in the April 2017 NSR
submittal.
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
25220
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
D. Remaining NSR Deficiencies
As discussed previously, this action
does not address all the outstanding
limited disapproval issues related to
ADEQ’s NSR program from our 2015
NSR action and our 2016 PM2.5
precursor action. Our TSD provides a
summary of the remaining limited
disapproval issues. Our 2015 NSR
action triggered a CAA obligation for
EPA to promulgate a FIP unless Arizona
submits, and we approve, plan revisions
that correct the deficiencies within two
years of the effective date of our final
action. In addition, for deficiencies
pertaining to requirements under part D
of title I of the CAA our action also
triggers sanctions unless ADEQ submits
and we approve SIP revisions that
correct the deficiencies before 18
months from our final action. The EPA
has preliminarily determined that
ADEQ’s April 2017 NSR submittal
addresses the deficiencies under part D
of title I of the CAA identified as limited
disapproval issues in our 2015 NSR
action. ADEQ intends to make an
additional submittal in order to the meet
the FIP deadline of December 2, 2017
related to our 2015 action and the
sanctions deadline of January 22, 2018
for our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
E. Federal Implementation Plan for
GHGs and ADEQ’s PSD Program
ADEQ is currently subject to a FIP
under the PSD program for GHGs
because ADEQ has not adopted a PSD
program for the regulation of GHGs. See
40 CFR 52.37. ADEQ’s April 2017 NSR
submittal is not intended to correct this
program deficiency, as regulation of
GHG emissions is currently prohibited
under State law. See A.R.S. section 49–
191. In our final action, we intend to
move the codification of the FIP for
GHGs for areas under the jurisdiction of
ADEQ and certain other areas in
Arizona from 40 CFR 52.37 to 40 CFR
52.144, where the State of Arizona’s
PSD program approval is listed.
Previously, there were several other
states subject to the FIP for GHGs, and
EPA applied the FIP to all such states,
collectively, at 40 CFR 52.37. See 75 FR
82246 on Dec. 30, 2010. However, the
State of Arizona is the only area that
remains subject to this GHG-specific
FIP. Therefore, it is appropriate to move
the FIP provision to the regulatory
section where Arizona’s PSD program is
identified.
In addition, if we finalize our action,
we also intend to update 40 CFR 51.144
to clarify that ADEQ has an approved
PSD program, except for GHGs, under
sections 160 through 165 of the Act.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
F. The EPA’s Recommendations To
Further Improve the State’s Rules
The TSD describes additional rule
revisions that we recommend that
ADEQ make the next time ADEQ
modifies the rules.
G. Do the rules meet the evaluation
criteria under Section 110(l) and 193 of
the Clean Air Act?
Section 110(l) states: ‘‘Each revision
to an implementation plan submitted by
a State under this chapter shall be
adopted by such State after reasonable
notice and public hearing. The
Administrator shall not approve a
revision of a plan if the revision would
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined
in section 7501 of this title), or any
other applicable requirement of this
chapter.’’
With respect to the procedural
requirements of CAA section 110(l),
based on our review of the public
process documentation included in
ADEQ’s April 2017 NSR submittal, we
find that ADEQ has provided sufficient
evidence of public notice and
opportunity for comment and public
hearings prior to adoption and submittal
of these rules to the EPA. With respect
to the substantive requirements of
section 110(l), we have determined that
our approval of the 2017 NSR submittal
corrects numerous deficiencies in
ADEQ’s program and does not relax any
existing requirements in the Arizona
SIP.
For the reasons set forth above, we
can approve the ADEQ SIP revision as
proposed in this action under section
110(l) of the Act.
Section 193 of the Act, which was
added by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990, includes a
savings clause that provides, in
pertinent part: ‘‘No control requirement
in effect, or required to be adopted by
an order, settlement agreement, or plan
in effect before November 15, 1990, in
any area which is a nonattainment area
for any air pollutant may be modified
after November 15, 1990, in any manner
unless the modification insures
equivalent or greater emission
reductions of such air pollutant.’’ We
find that the provisions included in
ADEQ’s 2017 NSR submittal would
ensure equivalent or greater emission
reductions as compared to the current
SIP-approved NSR program in the
nonattainment areas under ADEQ’s
jurisdiction. In addition, this action
does not modify any pre-1990
requirements. Although we are
proposing to remove two pre-1990 rules
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
from the SIP—R9–3–301(I) and (K)—
Installation Permits: General and R9–3–
304(H)—Installation Permits in
Attainment Areas—we are also
proposing to approve newer, updated
requirements into the SIP that are at
least as stringent.
For the reasons set forth above, we
can approve the submitted NSR program
under section 193 of the Act.
H. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, and as
explained further in our TSD, we find
that the rules in ADEQ’s April 2017
NSR submittal satisfy the applicable
CAA and regulatory requirements for
PSD, and nonattainment NSR permit
programs under CAA section
110(a)(2)(C) and parts C and D of title I
of the Act, with the exception of one
NA–NSR requirement relating to PM2.5
precursors that has already been
identified as a disapproval issue in a
previous action and which ADEQ
intends to address in a later SIP
submittal. The submitted NSR rules also
adequately address certain deficiencies
we identified in our 2015 NSR action
concerning specific requirements in 40
CFR 51.161 and 51.164 that were
evaluated as part of this action. Our
proposed approval is also consistent
with section 110(l) and 193 of the Act.
Accordingly, we are proposing to
approve all the rules in ADEQ’s April
2017 NSR submittal into the Arizona
SIP. In addition, we are also proposing
to remove the existing SIP-approved
rules listed in Table 2 from the SIP, as
these rules are outdated and mostly
being superseded by our proposed
action.
III. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA proposes to fully
approve the submitted rules into the
Arizona SIP because we believe they
fulfill all relevant requirements.
Specifically, we are proposing approval
of the new and amended ADEQ
regulations listed in Table 1, above, as
a revision to the ADEQ portion of the
Arizona SIP. We are also proposing to
remove from the Arizona SIP the
existing rules listed in Table 2, as these
rules are outdated and mostly being
superseded by our proposed action.
We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal until July 3,
2017. If we take final action to approve
the submitted rules, our final action will
incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 104 / Thursday, June 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
the ADEQ rule listed in Table 1 of this
preamble. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials
available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region IX Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the EPA
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, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 May 31, 2017
Jkt 241001
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide the 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, the SIP is not approved to
apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017–10946 Filed 5–31–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
46 CFR Parts 515, 520, 525, 530, 531,
532, 535, 540 and 565
[Docket No. 17–04]
RIN 3072–AC69
Regulatory Reform Initiative
Federal Maritime Commission.
Notice of inquiry.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Federal Maritime
Commission (FMC or Commission) is
issuing this Inquiry to solicit
information and comments in an effort
to identify existing FMC regulations that
are outdated, unnecessary, ineffective,
eliminate jobs or inhibit job creation,
impose costs that exceed benefits, or
otherwise interfere with regulatory
reform initiatives and policies. This
action is taken in conjunction with
Executive Order 13777, ‘‘Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda.’’
DATES: Comments are due July 5, 2017.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25221
You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Email: secretary@fmc.gov. Include
in the subject line: ‘‘Docket No. 17–04,
Regulatory Reform Initiative.’’
Comments should be attached to the
email as a Microsoft Word or textsearchable PDF document. Only nonconfidential comments and public
versions of confidential comments
should be submitted by email.
Comments containing confidential
information should not be submitted by
email.
• Mail: Rachel E. Dickon, Assistant
Secretary, Federal Maritime
Commission, 800 North Capitol Street
NW., Ste. 1046, Washington, DC 20573–
0001.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents and
comments received, go to the
Commission’s Electronic Reading Room
at: https://www.fmc.gov/17-04.
Confidential Information: If your
comments contain confidential
information, you must submit the
following:
• A transmittal letter requesting
confidential treatment that identifies the
specific information in the comments
for which protection is sought and
demonstrates that the information is a
trade secret or other confidential
research, development, or commercial
information.
• A confidential copy of your
comments, consisting of the complete
filing with a cover page marked
‘‘Confidential-Restricted,’’ and the
confidential material clearly marked on
each page. You should submit the
confidential copy to the Commission by
mail.
• A public version of your comments
with the confidential information
excluded. The public version must state
‘‘Public Version—confidential materials
excluded’’ on the cover page and on
each affected page, and must clearly
indicate any information withheld. You
may submit the public version to the
Commission by email or mail.
The Commission will provide
confidential treatment for the identified
confidential information to the extent
allowed by law.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions regarding submitting
comments or the treatment of
confidential information, contact Rachel
E. Dickon, Assistant Secretary, Federal
Maritime Commission, 800 North
Capitol Street NW., Ste. 1046,
Washington, DC 20573–0001. Phone:
(202) 523–5725. Email: secretary@
fmc.gov. For all other questions, contact
Karen V. Gregory, Managing Director,
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\01JNP1.SGM
01JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 104 (Thursday, June 1, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25213-25221]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10946]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0255; FRL-9963-08-Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Stationary Sources; New Source Review
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing
approval of regulatory revisions to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) portion of the applicable state
implementation plan (SIP) for the State of Arizona. These revisions are
primarily intended to make corrections to ADEQ's SIP-approved rules for
the issuance of New Source Review (NSR) permits for stationary sources,
with a focus on preconstruction permit requirements under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) for major sources and major modifications. On November
2, 2015, we took final action on a SIP submittal from ADEQ that
significantly updated ADEQ's SIP-approved NSR permitting program.
However, that action identified several deficiencies in ADEQ's program
that needed to be corrected. This proposed action will correct a
substantial portion of the deficiencies we identified in that 2015
action. We are seeking comment on our proposed action and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by July 3, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2017-0255, at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
R9airpermits@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Beckham, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-
3811, beckham.lisa@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. Which rules did the State submit?
B. Are there previous versions of the rules in the Arizona SIP?
C. What is the purpose of the EPA's proposed rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation
A. How is the EPA evaluating the State's rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Review of Rules Requested To Be Removed From the SIP
D. Remaining NSR Deficiencies
E. Federal Implementation Plan for GHGs and ADEQ's PSD Program
F. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the State's
Rules
G. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria under Sections
110(l) and 193 of the Clean Air Act?
[[Page 25214]]
H. Conclusion
III. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For this document, we are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials ADEQ mean or refer to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(iii) The initials A.R.S. mean or refer to the Arizona Revised
Statutes.
(iv) The initials BACT mean or refer to Best Available Control
Technology.
(v) The initials CFR mean or refer to Code of Federal Regulations.
(vi) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
(vii) The initials FIP mean or refer to Federal Implementation
Plan.
(viii) The initials GHG mean or refer to greenhouse gas.
(ix) The initials IBR mean or refer to incorporation by reference.
(x) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.
(xi) The initials NA-NSR mean or refer to Nonattainment New Source
Review.
(xii) The initials NSR mean or refer to New Source Review.
(xiii) The initials PAL mean or refer to Plantwide Applicability
Limits.
(xiv) The initials PM10 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10 micrometers (coarse
particulate matter).
(xv) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (fine
particulate matter).
(xvi) The initials PSD mean or refer to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.
(xvii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(xviii) The initials SMC mean or refer to significant monitoring
concentration.
(xix) The words State or Arizona mean the State of Arizona, unless
the context indicates otherwise.
(xx) The initials TSD mean or refer to the technical support
document for this action.
(xxi) The initials VOC mean or refer to volatile organic compound.
I. The State's Submittals
A. Which rules did the State submit?
On April 28, 2017, ADEQ submitted regulatory revisions for the ADEQ
portion of the Arizona SIP to the EPA. This SIP revision submittal,
which is the subject of this action and is referred to herein as the
``April 2017 NSR submittal,'' contains revisions to ADEQ's
preconstruction review and permitting program requirements. These
revisions are intended to correct deficiencies in ADEQ's SIP-approved
NSR program related to the requirements under both part C (prevention
of significant deterioration or PSD) and part D (nonattainment new
source review or NA-NSR) of title I of the Act, which apply to major
stationary sources and major modifications of such sources. The
preconstruction review and permitting programs are often collectively
referred to as ``New Source Review'' or NSR.
Table 1 lists the rules in the April 2017 NSR submittal, all of
which we are proposing for SIP approval in this action, along with the
rules' effective dates under State law. The submitted rules are from
the Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18--Environmental Quality,
Chapter 2--Department of Environmental Quality--Air Pollution Control,
Articles 1 through 4.
Table 1--Submitted Rules Proposed for Approval in This Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule Title State effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R18-2-101 (except 20)..................... Definitions..................... March 21, 2017.
R18-2-201................................. Particulate Matter: PM10 and March 21, 2017.
PM2.5.
R18-2-203................................. Ozone........................... March 21, 2017.
R18-2-217................................. Designation and Classification March 21, 2017.
of Attainment Areas.
R18-2-218................................. Limitation of Pollutants in March 21, 2017.
Classified Attainment Areas.
R18-2-330................................. Public Participation............ March 21, 2017.
R18-2-332................................. Stack Height Limitation......... March 21, 2017.
R18-2-401................................. Definitions..................... March 21, 2017.
R18-2-402................................. General......................... March 21, 2017.
R18-2-403................................. Permits for Sources Located in March 21, 2017.
Nonattainment Areas.
R18-2-404................................. Offset Standards................ March 21, 2017.
R18-2-405................................. Special Rule for Major Sources March 21, 2017.
of VOC or Nitrogen Oxides in
Ozone Nonattainment Areas
Classified as Serious or Severe.
R18-2-406................................. Permit Requirements for Sources March 21, 2017.
Located in Attainment and
Unclassifiable Areas.
R18-2-407................................. Air Quality Impact Analysis and March 21, 2017.
Monitoring Requirements.
R18-2-408................................. Innovative Control Technology... March 21, 2017.
R18-2-410................................. Visibility and Air Quality March 21, 2017.
Related Value Protection.
R18-2-411................................. Permit Requirements for Sources March 21, 2017.
that Locate in Attainment or
Unclassifiable Areas and Cause
or Contribute to a Violation of
Any National Ambient Air
Quality Standard.
R18-2-412................................. PALs............................ March 21, 2017.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 9, 2017, ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal was determined to meet
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be
met before formal EPA review.
The proposed revisions will apply to all areas and sources of
Arizona where ADEQ has jurisdiction. Currently, ADEQ has permitting
jurisdiction for the following stationary source categories in all
areas of Arizona: smelting of metal ores, coal-fired electric
generating stations, petroleum refineries, Portland cement plants, and
portable sources. ADEQ also has permitting jurisdiction for major and
minor sources in the following counties: Apache, Cochise, Coconino,
Gila, Graham, Greenlee, La Paz, Mohave, Navajo, Santa Cruz, Yavapai,
and Yuma. Finally, ADEQ has permitting jurisdiction over major sources
in Pinal
[[Page 25215]]
County \1\ and the Rosemont Copper Mine in Pima County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ADEQ has delegated implementation of the major source
program to the Pinal County Air Quality Control District.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Are there previous versions of the rules in the Arizona SIP?
Table 2 lists the existing rules in the Arizona SIP that would be
superseded or removed from the Arizona SIP as part of our proposed
action. If the EPA were to take final action as proposed herein, these
rules generally would be replaced in the SIP by the submitted set of
rules listed in Table 1.
Table 2--SIP Rules Proposed for Removal From Arizona SIP in This Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA approval
Rule Title date Federal Register citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R9-3-301(I) and (K)................... Installation Permits: 05/05/1982 47 FR 19326
General.
R9-3-304(H)........................... Installation Permits in 05/03/1983 48 FR 19878
Attainment Areas.
R18-2-101............................. Definitions............ 11/23/2014 79 FR 56655
11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
R18-2-201............................. Particulate Matter: 09/23/2014 79 FR 56655
PM10 and PM2.5.
R18-2-203............................. Ozone: One-hour 09/23/2014 79 FR 56655
Standard and Eight-
hour Averaged Standard.
R18-2-217............................. Designation and 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
Classification of
Attainment Areas.
R18-2-218............................. Limitation of 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
Pollutants in
Classified Attainment
Areas.
R18-2-330............................. Public Participation... 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
R18-2-332............................. Stack Height Limitation 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
R18-2-401............................. Definitions............ 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
R18-2-402............................. General................ 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
R18-2-403............................. Permits for Sources 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
Located in
Nonattainment Areas.
R18-2-404............................. Offset Standards....... 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
R18-2-405............................. Special Rule for Major 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
Sources of VOC or
Nitrogen Oxides in
Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Classified as
Serious or Severe.
R18-2-406............................. Permit Requirements for 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
Sources Located in
Attainment and
Unclassifiable Areas.
R18-2-407............................. Air Quality Impact 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
Analysis and
Monitoring
Requirements.
R18-2-412............................. PALs................... 11/2/2015 80 FR 67319
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the purpose of the EPA's proposed rule?
The purpose of this proposed rule is to propose to update the
Arizona SIP by approving the rule revisions submitted in ADEQ's 2017
NSR submittal, to discuss the basis for our proposed approval action,
and to provide notice of and seek public comment on our proposed
action. We present our evaluation of the rules submitted by ADEQ in its
April 2017 NSR submittal, which are identified in Table 1 above, as
compared with applicable requirements under the CAA and EPA
regulations, particularly with respect to the PSD and NA-NSR
requirements applicable to major sources and major modifications. We
provide our reasoning in general terms below, and include our more
detailed analysis in the Technical Support Document for this action
(TSD), which is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
This proposed rule also discusses our proposal to approve ADEQ's
request that we remove older, outdated rules from the Arizona SIP and
our rationale for doing so.
II. The EPA's Evaluation
A. How is the EPA evaluating the State's rules?
The EPA has reviewed the provisions submitted for SIP approval by
ADEQ that are the subject of this action for compliance with the CAA's
general requirements for SIPs in CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA's
regulations for stationary source permitting programs in 40 CFR part
51, subpart I, and the CAA requirements for SIP revisions in CAA
section 110(l) and 193.
With respect to procedures, CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) require
that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the state after reasonable notice
and public hearing. EPA has promulgated specific procedural
requirements for SIP revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F. These
requirements include publication of notices, by prominent advertisement
in the relevant geographic area, a public comment period of at least 30
days, and an opportunity for a public hearing. Based on our review of
the public process documentation included in the April 2017 NSR
submittal, we find that ADEQ has provided sufficient evidence of public
notice and opportunity for comment and public hearing prior to adoption
and submittal of these rules to the EPA.
With respect to substantive requirements, we have reviewed the ADEQ
provisions that are the subject of our current action in accordance
with the CAA and applicable regulatory requirements, focusing primarily
on those that apply to PSD permit programs under part C of title I of
the Act and Nonattainment NSR permit programs under part D of title I
of the Act. The submitted rules are intended to correct a substantial
portion of the deficiencies in ADEQ's NSR program that we identified in
our November 2, 2015 final action and a separate June 22, 2016 final
action issued by the EPA, discussed below.
On November 2, 2015 (80 FR 67319), the EPA published a final
limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the ADEQ
portion of the Arizona SIP (referred to hereinafter as ``our 2015 NSR
action'').\2\ Our 2015 NSR action updated ADEQ's SIP-approved NSR
permitting program, but identified deficiencies that need to be
corrected for the EPA to grant full approval of ADEQ's NSR program.
Thus, our 2015 NSR action would trigger an obligation on the EPA to
promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the
deficiencies that were the basis for our limited disapproval action
unless the State of Arizona corrects the
[[Page 25216]]
deficiencies, and the EPA approves the related plan revisions, within
two years of that final action. In addition, to avoid sanctions under
section 179 of the Act, ADEQ has 18 months from December 2, 2015, the
effective date of our 2015 NSR action, to correct those deficiencies
related to part D of title I of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We also finalized other actions, which included a partial
disapproval related to the fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) significant monitoring concentration, and limited
approvals, without corresponding limited disapprovals, related to
section 189(e) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 22, 2016 (81 FR 40525), the EPA also published a separate
but related final limited disapproval action for ADEQ's NA-NSR program,
as ADEQ's program did not fully address fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) precursors as required by section 189(e) of the Act
(referred to hereinafter as ``our 2016 PM2.5 precursor
action''). This action triggered an obligation on the EPA to promulgate
a FIP to address this deficiency unless the State of Arizona corrects
the deficiency, and the EPA approves the related plan revisions, within
two years of the final action. In addition, to avoid sanctions under
section 179 of the Act, ADEQ has 18 months from the July 22, 2016
effective date of our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action to correct
the deficiency as it relates to part D of title I of the Act.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
Please see our 2015 NSR action, including our proposed action on
March 18, 2015 (80 FR 14044), for a detailed discussion of the approval
criteria for the NSR program and how ADEQ's NSR rules reviewed in that
action generally meet the approval criteria despite certain
deficiencies that require correction for the EPA to fully approve
ADEQ's NSR program. In this action, we are focusing our review on the
revisions that ADEQ made to correct the deficiencies we identified in
our 2015 NSR action and our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action. We
also reviewed other revisions ADEQ made in the rules submitted in
ADEQ's April 2017 NSR action to ensure that the revised language was
consistent with applicable requirements of the Act and EPA regulations.
We are proposing approval of ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal because it
would correct numerous deficiencies and is otherwise consistent with
the requirements for NSR programs and the Act. If approved, this action
would not correct all the deficiencies in ADEQ's NSR program previously
identified by the EPA, but it would correct those deficiencies that
would potentially lead to sanctions under section 179 of the Act
because of our 2015 NSR action. ADEQ expects to correct the remaining
deficiencies in a subsequent SIP submittal. Our detailed analysis of
ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal is provided in the TSD for this action. Here
we briefly discuss the previously identified deficiencies that this
action, if finalized, would correct.
1. Deficiencies Corrected Related to Public Availability of Information
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program did not
ensure, for all sources subject to NSR review, that certain
requirements related to public availability of information were met.
Specifically, ADEQ's program did not ensure that the information
submitted by the owner or operator and ADEQ's analysis of effects of
air quality would be available for public inspection in at least one
location in the affected area. See 40 CFR 51.161(b)(1). To address this
deficiency, ADEQ revised its public notice requirements to ensure that
the necessary documents will be available for public inspection in the
``area affected'' by the action, including the Director's analysis of
the effects on ambient air quality. See revised R18-2-330(D) and (F).
2. Deficiencies Corrected Related to Stack Height Provisions
Regarding requirements for stack heights and good engineering
practice, in our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program did
not adequately address the following requirements. First, we found that
ADEQ's NSR program did not meet the public hearing requirements in 40
CFR 51.164 and 51.118(a) because the referenced procedures were not in
the SIP or submitted for SIP approval. ADEQ addressed this issue by
revising R18-2-332 to reference the SIP-approved public notice
requirements in R18-2-330. See revised R18-2-332(E). We found that
ADEQ's rules did not contain language that met the exception to the
stack height provisions provided in 40 CFR 51.118(b). In addition, R18-
2-332 incorrectly referenced July 1, 1975 instead of July 1, 1957.
ADEQ's current SIP submittal has corrected these deficiencies; see
revised R18-2-332(B)(1) and (B)(2). We also determined that ADEQ's NSR
program did not contain a requirement that owners or operators seeking
to rely on the equation in 40 CFR 51.100(ii)(2)(i) produce evidence
that the equation was relied on in establishing an emission limitation.
ADEQ's currently submitted rules have added this requirement; see
revised R18-2-332(C)(2)(a). Finally, ADEQ's NSR program previously
contained a provision at R18-2-332(D) which provided additional
provisions for sources ``seeking credit because of plume impaction
which results in concentrations in violation of national ambient air
quality standards or applicable maximum allowable increases.'' This
provision is not contained in the federal regulations and appeared to
allow for the use of stack heights beyond good engineering practice
(GEP) stack height, as defined in 40 CFR 51.100(ii), which we
identified as a deficiency in our 2015 NSR action. ADEQ has now
addressed this deficiency by removing this provision from R18-2-332.
3. Deficiencies Corrected Related to the CAA NA-NSR Program
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program often
referred to Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ's regulations where the
federal regulations refer to 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63; or, similarly,
sections 111 or 112 of the Act (see 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xiii)--lowest
achievable emission rate, and (a)(1)(xl)--best available control
technology).\3\ Articles 9 and 11 are where ADEQ incorporates by
reference the federal regulations in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 (which
the EPA implements under sections 111 and 112 of the Act). However,
these Articles were not in the SIP, had not been submitted for SIP
approval, and did not necessarily contain provisions equivalent to all
the subparts in parts 60, 61, and 63. In its current submittal, ADEQ
has revised its rules to remove the references to Article 9 and 11 and
instead reference the requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63;
sections 111 and 112; and/or the new source performance standard or
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. See the
revised R18-2-101(21), R18-2-401(11) and R18-2-406(A)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Our 2015 NSR action also identified the definition for
``regulated NSR pollutant'' in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii) as being
part of this deficiency. However, upon further review, that
determination was in error as the federal definition does not
reference part 60, 61, 63 or sections 111 and 112 of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's SIP-approved
NSR rules governing nonattainment NSR contained several definitions
that were not at least as stringent as the corresponding federal
definition. In its April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ has revised its
definitions for consistency with the federal definitions in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1). Specifically, ADEQ corrected the definitions for
stationary source in revised R18-2-101(140), major stationary source in
revised R18-2-401(13), net emissions increase in revised R18-2-101(88),
significant in revised R18-2-101(131) and R18-2-405(B), allowable
emissions in revised R18-2-101(13), federally enforceable in
[[Page 25217]]
revised R18-2-101(53), regulated NSR pollutant in revised R18-2-
101(122), and projected actual emissions in revised R18-2-401(23).
40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(G) requires that credit for emission
reductions can be claimed only to the extent that the reviewing
authority has not relied on it in issuing any permit under regulations
approved pursuant to 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, or the state has not
relied on it in demonstration of attainment or reasonable further
progress. In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program
generally addresses this requirement at R18-2-404(H), but also needed
to include references to minor NSR requirements, which are to be
approved as part of ADEQ's NSR regulations under subpart I. In its
April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ added a reference to its minor NSR rule
R18-2-334, but not its registration program in R18-2-302.01. We
determined that this is acceptable as sources in the registration
program cannot use emission reductions to obtain a registration. That
is, as ADEQ explained in its April 2017 NSR submittal, R18-2-302.01
does not provide for the imposition of minor NSR emission limits;
rather, those limits would only be imposed on a source that was denied
registration and required to obtain a permit meeting the minor NSR
requirements (which are in R18-2-334). See revised R18-2-404(H).
We determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's NSR program
contained an apparent typographical error in R18-2-402 by including an
incorrect cross reference that did not meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.165(a)(6) that ensures owners and operators document and maintain a
record of certain applicability-related information. In its current
submittal, ADEQ has corrected this error; see revised R18-2-
402(F)(1)(c). Additionally, we previously found that ADEQ's NSR program
did not require owners or operators to make information required under
40 CFR 51.165(a)(6) available for review upon request by the Director
or the public, as required by 40 CFR 51.165(a)(7). ADEQ's current
submittal has added this requirement; see revised R18-2-402(F)(7).
40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i) requires that increases in emissions be
offset by reductions in emissions using a ratio of emission decreases
to emission increases of at least 1 to 1. ADEQ's rules contained this
requirement in R18-2-404, but we found in our 2015 NSR action that it
could have been interpreted as establishing the ratio as increases to
decreases, instead of decreases to increases. In addition, R18-2-404(A)
referred to additional offset requirements in R18-2-405, but did not
refer to the offset requirement in other parts of R18-2-404. ADEQ has
corrected these deficiencies in its current SIP submittal; see revised
R18-2-402(A).
40 CFR 51.165(a)(11) requires emission offsets to be obtained for
the same regulated NSR pollutant, unless interprecursor offsetting is
permitted for a particular pollutant, as further specified in the rule.
We found in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules did not contain a
specific requirement that offsets must be for the same regulated
pollutant. In its April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ has clarified its
rules consistent with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11). See revised R18-2-404(A).
In addition, ADEQ added an option to R18-2-404(A) to use interprecursor
trading for ozone that is consistent with new revisions to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(11)(i).
40 CFR 51.165(b) requires that SIPs have a preconstruction program
that satisfies the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act
for any new major stationary source or major modification that would
locate in an attainment area, but would cause or contribute to a
violation of a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in any
adjacent area. ADEQ's rules contained provisions for 40 CFR 51.165(b)
in R18-2-406 that generally met this requirement. However, we found in
our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's regulations referred to the State's
primary or secondary ambient air quality standards, and thus did not
fully meet the requirements in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(1) and (2) as ADEQ's
program did not ensure such standards would apply to areas outside of
Arizona. In this current SIP submittal, ADEQ has addressed this issue
by revising its program to instead refer to the NAAQS, which are
applicable in all areas. These program requirements were removed from
R18-2-406 and included in the new R18-2-411--Permit Requirements for
Sources that Locate in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas and Cause or
Contribute to a Violation of any National Ambient Air Quality Standard.
See revised R18-2-101(85), R18-2-401(27), and newly adopted R18-2-411.
In our 2015 NSR action, we found certain deficiencies in ADEQ's
rules regarding requirements for Plantwide Applicability Limits (or
Actuals PALs), which have been corrected in ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal.
First, ADEQ's provisions for PALs did not specify that modifications
under a PAL do not need approval through the nonattainment major NSR
program as required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1)(iii)(B), as only the PSD
program was mentioned. ADEQ's current submittal has added language to
include this provision, see revised R18-2-412(A)(2)(b). ADEQ's NA-NSR
program did not contain a definition for major emissions unit as is
required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(2)(iv). ADEQ has now added this term at
R18-2-401(12). 40 CFR 51.165(f)(9)--ADEQ's PAL provisions at R18-2-
412(H) contained an incorrect reference, and R18-2-412(H)(5) used
``eliminated'' where the federal regulation uses ``established.'' ADEQ
has now corrected these deficiencies; see revised R18-2-412(H)(4) and
(H)(5). ADEQ's program also contained incorrect cross-references in
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(f)(10), as follows: PAL
renewal provisions at R18-2-412(I)(1) needed to contain a reference to
subsection (D) of R18-2-412 instead of (F), and R18-2-(I)(4)(a) needed
to reference subsection (E) of R18-2-412. ADEQ's current SIP submittal
shows that it has made these corrections; see revised R18-2-412(I)(1)
and (I)(4)(a).
Finally, section 173(a)(4) of the Act requires that NA-NSR permit
programs shall provide that permits to construct and operate may be
issued if ``the Administrator has not determined that the applicable
implementation plan is not being adequately implemented for the
nonattainment area in which the proposed source is to be constructed or
modified.'' We found in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's program did not
contain this provision. ADEQ's current SIP submittal has added this
requirement. See revised R18-2-403(A)(4).
4. Deficiencies Corrected Related to the CAA PSD Program
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR rules often
referred to Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ's regulations where the
federal regulations refer to 40 CFR parts 60, 61, or 63; or, similarly,
sections 111 or 112 of the Act (see 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(iii)(aa),
(b)(12), (b)(16)(i), (b)(17), (b)(47)(ii)(c), (b)(49)(ii),
(i)(1)(ii)(aa), and (j)). Articles 9 and 11 are where ADEQ incorporates
by reference the federal regulations in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63
(which EPA implements under sections 111 and 112 of the Act). However,
these Articles were not in the SIP, had not been submitted for SIP
approval, and do not necessarily contain provisions equivalent to all
the subparts in parts 60, 61, and 63. In its current SIP submittal,
ADEQ has revised its rules to remove the references to Article 9 and 11
and instead reference the requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 61, or
[[Page 25218]]
63; and/or sections 111 and 112. See revised R18-2-101(53)(a),
(124)(b); R18-2-401(11); R18-2-101(21); R18-2-402(G)(2); and R18-2-
406(A)(4).
ADEQ adopted the PSD increments, or maximum allowable increases, in
R18-2-218--Limitation of Pollutants in Classified Attainment Areas.
However, we determined in our 2015 NSR action that in other rules ADEQ
used ``increment'' or ``incremental ambient standard'' where it
appeared the intent is to refer to the standards established in R18-2-
218 and identified in ADEQ's rules as the ``maximum allowable
increases.'' ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal addresses this issue by
generally revising these references to ``maximum allowable increases.''
See revised R18-2-406(E), R18-2-412(G)(2)(b), R18-2-101(51).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ADEQ also needs to correct this issue in R18-2-319(A)(3) and
R18-2-320(B)(6) per our 2015 NSR action. While ADEQ has recently
revised these rules to address this issue, they were not included in
the April 2017 NSR submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's program did not ensure
that sources subject to the PSD program would be reviewed for
compliance with the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS of 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\,
which was effective March 18, 2013 (see 78 FR 3086). See 40 CFR
51.166(b)(2)(iii)(i)(2), (b)(35), (d), (g)(3)(ii), (k), and (m)(1).
This new NAAQS is required to be implemented for PSD sources (unless
otherwise grandfathered under provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(10))
beginning with the effective date of the NAAQS. In its April 2017 NSR
submittal, ADEQ revised its program to more broadly reference the
NAAQS, ensuring that this requirement is met. See the revised R18-2-
218(F)(5)(b)(ii), R18-2-401(27), R18-2-406(A)(5) and R18-2-407(B).
In our 2015 NSR action, we noted that ADEQ's PSD program, at R18-2-
406(A), contained a reference to rule R18-2-408, but R18-2-408 was not
in the SIP and had not been submitted for SIP approval. ADEQ included
R18-2-408 in the April 2017 NSR submittal, and we are proposing to
approve it into the SIP.
In our 2015 NSR action, we determined that ADEQ's definitions
applicable to the PSD program did not fully meet 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1),
which requires each state plan to contain specific definitions for the
PSD program. We have reviewed the revised definitions included in the
current SIP submittal as compared with the federal PSD definitions in
40 CFR 51.166(b) and have found that ADEQ's submittal contains the
definitions necessary to implement a PSD program. ADEQ made revisions
that corrected the following definitions from 40 CFR 51.166(b): Major
stationary source--see revised R18-2-101(75) and R18-2-401(13), net
emissions increase--see revised R18-2-101(88), stationary source--see
revised R18-2-101(140), major source baseline date--see revised R18-2-
218(B)(2)(b), baseline area--see revised R18-2-218(D), allowable
emissions--see revised R18-2-101(13)(b), federally enforceable--see
revised R18-2-101(53), complete--see revised R18-2-401(4),
significant--see revised R18-2-101(131), projected actual emissions--
see revised R18-2-401(23), and regulated NSR pollutant--see revised
R18-2-101(124).
Regarding restrictions on area classifications (as Class I, II or
III), we found in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules did not
completely meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(e) and section 162(a)
of the Act, which require certain areas in existence on August 7, 1977
to be designated as Class I areas. ADEQ's rules impermissibly limited
the consideration of boundary changes to such Class I areas to those
made prior to March 12, 1993. ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency;
see revised R18-2-217(B). ADEQ's rules also did not contain a provision
consistent with the federal regulatory requirement for Class I area
redesignations prior to August 7, 1977 at 40 CFR 51.166(e)(2). ADEQ has
now corrected this deficiency, see revised R18-2-217(C). In addition,
ADEQ's rules did not include a provision that is fully consistent with
the requirements related to designating areas as Class II areas in 40
CFR 51.166(e)(3). ADEQ corrected this deficiency, see the revised R18-
2-217(D).
Regarding requirements for exclusions from increment consumption,
we determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules contained
provisions that allowed for certain temporary emissions to be excluded
from increment consumption that did not conform with the requirements
in 40 CFR 51.166(f)(1)(v) and (f)(4). ADEQ needed to remove the
Director's discretion to extend the time allowed for temporary
emissions, and to broaden the reference to the State ambient air
quality standards to apply to any air quality control region. In its
current SIP submittal, ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies; see
revised R18-2-218(F)(5).
Regarding requirements for redesignating areas as Class I, II or
II, in our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's program incorrectly
applied the provisions in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(1) only to attainment and
unclassifiable areas. However, this portion of the PSD program applies
to all areas of the State, including nonattainment areas. This
deficiency has been corrected in the current SIP submittal; see revised
R18-2-217(A). ADEQ's rules also previously contained provisions for
allowing the State to redesignate certain areas under 40 CFR 51.166(g),
but they did not adequately meet the public participation requirements
in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(2)(i). ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18-2-217(F)(1). In addition, ADEQ's provisions for classifying
areas to Class III did not clearly identify which areas may be
designated as Class III as specified in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(3). ADEQ has
now corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-217(G). Concerning 40
CFR 51.166(g)(3)(ii), ADEQ's rules improperly allowed for redesignation
to be approved by the Governor's designee. This was inconsistent with
40 CFR 51.166(g)(3)(ii), which specifically requires the Governor's
approval. ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-
217(F) and (G). In meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.166(g)(3)(iii), ADEQ rules R18-2-217 also contained a reference to
``maximum allowable concentration'' which incorrectly referenced R18-2-
218, and referenced only the State's ambient air quality standards,
which do not generally apply in areas outside of Arizona. In the
current SIP submittal, ADEQ has corrected this deficiency; see revised
R18-2-217(G)(4). Also, ADEQ's rules did not meet all the public notice
requirements for redesignations under 40 CFR 51.166(g)(3)(iv). ADEQ's
current submittal has corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-
217(G).
At the time of our 2015 NSR action, ADEQ's rules provided an
exemption for certain portable stationary sources with a prior permit
that contains requirements equivalent to the PSD requirements in 40 CFR
51.166 (j) through (r). While this requirement was generally consistent
with 40 CFR 51.166(i)(1)(iii), we found that ADEQ's rules impermissibly
expanded this exemption to portable sources that have been issued
nonattainment NSR permits and PAL permits. ADEQ has corrected this
deficiency. See revised R18-2-406(E).
In our 2015 NSR action, we determined that ADEQ's rules did not
clearly meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(k)(1) because the
relevant rule provision contained an ``or'' that could be interpreted
as allowing a source to demonstrate it will not contribute to an
increase above the significance levels in an adjacent nonattainment
area in lieu of the demonstration required for the NAAQS and
increments. In addition, R18-2-406(A)(5)(a) requires that a
[[Page 25219]]
person applying for a PSD permit demonstrate that the project would not
cause a violation of any maximum allowable increase over the baseline
concentration in ``any attainment or unclassifiable area,'' but ADEQ's
definition for ``attainment area'' in the SIP limited attainment areas
to those ``in the state.'' ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies in its
current SIP submittal. See revised R18-2-406(A)(5) and R18-2-101(19).
We determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules did not
specifically address the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(n)(1) and (3),
which require that (1) the owner or operator of a proposed source or
modification submit all information necessary to perform any analysis
or make any determination required under procedures established in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.166, and (2) upon request of the state, the
owner or operator also provide specified information concerning air
quality impacts and growth. ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies in
its current SIP submittal; see revised R18-2-406(L).
Regarding requirements for sources impacting Class I areas, in our
2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's rules did not fully address the
requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(p)(1) that relate to notifications to
EPA, although existing SIP requirements in R9-3-304(H) partially
addressed the requirements. ADEQ now has corrected this issue by
submitting R18-2-410 for SIP approval, which contain these requirements
at R18-2-410(C)(1). In addition, we found in our 2015 NSR action that
while ADEQ's rules generally included the requirements of 40 CFR
51.166(p)(3) at R18-2-406, ADEQ's rule contained the phrase ``no
significant adverse impacts,'' which is inconsistent with the federal
regulation, which requires a demonstration of ``no adverse impacts.''
ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-410(D).
ADEQ's program also contained outdated maximum allowable increases for
Class I areas that were not consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(p)(4). ADEQ
has corrected this deficiency in the current SIP submittal; see revised
R18-2-410(F).
In our 2015 NSR action, we found that certain PSD public
participation requirements were not adequately addressed; these issues
have been corrected in ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal. First, ADEQ's
rules did not ensure that materials available during the public comment
period are available in each region in which the proposed source would
be constructed as required by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(ii). ADEQ has now
corrected this deficiency. See R18-2-330(D). ADEQ's rules also did not
require ADEQ to notify the public of (1) the degree of increment
consumption that is expected from the source or modification, or (2)
the Director's preliminary determination, as required by 40 CFR
51.166(q)(2)(iii). ADEQ has corrected this deficiency. See revised R18-
2-402(I). ADEQ's NSR program also did not require ADEQ to make public
comments and the written notification of its final determination
available in the same location as the preliminary documents as required
by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) and (viii). ADEQ has also corrected this
deficiency; see revised R18-2-402(I).
Regarding information required to be provided by the source, in our
2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's rules contained a typographical
error, which did not ensure owners and operators would document and
maintain records of certain applicability-related information as
required by 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6). ADEQ corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18-2-402(F)(6)(b). In addition, we found that ADEQ's submittal
did not require owners or operators to make information required under
40 CFR 51.166(r)(6) available for review upon request by the Director
or the public as required by 40 CFR 51.166(r)(7). ADEQ has corrected
this deficiency in its current SIP submittal; see revised R18-2-
402(F)(7).
In our 2015 NSR action, we identified a number of deficiencies in
ADEQ's rules specifying the requirements for plantwide applicability
limits (PALs), which have been corrected in its April 2015 NSR
submittal. The issues are similar to the issues discusses above for
PALs provisions for the NA-NSR program. First, ADEQ's program did not
include a definition for major emissions unit as required by 40 CFR
51.166(w)(2)(iv). ADEQ has added the definition at R18-2-401(12).
ADEQ's PAL provisions at R18-2-412(H) contained an incorrect reference,
and R18-2-412(H)(5) used ``eliminated'' where the federal regulation
uses ``established'', which prevented ADEQ's rules from meeting 40 CFR
51.166(w)(9). ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies; see revised R18-2-
412(H)(4) and (5). ADEQ's PAL renewal provisions also contained
incorrect references related to the requirements in 40 CFR
51.166(w)(10). ADEQ has now corrected those references; see revised
R18-2-412(I)(1) and (4).
5. Other Revisions and Changes to the EPA's NSR Program and/or ADEQ's
NSR Program
Our review of ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal also considered
whether ADEQ's submittal was consistent with other changes made to
federal NSR program requirements following our 2015 action. These
changes include: The removal of vacated elements from the PSD program
related to GHGs (August 19, 2015 at 80 FR 50199); revisions to the
public noticing provisions for permitting (October 18, 2016 at 81 FR
71613); SIP requirements for PM2.5 nonattainment areas
(August 24, 2016 at 81 FR 58010); and the 2015 ozone standard (October
26, 2015 at 80 FR 65292). As discussed in further detail in our TSD, we
have determined that ADEQ's program, as updated by the current SIP
submittal, meets the required elements of these regulatory revisions
except for one disapproval issue that is already the subject of a
limited disapproval in our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action. ADEQ
intends to correct this deficiency in a separate SIP submittal. That
is, no new disapproval issues have been identified that are associated
with these changes to the federal NSR requirements.
Additionally, in our 2015 NSR action we finalized a partial
disapproval of ADEQ's program related to the significant monitoring
concentration (SMC) for PM2.5 at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c).
Our disapproval action did not require ADEQ to revise its program, as
our action prevented this portion of ADEQ's program from becoming
approved into the SIP. However, in its current SIP submittal, ADEQ has
updated its program to be consistent with the PM2.5 SMC, and
our current action includes our proposed approval of that change.
C. Review of Rules Requested To Be Removed From the SIP
In Table 2 of this preamble, we identified the ADEQ rules we are
proposing to remove from the SIP as part of this action. Except for R9-
2-301(I) and (K) and R9-3-304(H), the ADEQ rules we are proposing to
replace are older versions of the ADEQ rules in the April 2017 NSR
submittal. The older versions proposed for removal from the SIP contain
deficiencies that ADEQ needed to correct. R9-3-301(I) and (K) and R9-3-
304(H) are significantly older rules that were approved into the SIP in
1982 and 1983 that have since been repealed by ADEQ under State law,
and the corresponding updated provisions are included in the April 2017
NSR submittal.
[[Page 25220]]
D. Remaining NSR Deficiencies
As discussed previously, this action does not address all the
outstanding limited disapproval issues related to ADEQ's NSR program
from our 2015 NSR action and our 2016 PM2.5 precursor
action. Our TSD provides a summary of the remaining limited disapproval
issues. Our 2015 NSR action triggered a CAA obligation for EPA to
promulgate a FIP unless Arizona submits, and we approve, plan revisions
that correct the deficiencies within two years of the effective date of
our final action. In addition, for deficiencies pertaining to
requirements under part D of title I of the CAA our action also
triggers sanctions unless ADEQ submits and we approve SIP revisions
that correct the deficiencies before 18 months from our final action.
The EPA has preliminarily determined that ADEQ's April 2017 NSR
submittal addresses the deficiencies under part D of title I of the CAA
identified as limited disapproval issues in our 2015 NSR action. ADEQ
intends to make an additional submittal in order to the meet the FIP
deadline of December 2, 2017 related to our 2015 action and the
sanctions deadline of January 22, 2018 for our 2016 PM2.5
precursor action.
E. Federal Implementation Plan for GHGs and ADEQ's PSD Program
ADEQ is currently subject to a FIP under the PSD program for GHGs
because ADEQ has not adopted a PSD program for the regulation of GHGs.
See 40 CFR 52.37. ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal is not intended to
correct this program deficiency, as regulation of GHG emissions is
currently prohibited under State law. See A.R.S. section 49-191. In our
final action, we intend to move the codification of the FIP for GHGs
for areas under the jurisdiction of ADEQ and certain other areas in
Arizona from 40 CFR 52.37 to 40 CFR 52.144, where the State of
Arizona's PSD program approval is listed. Previously, there were
several other states subject to the FIP for GHGs, and EPA applied the
FIP to all such states, collectively, at 40 CFR 52.37. See 75 FR 82246
on Dec. 30, 2010. However, the State of Arizona is the only area that
remains subject to this GHG-specific FIP. Therefore, it is appropriate
to move the FIP provision to the regulatory section where Arizona's PSD
program is identified.
In addition, if we finalize our action, we also intend to update 40
CFR 51.144 to clarify that ADEQ has an approved PSD program, except for
GHGs, under sections 160 through 165 of the Act.
F. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the State's Rules
The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend that
ADEQ make the next time ADEQ modifies the rules.
G. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria under Section 110(l) and
193 of the Clean Air Act?
Section 110(l) states: ``Each revision to an implementation plan
submitted by a State under this chapter shall be adopted by such State
after reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not
approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 7501 of this title), or any other
applicable requirement of this chapter.''
With respect to the procedural requirements of CAA section 110(l),
based on our review of the public process documentation included in
ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal, we find that ADEQ has provided
sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for comment and
public hearings prior to adoption and submittal of these rules to the
EPA. With respect to the substantive requirements of section 110(l), we
have determined that our approval of the 2017 NSR submittal corrects
numerous deficiencies in ADEQ's program and does not relax any existing
requirements in the Arizona SIP.
For the reasons set forth above, we can approve the ADEQ SIP
revision as proposed in this action under section 110(l) of the Act.
Section 193 of the Act, which was added by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990, includes a savings clause that provides, in
pertinent part: ``No control requirement in effect, or required to be
adopted by an order, settlement agreement, or plan in effect before
November 15, 1990, in any area which is a nonattainment area for any
air pollutant may be modified after November 15, 1990, in any manner
unless the modification insures equivalent or greater emission
reductions of such air pollutant.'' We find that the provisions
included in ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal would ensure equivalent or
greater emission reductions as compared to the current SIP-approved NSR
program in the nonattainment areas under ADEQ's jurisdiction. In
addition, this action does not modify any pre-1990 requirements.
Although we are proposing to remove two pre-1990 rules from the SIP--
R9-3-301(I) and (K)--Installation Permits: General and R9-3-304(H)--
Installation Permits in Attainment Areas--we are also proposing to
approve newer, updated requirements into the SIP that are at least as
stringent.
For the reasons set forth above, we can approve the submitted NSR
program under section 193 of the Act.
H. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, and as explained further in our TSD,
we find that the rules in ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal satisfy the
applicable CAA and regulatory requirements for PSD, and nonattainment
NSR permit programs under CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and parts C and D of
title I of the Act, with the exception of one NA-NSR requirement
relating to PM2.5 precursors that has already been
identified as a disapproval issue in a previous action and which ADEQ
intends to address in a later SIP submittal. The submitted NSR rules
also adequately address certain deficiencies we identified in our 2015
NSR action concerning specific requirements in 40 CFR 51.161 and 51.164
that were evaluated as part of this action. Our proposed approval is
also consistent with section 110(l) and 193 of the Act. Accordingly, we
are proposing to approve all the rules in ADEQ's April 2017 NSR
submittal into the Arizona SIP. In addition, we are also proposing to
remove the existing SIP-approved rules listed in Table 2 from the SIP,
as these rules are outdated and mostly being superseded by our proposed
action.
III. Public Comment and Proposed Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rules into the Arizona SIP because we
believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. Specifically, we are
proposing approval of the new and amended ADEQ regulations listed in
Table 1, above, as a revision to the ADEQ portion of the Arizona SIP.
We are also proposing to remove from the Arizona SIP the existing rules
listed in Table 2, as these rules are outdated and mostly being
superseded by our proposed action.
We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until July
3, 2017. If we take final action to approve the submitted rules, our
final action will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.
[[Page 25221]]
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the ADEQ rule listed in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the EPA 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the 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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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 the 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 16, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-10946 Filed 5-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P