Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Arkansas; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 55065-55074 [2017-25045]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Dated: November 13, 2017.
Jonodev O. Chaudhuri,
Chairman.
Kathryn Isom-Clause,
Vice Chair.
E. Sequoyah Simermeyer,
Associate Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2017–25046 Filed 11–17–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0435; FRL–9970–19–
Region 6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Arkansas; Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan Requirements for
the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
Arkansas to address the requirements of
section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) for the 2006 and 2012
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), 2008 lead (Pb) NAAQS, 2008
ozone (O3) NAAQS, 2010 nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010
sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. Under
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),
each state is required to submit a SIP
that provides for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of a
revised primary or secondary NAAQS.
CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) require
each state to make a new SIP
submission within three years after EPA
promulgates a new or revised NAAQS
for approval into the existing SIP to
assure that the SIP meets the applicable
requirements for such new and revised
NAAQS. This type of SIP submission is
commonly referred to as an
‘‘infrastructure SIP or ‘‘i-SIP.’’ We
propose approval of this action under
Section 110 of the Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 20,
2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2017–0435, at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
salem.nevine@epa.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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 Ms. Nevine Salem, (214) 665–
7222, salem.nevine@epa.gov. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available at
either location (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nevine Salem, (214) 665–7222,
salem.nevine@epa.gov. To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment with her or Bill Deese at
(214) 665–7253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
or ‘‘our’’ mean EPA.
I. Background
The EPA has revised certain NAAQS
that are the subject of this SIP revision
proposal action. In 2006, following a
periodic review of the NAAQS for
PM2.5, EPA revised the PM2.5 NAAQS to
35 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3),
and the annual standard was retained at
15 mg/m3. 71 FR 61144 (October 17,
2006). In 2012, we promulgated a final
rule to address revised primary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. 78 FR 3086 (January 15,
2013). The primary annual standard was
revised to 12.0 mg/m3, and we retained
the 24-hour PM2.5 standards of 35 mg/
m3. In 2008, following a periodic review
of the NAAQS for Pb, we revised the
NAAQS to 0.15 mg/m3 for both the
primary and secondary standards. 73 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55065
66964 (November 12, 2008). In March
2008, following a periodic review, EPA
revised the primary and secondary O3
NAAQS. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008)
to establish a new primary standard of
0.075 parts per million (ppm), expressed
to three decimal places, based on a 3year average of the fourth-highest
maximum 8-hour average concentration,
and revised the current 8-hour standard
by making it identical to the revised
primary standard.
Likewise, in 2010, EPA revised the
primary national ambient air quality
standard for oxides of nitrogen as
measured by nitrogen dioxide (NO2), for
the 1-hour standard at a level of 100
ppb, based on the 3-year average of the
98th percentile of the yearly distribution
of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations, to supplement the
existing annual standard. 75 FR 6474
(February 9, 2010). In that same action,
EPA also established requirements for a
NO2 monitoring network that includes
monitors at locations where maximum
NO2 concentrations are expected to
occur, including within 50 meters of
major roadways, as well as monitors
sited to measure the area-wide NO2
concentrations that occur more broadly
across communities. 75 FR 6474.
Additionally, in June 2010, the EPA
revised the primary SO2 NAAQS to
establish a new 1-hour standard, with a
level of 75 ppb, based on the 3-year
average of the annual 99th percentile of
1-hour daily maximum concentrations.
75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the
CAA, states are required to submit
i-SIPs that provide for the
implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of a new or revised SAAQS
within 3 years following the
promulgation of such new or revised
NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific
requirements that that i-SIPs must
include to adequately address such new
or revised NAAQS, as applicable.
On March 24, 2017, the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) submitted SIP revisions to
address all of the revised NAAQS as
required by i-SIP requirements. Each
state must submit an i-SIP within three
years after the promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) of the
CAA includes a list of specific elements
the i-SIP must meet. In an effort to assist
states in complying with this
requirement, EPA issued guidance
addressing the i-SIP elements for the
NAAQS.1 Our technical evaluation of
1 ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),’’
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
Continued
20NOP1
55066
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
the Arkansas March, 24, 2017 i-SIP
submittal is provided in the Technical
Support Document (TSD), which is in
the docket for this rulemaking.2
EPA is proposing to approve the
Arkansas i-SIP submittal except for
certain portions 3 of the SIP pertaining
to CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for
interstate transport 4 for the 2008
ozone,5 2010 SO2, and the 2012 PM2.5
submittal(s) that pertain to significant
contribution to nonattainment or
interference with maintenance of the
NAAQS in other states, and CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for 2006 and
2012 PM2.5, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2 and
2010 SO2 NAAQS pertaining to the
visibility protection requirements. EPA
will take action in separate, future rule
making(s) for the portions of the 2008
ozone, 2010 SO2, and the 2012 PM2.5
submittal(s) that pertain to significant
contribution to nonattainment or
interference with maintenance of the
NAAQS in other states and the portions
Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13,
2013.
2 Please see our Technical Support Document
(TSD) included in the docket to this action for
additional information on the following: The
history of the NAAQS pollutants, their levels, forms
and, determination of compliance; EPA’s approach
for reviewing i-SIPs; the details of the SIP submittal
and EPA’s evaluation thereof; the effect of recent
court decisions on i-SIPs; the statutory and
regulatory citations in the Arkansas SIP specific to
this i-SIP review; citation to the specific i-SIP
provisions applicable under CAA and EPA
regulations; our Federal Register actions on the
Arkansas minor New Source Review program and
EPA approval activities; as well as the Arkansas
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program.
3 The exceptions are: (1) The portions of the 2008
ozone NAAQS submittal that pertain to interstate
transport of Arkansas emissions which will
significantly contribute to nonattainment of the
NAAQS in other states, (2) the portions of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS submittal that pertain to interstate
transport of Arkansas emissions to other states, and
(3) the portions of the submittal that pertain to
interstate transport of Arkansas emissions which
will interfere with visibility protection measures in
other states for the 2012 PM2.5, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2,
and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. We will take future, separate
action(s) on the portions of the 2008 ozone, 2012
PM2.5, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS submittal that pertain
to significant contribution to nonattainment or
interference with maintenance of the NAAQS in
other states.
4 An important aspect of the SIP is to ensure that
emissions from within the state do not have certain
prohibited impacts upon the ambient air in other
states through the interstate transport of pollutants.
This SIP requirement is specified in section
110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA. Pursuant to 110(a)(2)(D),
each state’s SIP must contain provisions adequate
to prevent, among other things, emissions that
interfere with measures required to be included in
the SIP of any other state to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality in any other state. Each
federally-approved SIP protects air quality
primarily by addressing air pollution at its point of
origin.
5 CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which addresses
the contribution to nonattainment and interference
with maintenance of the 2008 Ozone NAAQS in
other states was not included in this SIP submittal.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
which will interfere with visibility
protection measures in other states for
the 2012 PM2.5, 2008 O3, and 2010 SO2
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve
the remainder of the Arkansas i-SIP
submittal for the 2006 PM2.5; 2008 Pb;
2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, 2012
PM2.5 for i-SIP purposes.6
II. EPA’s Evaluation of Arkansas’
NAAQS Infrastructure Submission
The State’s submittal on March 24,
2017 demonstrates how the existing
Arkansas SIP meets the infrastructure
requirements for 2006 PM2.5, 2008 Pb;
2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 and, 2012
PM2.5. Below is a summary of EPA’s
evaluation of the Arkansas i-SIP for each
applicable element of CAA 110(a)(2)
A–M. More detailed information can be
found in our TSD that is in the docket
to this rulemaking action.
(A) Emission limits and other control
measures: The CAA § 110(a)(2)(A)
requires the SIP to include enforceable
emission limits and other control
measures, means or techniques
(including economic incentives such as
fees, marketable permits, and auctions
of emissions rights), as well as
schedules and timetables for
compliance, as may be necessary or
appropriate to meet the applicable
requirements of the Act and other
related matters as needed to implement,
maintain and enforce each of the
NAAQS.7 The State of Arkansas
provided information to show that
Arkansas’s SIP contains enforceable
emission limitations and other control
measures requirements. The relevant
provisions to address such requirements
are a part of the Arkansas Water and Air
Pollution Control Act (AWAPCA),
Arkansas Code Annotated (‘‘Ark. Code
Ann.’’) § 8–4–101 et seq., and those
provisions of the Arkansas Pollution
Control & Ecology Commission
(APC&EC) Regulation 19, codified in 40
CFR. 52.170. The regulations in APC&
EC Regulation 19 have been duly
6 See section III and Table I that follow (below)
for more details on EPA’s proposed actions in this
rule making.
7 We note that the specific nonattainment area
plan requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) are
subject to the timing requirements of CAA section
172, not the timing requirement of CAA section
110(a)(1). Thus, CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) does not
require that states submit regulations or emissions
limits specifically for attaining the 2006 PM2.5, 2008
Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 or 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. Those SIP provisions are due as part of
each state’s attainment plan, and will be addressed
separately from the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(A). See 73 FR 16025, 16206 (March 27,
2008). In the context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA
is not evaluating the existing SIP provisions for this
purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating whether
the state’s SIP has basic structural provisions for the
implementation of the NAAQS to meet i-SIP
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
adopted by the State and where these
provisions relate to CAA section 110
requirements, SIP revisions have been
submitted to and approved by EPA. The
EPA-approved SIP revisions are codified
at 40 CFR part 52, subpart E. Arkansas
has an EPA-approved air permitting
program for both major and minor
facilities, which ensures that all
applicable requirements are included in
any applicable facility permit. A
detailed list of the applicable authorities
and regulations is provided in the TSD
in the docket to this action. Arkansas’
SIP contains enforceable emission limits
and other control measures, which are
also in the federally enforceable SIP.
EPA is therefore proposing to find that
the Arkansas SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) of
the Act with respect to 2012 PM2.5, 2008
Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2
NAAQS.
(B) Ambient air quality monitoring/
data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) of the
CAA requires SIPs to include provisions
for establishment and operation of
ambient air quality monitors, collecting
and analyzing ambient air quality data,
and making these data available to EPA
upon request. The SIP-approved
APC&EC Regulation 19, Chapter 3
provides ADEQ with the responsibility
to conduct ambient air monitoring in
any area of the State that can be
expected to be in excess of the NAAQS.
65 FR 61103 (October 16, 2000).
Arkansas’ Statewide Air Quality
Surveillance Network was approved by
EPA on August 6, 1981 (46 FR 40005),
and consists of stations that measure
ambient concentrations of the six
criteria pollutants. The ADEQ operates
and maintains a statewide network of
air quality monitors—data are collected,
results are quality assured, and the data
are submitted to EPA’s Air Quality
System 8 on a regular basis. Regulation
19, Chapters 3 and Chapter 7 provide
ADEQ with the authority to collect air
quality monitoring data, quality-assure
the results, and report the data. ADEQ
maintains and operates a monitoring
network to measure levels of the
pollutants in accordance with EPA
regulations specifying siting and
monitoring requirements. All
monitoring data is measured using EPA
approved methods 9 and subject to the
EPA quality assurance requirements.10
8 A copy of the 2015–2016 Annual Air Monitoring
Network Plan and EPA’s approval letter are
included in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking.
9 See Appendix C to 40 CFR Part 58—Ambient
Air Quality Monitoring Methodology.
10 See Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 58—Quality
Assurance Requirements for Monitors used in
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
ADEQ submits all required data to EPA,
pursuant to EPA regulations as specified
in 40 CFR part 58. The monitoring
network was approved into the SIP and
it undergoes annual review by EPA.11
The ADEQ Web site provides the
monitor locations and posts past and
current concentrations of criteria
pollutants measured in the State’s
network of monitors.12 Additional
details of the applicable authorities and
regulations are provided in the TSD in
the docket to this action.
In summary, Arkansas meets the
requirement to establish, operate, and
maintain an ambient air monitoring
network; collect and analyze the
monitoring data; and make the data
available to EPA upon request. EPA is
proposing to find that the current
Arkansas SIP meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to 2006
and 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
(C) Program for enforcement of
control measures: The CAA
§ 110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to include
the following three elements: (1) A
program providing for enforcement of
the measures in paragraph A above; (2)
a program for the regulation of the
modification and construction of
stationary sources as necessary to
protect the applicable NAAQS (i.e.,
state-wide permitting of minor sources);
and (3) a permit program to meet the
major source permitting requirements of
the CAA (for areas designated as
attainment or unclassifiable for the
NAAQS in question).13
(1) Enforcement of SIP Measures. As
discussed previously, the Arkansas
Water and Air Pollution Control Act
(AWAPCA) provides the ADEQ with
authority to enforce the State’s
environmental quality rules. The ADEQ
established rules governing emissions of
the NAAQS and their precursors
throughout the state, and these rules are
in the federally-enforceable SIP. The
rules in Regulation 19, Chapters 1, 3–5,
7–10, 13 and 14; Regulation 26,
Chapters 3 and Regulation 31, Chapters
1, 3, 4 and 8 include allowable rates,
compliance, control plan requirements,
actual and allowable emissions,
monitoring and testing requirements,
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, and control schedules.
Evaluations of National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
11 A copy of the 2015–2016 Annual Air
Monitoring Network Plan and EPA’s approval letter
are included in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking.
12 See https://www.adeq.state.ar.us/air/planning/
monitoring.aspx.
13 Please see the TSD for further detail.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
These rules clarify the boundaries
beyond which regulated entities in
Arkansas can expect enforcement
action. To meet the CAA requirement
for having a program for the regulation
of the modification and construction of
any stationary source within the areas
covered by the plan as necessary to
assure that national ambient air quality
standards are achieved—including a
permit program as required by Parts C
and D—generally, the State is required
to have SIP-approved PSD,
Nonattainment, and Minor New Source
Review permitting programs adequate to
implement the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5,
2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010
SO2 NAAQS. As explained in footnote
7 above, we are not evaluating
nonattainment-related provisions—such
as the Nonattainment NSR program
required by part D in 110(a)(2)(C) and
measures for attainment required by
section 110(a)(2)(I), as part of the
infrastructure SIPs for these NAAQS—
because these submittals are required
beyond the date (3 years from NAAQS
promulgation) that CAA section 110
infrastructure submittals are required.
(2) Minor New Source Review. Section
110(a)(2)(C) also requires that the SIP
include measures to regulate
construction and modification of
stationary sources to protect the
NAAQS. The Arkansas minor NSR
permitting requirements are approved as
part of the SIP.14 Arkansas’ minor
source permitting requirements are
contained at APC&EC Regulation 19,
Chapter 4 and revisions to the rule were
previously approved by EPA at 72 FR
18394 (April 12, 2007).15 The SIP
continues to require preconstruction
permits for minor sources and minor
modifications.
(3) Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) permit program.
The Arkansas’ PSD program was
initially approved into the SIP on
January 14, 1982 (47 FR 02112).
Subsequent revisions to Arkansas’ PSD
program were approved into the SIP on
14 The EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove the existing Arkansas minor NSR
program to the extent that it may be inconsistent
with the EPA’s regulations governing this program.
The EPA has maintained that the CAA does not
require that new infrastructure SIP submissions
correct any defects in existing EPA-approved
provisions of minor NSR programs in order for the
EPA to approve the infrastructure SIP for element
C (e.g., 76 FR 41076–41079). The EPA believes that
a number of states may have minor NSR provisions
that are contrary to the existing EPA regulations for
this program. The statutory requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable flexibility in
designing minor NSR programs.
15 The EPA has since proposed approval of
revisions to the State’s minor NSR rules at 82 FR
43506 (September 18, 2017). Comments must have
been received by October 18, 2017.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55067
February 10, 1986 (51 FR 04910), May
2, 1991 (56 FR 20137), October 16, 2000
(65 FR 61103), and April 12, 2007 (72
FR 18394). On December 4, 2014,
Arkansas submitted final SIP revisions
to address the 2006 PM2.5 PSD elements.
EPA’s final approval was published on
March 4, 2015 (80 FR 11573). ADEQ has
the authority to implement the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS and regulate and permit
PM2.5 emissions, and its precursors
through the Arkansas PSD program.
Arkansas submitted SIP revisions
relating to Greenhouse Gases (GHG’s) on
July 2010 and a revision to that SIP on
November 6, 2010 addressing the PSD
program for EPA approval, which we
approved on April 2, 2013 (78 FR
19596), whereby we also rescinded the
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) that
was in place which addressed
permitting for the GHG purposes in
Arkansas. With the approval of the SIP
revisions to address GHG PSD
permitting and 2006 PM2.5 PSD
elements, ADEQ has a complete SIP
approved PSD permitting program in
place covering the required elements for
all regulated New Source Review (NSR)
pollutants. Arkansas’ PSD portion of the
federally-approved SIP covers all NSR
regulated pollutants as well as the
requirements to meet CAA 110(a)(2)(C)
for the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Pb,
2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2
NAAQS. Additional details of the
applicable authorities and regulations
are provided in the TSD in the docket
to this action.
(D)(i) Interstate Pollution Transport:
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA
requires that the State’s SIP contain
adequate provisions to address
interstate transport of certain emissions.
The State’s SIP must address any
emissions activity in one state that
contributes significantly to
nonattainment, or interferes with
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another
state. The EPA refers to this requirement
as prong 1 (significant contribution to
nonattainment) and prong 2
(interference with maintenance).
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA
requires SIPs to include provisions
prohibiting any sources or other types of
emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required of
any other state to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or from
interfering with measures required of
any other state to protect visibility
(referring to visibility of Class I areas).
The EPA sometimes refers to this
requirement under CAA subsection
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as prong 3
(interference with PSD) and prong 4
(interference with visibility protection).
The EPA interprets CAA section
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
55068
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
110(a)(2) to require air agencies to
address prong 3 and prong 4 as part of
each infrastructure SIP submission.
We previously approved the portions
of Arkansas’ 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS i-SIP
which addressed the requirements that
emissions within Arkansas be
prohibited from contributing to the
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS in other
states (prong 1 and 2). 78 FR 53269
(August 29, 2013). In this proposed
rulemaking, EPA is not acting on
provisions pertaining to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prong 1 and prong 2 for
the following pollutants: 2012 PM2.5,
2008 Ozone, and 2010 SO2. We will
address these requirements in a
separate, future rulemaking(s). Also,
EPA is proposing only to approve CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3- PSD
portion) for 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008
O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
EPA will address 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
prong 4 for all the above pollutants in
a separate, future rule making. However,
EPA is proposing to approve
subsections of 110(a)(D)(i) and
110(a)(D)(ii) for 2008 Lead (Pb) and
2010 NO2 NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the CAA
requires SIPs to include adequate
provisions to ensure compliance with
sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating
to interstate and international pollution
abatement. Section 126(a) of the CAA
requires new or modified sources to
notify neighboring states of potential
impacts from the source. Section 115 of
the CAA relates to the international
pollution abatement portion of
110(a)((2)(D)(ii).
The i-SIP must prohibit emissions
within Arkansas from contributing
significantly to the nonattainment of the
NAAQS in other states, and from
interfering with the maintenance of the
NAAQS in other states (CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)). The SIP must also
prohibit emissions within Arkansas
both from interfering with measures
required to prevent significant
deterioration in other states and from
interfering with measures required to
protect visibility in other states (CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)).
Lead: We propose to approve the
portion of the State’s submittal which
addresses the requirement that
emissions within Arkansas be
prohibited from contributing to the
nonattainment of the Pb NAAQS in
other states, and from interfering with
the maintenance of the Pb NAAQS in
other states. The physical properties of
Pb, which is a metal and very dense,
prevent Pb emissions from experiencing
a significant degree of travel in the
ambient air. No complex chemistry is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
needed to form Pb or Pb compounds in
the ambient air; therefore, ambient
concentrations of Pb are typically
highest near Pb sources. More
specifically, there is a sharp decrease in
ambient Pb concentrations as the
distance from the source increases.
According to EPA’s report entitled Our
Nation’s Air: Status and Trends
Through 2010, Pb concentrations that
are not near a source of Pb are
approximately 8 times less than the
typical concentrations near the source.16
There are no areas within the State of
Arkansas designated as nonattainment
with respect to the 2008 lead NAAQS.
ADEQ has determined that there are
few sources of lead emissions located in
close proximity to Arkansas’ borders
(e.g., within 2 miles), considering the
physical properties of Pb explained
above which prevent Pb emissions from
experiencing the same travel or
formation phenomena as PM2.5 or ozone
and there is a sharp decrease in Pb
concentrations as the distance from a Pb
source increases. Significant impacts
from Pb emissions from stationary
sources are limited to short distances
from emitting sources, therefore,
visibility is not affected by lead
emissions.17 Given this information, we
propose to approve the portion of the Pb
i-SIP submittal related to the protection
of visibility in other states.
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2): We propose
to approve the portion of the submittal
which addresses the prevention of
emissions which significantly
contribute to the nonattainment of the
NO2 NAAQS in other states and
interfere with the maintenance of the
NO2 NAAQS in other states. On
February 17, 2012, EPA designated the
entire United States as ‘‘unclassifiable/
attainment’’ for the 2010 NO2.18 The
available air quality data show that all
areas in the country meet the 2010 NO2
NAAQS for 2008–2010. No state or
tribal entity recommended an area be
designated ‘‘nonattainment.’’ As listed
in our NO2 Design Values report,19 only
one maintenance area exists for the
prior annual NO2 NAAQS (Los Angeles,
California). With no nonattainment or
maintenance areas in surrounding
states, Arkansas does not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or
maintenance of the NO2 NAAQS in any
of the contiguous states. As further
evidence that Arkansas NO2 emissions
do not contribute to nonattainment or
16 https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/2011/report/
fullreport.pdf.
17 Please see our TSD for more detailed
information.
18 See 77 FR 9532 (February 17, 2012).
19 https://epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance of NAAQS, we reviewed
more recent monitoring data for NO2
throughout the United States. Using
previous EPA methodology,20 we
evaluated specific monitors identified as
having nonattainment and/or
maintenance problems, which we refer
to as ‘‘receptors.’’ We identify
nonattainment receptors as any monitor
that violated the NO2 NAAQS in the
most recent three-year period.
Meanwhile, we identify NO2
maintenance receptors as any monitor
that violated the NO2 NAAQS in either
of the prior monitoring cycles (2010–
2012 and 2011–2013), but attained in
the most recent monitoring cycle (2012–
2014). During the three most recent
design value periods of 2010 through
2012, 2011 through 2013 and 2012
through 2014, we found no monitors
violating the 2010 NO2 NAAQS in the
United States.
We are also proposing to approve the
portion of the SIP pertaining to the
prevention of significant deterioration
in other states for Pb and NO2, as
Arkansas has a fully approvable PSD
program. The program regulates all NSR
pollutants, including greenhouse gases
(GHGs) which prevents significant
deterioration in nearby states.
2012 PM, O3, SO2: At this time, we are
not proposing action on the i-SIP
submittals which address the
prevention of emissions which
significantly contribute to the
nonattainment of 2012 PM2.5, 2008
Ozone, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS in other
states, and the interference with the
maintenance 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Ozone,
2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS in
other states. We plan to act on these
portions of the i-SIP in future, separate
rulemaking actions.
Based on information presented in the
State’s SIP submission, we are
proposing to approve the portion of the
SIP submittal related to the prevention
of significant deterioration in other
states, as Arkansas has a fully approved
PSD program that addresses all
regulated new source review pollutants,
including greenhouse gases (GHG)
which prevent significant deterioration
in nearby states.
(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution Abatement
and International Air Pollution: In
addition, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
requires that the SIP contain adequate
provisions insuring compliance with the
applicable requirements of section 126
of the Act (relating to interstate
pollution abatement) and 115 of the Act
20 See NO SIP call, 63 FR 57371 (October 27,
X
1998); CAIR, 7025172 (May 12, 2005; and Transport
Rule or Cross-State Air Pollution Rule 76 FR 48208
(August 8, 2001).
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
(relating to international pollution
abatement). Section 126(a) of the CAA
requires new or modified sources to
notify neighboring states of potential
impacts from the source. Arkansas
meets the CAA section 126
requirements as it has a fully approved
PSD SIP and no source or sources have
been identified by the EPA as having
any interstate impacts under CAA
section 126 in any pending action
related to any air pollutant. Arkansas
meets the section 115 requirements as
there are no final findings by the EPA
that Arkansas air emissions affect other
countries. Therefore, we propose to
approve the portion of the Arkansas SIP
for these NAAQS: 2006 PM2.5, 2008
Ozone, 2008 Pb, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2,
and 2012 PM2.5 i-SIP pertaining to CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). For additional
detail, please refer to the TSD.
(E) Adequate authority, resources,
implementation, and oversight: CAA
110(a)(2)(E) requires that the SIP must
provide for the following: (1) Necessary
assurances that the state (and other
entities within the state responsible for
implementing the SIP) will have
adequate personnel, funding, and
authority under state or local law to
implement the SIP, and that there are no
legal impediments to such
implementation; (2) compliance with
requirements relating to state boards as
required under section 128 of the CAA;
and (3) necessary assurances that the
state has responsibility for ensuring
adequate implementation of any plan
provision for which it relies on local
governments or other entities to carry
out. Both elements (A) and (E) herein
address the requirement that a state
have adequate authority to implement
and enforce the SIP without legal
impediments.
The i-SIP submission for the
referenced NAAQS pollutants describes
the SIP regulations governing the
various functions of personnel within
the ADEQ, including the administrative,
technical support, planning,
enforcement, and permitting functions
of the program.
With respect to necessary assurances,
and the requirement to address funding,
Arkansas has authority to collect fees for
the NSR permit programs, and other
inspections, maintenance and renewals
required of other air pollution sources
also provide necessary funds to help
implement the State’s air programs. Ark.
Code Ann. § 8–1–103(1)(A) grants
APC&EC the authority to establish, by
regulation, reasonable fees for initial
issuance, annual review, and
modification of permits. Under Ark.
Code Ann. § 8–1–103(3), ADEQ is
authorized to collect the fees established
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
by APC&EC and shall deny the issuance
of an initial permit, a renewal permit, or
a modification permit if and when a
facility fails or refuses to pay the fees
after reasonable notice. APC&EC
Regulation 9, Fee Regulation. Chapter 5,
Air Permit Fees, contains the air permit
fees applicable to non-part 70 permits,
part 70 permits and general permits.
More specific information on permitting
fees is provided in the TSD.
With respect to authority and
personnel, Ark. Code Ann. § 8–1–
202(b)(2)(D) states that the Director of
ADEQ’s duties include the day-to-day
administration of all activities that the
Department is empowered by law to
perform, including, but not limited to,
the employment and supervision of
such technical, legal, and administrative
staff, within approved appropriations,
as is necessary to carry out the
responsibilities vested with ADEQ. The
AWAPCA provides the ADEQ adequate
authority, in part ‘‘to administer and
enforce all laws and regulations relating
to pollution of the air.’’ Ark. Code Ann.
Sec. 8–4–311(7). APC&EC Regulation
19.301 gives ADEQ the responsibility of
meeting all applicable regulations and
requirements contained in the CAA, as
amended, if any area of the state is
determined to be in violation of the
NAAQS. APC&EC Reg. 19.410 gives
ADEQ the authority to revoke, suspend,
or modify any permit for cause. For
further details, please refer to the TSD.
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that
the State’s SIP comply with CAA
section 128 that requires: (1) That the
majority of members of the state body
that approves permits or enforcement
orders do not derive any significant
portions of their income from entities
subject to permitting or enforcement
orders under the CAA; and (2) any
potential conflicts of interest by such
body be adequately disclosed. In 1982,
the EPA approved the State’s SIP
submittal to demonstrate compliance of
the SIP with Section 128 of the CAA. 47
FR 19136 (May 04, 1982). The submittal
cited AWAPCA section 82–1901 as
demonstrating compliance with CAA
section 128(a)(1) and cited Arkansas
Code of Ethics Law Act 570 of 1979,
Section 3: Use of Public Office to Obtain
Special Privilege Prohibited: Section 4:
Use and Disclosure of Information—
Acquired by Reason of Office Activities
Requiring Disclosure; Section 5:
Requirement to File Statement and
Section 6: Statements Period Retained
Public Access Signature Required.
Under APC&EC Reg. 8.202, the Director
or the Director’s delegate shall issue all
permits with nothing in APC&EC
Regulation 8 being construed to
authorize APC&EC to issue a permit,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55069
including the power to reverse or affirm
a permitting decision by the Director.
Under Ark. Code Ann. § 21–8–1001,
no member of a state board or
commission or board member of an
entity receiving state funds shall
participate in, vote on, influence or
attempt to influence an official decision
if the member has pecuniary interest in
the matter under consideration by the
board, commission, or entity. In
addition, no member of a state board or
commission or board member of an
entity receiving state funds shall
participate in any discussion or vote on
a rule or regulation that exclusively
benefits the member. As required by the
CAA, the SIP stipulates that any board
or body, which approves permits or
enforcement orders, must have at least
a majority of members who represent
the public interest and do not derive
any ‘‘significant portion’’ of their
income from persons subject to permits
and enforcement orders or who appear
before the board on issues related to the
CAA. The members of the board or
body, or the head of an agency with
similar powers, are required to
adequately disclose any potential
conflicts of interest. While the ADEQ
has no board or commission, the ADEQ
submitted a letter dated January 19,
2012, that clarified that the Director of
the ADEQ is considered the ‘‘the head
of an executive agency with similar
powers,’’ and must meet the
requirement to adequately disclose any
potential conflicts of interest.21 The
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(E)(iii) concerning local
governments or other entities, are not
applicable to Arkansas because it does
not rely on local agencies for specific
SIP implementation.
(F) Stationary source monitoring
system: CAA 110(A)(2)(F) requires the
SIP provide for the establishment of a
system to monitor emissions from
stationary sources and to submit
periodic emission reports. It must
require the installation, maintenance,
and replacement of equipment, and the
implementation of other necessary
steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources, to monitor emissions
from such sources. The SIP shall also
require periodic reports on the nature
and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such
sources. It shall require that the state
correlate the source reports with
emission limitations or standards
established under the CAA. These
21 The ADEQ submitted a letter to EPA Region 6
to clarify that the requirements of § 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
do apply to the Director of the ADEQ, and that EPA
has already approved a state submittal to this effect.
The letter is included in the docket to this action.
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
55070
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
reports must be made available for
public inspection at reasonable times.
The relevant regulatory requirements
have been codified in APC&E
Regulation 19, Regulations of the
Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air
Pollution Control, Chapter 7 (pertaining
to sampling and testing).
Provisions in APC&EC Chapter 7,
Regulation 19.705 provide for the
reporting of emissions inventories in a
format established by the ADEQ on a
schedule set forth in that section. In
addition, APC&EC Regulation 19.705
requires the submission of emission
statements as required by the CAA.
Area, mobile, and non-road data are
required to be reported on a three-year
cycle.
Enforceable emission limitations and
other control measures are covered in
the Arkansas Water and Air Pollution
Control Act and those provisions of Ark.
Code Ann. §§ 8–4–310 and 8–4–311.
Elements of the program for
enforcement are found in the
monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for sources in
these control measures as well as
individual SIP permits. Additional
details and citations to the relevant
regulatory authorities and provisions are
discussed in the TSD. We are proposing
that the Arkansas SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F).
(G) Emergency authority: CAA
110(A)(2)(G) requires a demonstration
that the ADEQ has authority to restrain
any source from causing imminent and
substantial endangerment to public
health or welfare or the environment.
The SIP must include an adequate
contingency plan to implement ADEQ’s
emergency authority.
Ark. Code Ann. § 8–1–202(b)(2)(C)
empowers the ADEQ to issue orders
under circumstances that reasonably
require emergency measures to be taken
to protect the environment or the public
health and safety. APC&EC Reg. 8.502
requires ADEQ to publish a Notice of
Emergency Order in a newspaper
covering the affected area, or in a
newspaper of statewide circulation. The
notice must contain a description of the
action, ADEQ’s authority for taking the
action and other information
appropriate to ensure the public is
informed about the action.
Ark. Code Ann. § 8–4–202(e)(1)
empowers APC&EC to declare an
emergency and implement emergency
rules, regulations, suspensions, or
moratoria on categories or types of
permits if APC&EC determines that
imminent peril to the public health,
safety, or welfare requires immediate
change in the rules or immediate
suspension or moratorium on categories
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
or types of permits. APC&EC Regulation
8, Administrative Procedures, Reg.
8.807 authorizes the Commission to
waive or reduce the notice requirements
in cases involving emergency
rulemaking. No emergency rule shall be
effective for more than 180 days.
(H) Future SIP revisions: CAA
110(a)(2)(H) requires that States have
the authority to revise their SIPs in
response to changes in the NAAQS,
availability of improved methods for
attaining the NAAQS, or in response to
an EPA finding that the SIP is
substantially inadequate to attain the
NAAQS.
The AWAPCA, Section 82–1935(1),
empowers the APC&EC to ‘‘formulate
and promulgate, amend, repeal, and
enforce rules and regulations
implementing or effectuating the powers
and duties of the Commission [. . .] to
control air pollution’’. Therefore,
Arkansas has the authority to revise its
SIP as may be necessary to take into
account revisions of primary or
secondary NAAQS, or the availability of
improved or more expeditious methods
of attaining such standards.
Furthermore, Arkansas also has the
authority under the AWAPCA
provisions to revise its SIP in the event
the EPA (pursuant to the Act) finds the
SIP to be substantially inadequate to
attain the NAAQS. APC&EC Regulation
19, Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of
Implementation for Air Pollution
Control, Chapter 1, provides a clear
delineation of those regulations that are
promulgated by APC&EC in satisfaction
of certain requirements of the CAA. Ark.
Code Ann. § 8–4–311(a)(7) empowers
ADEQ to administer and enforce all
laws and regulations relating to
pollution of the air. Ark. Code Ann. § 8–
4–202(d)(4)(A)(ii) authorizes APC&EC to
refer to the Code of Federal Regulations
for any APC&EC standard or regulation
that is identical to a regulation
promulgated by the EPA.
The Arkansas Pollution Control and
Ecology Commission’s Regulation 19,
Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of
Implementation for Air Pollution
Control, Chapter 1, demonstrates that
those regulations that are promulgated
by the Commission satisfy the
requirements of this provision of the
CAA.
(I) Nonattainment areas: The CAA
section 110(a)(2)(I) requires that in the
case of a plan or plan revision for areas
designated as nonattainment areas,
states must meet applicable
requirements of Part D of the CAA,
relating to SIP requirements for
designated nonattainment area. SIP
revisions that implement the control
strategies necessary to bring a
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
nonattainment area into attainment of
the NAAQSs are not required by CAA
to be submitted within three years of the
promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS. Therefore, as stated earlier,
CAA 110(a)(1) does not require this
element to be demonstrated as part of an
infrastructure SIP submittal. 73 FR
16025 16206 (March 27, 2008).
(J) Consultation with government
officials, public notification, PSD and
visibility protection: The SIP must meet
the following four CAA requirements:
(1) Those listed in section 121 of the
CAA, relating to interagency
consultation; (2) those listed in CAA
section 127, relating to public
notification of NAAQS exceedances and
related issues; (3) prevention of
significant deterioration of air quality
and (4) visibility protection.
Under APC&EC Regulation 19,
Chapter 9, Arkansas has incorporated by
reference the requirements in 40 CFR
part 52 for PSD in their entirety, with
the exception of 40 CFR
52.21(b)(2)(iii)(a), 52.21(b)(49),
52.21(b)(50), 52.21(b)(55–58), 52.21(i)
and 52.21(cc). These provisions were
approved by EPA as part of the
federally-approved SIP. These
incorporated provisions also provide for
protection of visibility in Federal Class
I areas. All new major sources and major
modifications are subject to a
comprehensive EPA-approved PSD
permitting program, including GHG PSD
permitting that was approved on April
2, 2013 (78 FR 19596) and PM2.5 PSD
permitting approved on March 4, 2015
(80 FR 11573). Chapter 9 of APC&EC
Regulation 19 authorizes enforcement of
regulations governing the prevention of
significant deterioration of air quality
and regulations governing the protection
of visibility in mandatory Federal Class
I areas.
The visibility sub-element of Element
J is not being addressed because EPA
stated in a September 13, 2013
‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP Elements
under CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2)’’ that we believe that there are
no newly applicable visibility
protection obligations pursuant to
Element J after the promulgation of new
or revised NAAQS.
(1) Consultation With Identified
Official on Certain Actions: The i-SIP
needs to show that there is an
established process for consultation
with general purpose local governments,
designated organization of elected
officials of local governments and any
federal land manager having authority
over federal land to which the plan
applies, consistent with CAA section
121, which lists the specific types of
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
actions for which consultation is
required. If the relevant statute is selfexecuting such that there is no
associated regulation or other
documents, then the statute would need
to be included in the SIP. If a regulation
or other document meeting the CAA
requirements exists, then the regulation
or other document would need to be
included in the SIP submission, and the
authorizing statute should be referenced
but the statute is not required to be part
of the EPA approved SIP. Under the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.240, the SIP
would need to identify organizations
‘‘that will participate in developing,
implementing, and enforcing the plan
and the responsibilities of such
organizations.’’ The plan should include
any agreements or memoranda of
understanding among the organizations.
The AWAPCA, as codified under Ark
Code Ann. A.C.A. § 8–1–203 provides
that the APC&EC ‘‘shall meet regularly
in publicly noticed open meetings to
discuss and rule upon matters of
environmental concern’’ prior to the
adoption of any rule or regulation
implementing the substantive statutes
charged to the ADEQ for administration.
In addition, Ark. Code Ann. section 8–
4–311(a)(2) provides that the ADEQ or
its successor shall have the power and
duty ‘‘to advise, consult, and cooperate
with other agencies of the state, political
subdivisions, industries, other states,
the federal government, and with
affected groups in the furtherance of the
purposes of this chapter.’’ Further,
Regulation 19.904(D) provides that
ADEQ shall make determinations that a
source may affect air quality or visibility
in a mandatory Class I federal area
based on screening criteria agreed upon
by the Department and the Federal Land
Manager.22
(2) Public Notification: The i-SIP
submission needs to demonstrate that
the air agency does regularly notify the
public of instances or areas in which the
new or revised primary NAAQS was
exceeded; it needs to advise the public
of health hazards associated with such
exceedances and of ways in which the
public can participate in regulatory and
other efforts to improve air quality.
Public notification begins with the air
quality forecasts, which advise the
public of conditions capable of
exceeding the 8-hour ozone 23 and PM2.5
NAAQS. The air quality forecasts can be
found on the ADEQ Web site: For 8hour ozone and PM2.5, the forecast
22 See
72 FR 18394 (April 12, 2007).
ADEQ forecasts for 8-hour ozone are based
on the 2008 ozone standard, which is 75 ppb.
23 The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
includes two regions 24 in the State.
Ozone forecasts are made daily during
the ozone season for each of the forecast
areas.25 The ozone forecasts are made,
in most cases, a day in advance by 2:00
p.m. local time and are valid for the
next day. When the forecast indicates
that ozone levels will be above the 8hour ozone standard, the ADEQ and the
Arkansas Department of Health issue an
Ozone Health Advisory.
In addition, the State implements an
Ozone Action Day (OAD) program 26
and will issue an ozone alert in the
afternoon on the day before an elevated
level of ozone is expected to occur.
Announcements for an OAD will be
broadcast through television and other
news media, and to employers
participating in the OAD program. The
OAD program includes examples of
actions that can be implemented by
individuals and organizations to reduce
ozone levels and exposure to ozone.
Also through the Metroplan Web site,
the public can subscribe to an electronic
information system that provides air
quality forecast and ozone alert
information via email. Ozone data are
posted on the ADEQ Web site; current,
regional hourly and regional 8-hour
ozone data are posted hourly (See
https://www.adeq.state.ar.us/techsvs/
ozonemonitors.asp). Provisions
regarding public availability of emission
data were also approved into the
Arkansas SIP on April 12, 2007 (72 FR
18394).
(3) PSD and Visibility Protection:
Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires states to
meet applicable requirements of Part C
related to prevention of significant
deterioration and visibility protection.
EPA approved Arkansas’s Visibility
Protection Plan (Protection of Visibility
in Mandatory Class I Federal Areas) into
the Arkansas SIP on February 10, 1986
(51 FR 4910). EPA approved revisions to
the Arkansas Visibility Protection Plan
and approved a Long-Term Strategy for
Visibility Protection into the Arkansas
SIP on July 21, 1988 (53 FR 27514). The
State’s SIP revision to its Regional Haze
24 The 2 forecast areas for 8-hour ozone and PM
2.5
are Little Rock and Springdale. See
www.adeq.state.ar.us/techsvs/default.htm.
25 Ozone is a gas composed of three oxygen
atoms. Ground level ozone is generally not emitted
directly from a vehicle’s exhaust or an industrial
smokestack, but is created by a chemical reaction
between NOX and VOCs in the presence of sunlight
and high ambient temperatures. Thus, ozone is
known primarily as a summertime air pollutant. For
Arkansas, the ozone season runs from March 1
through November 31 (see 40 CFR 58, APPENDIX
D, Table D–3). The Arkansas air quality control
regions are defined at 45 FR 6571 (January 29,
1980).
26 For coordinating agencies, participating
counties and other information, please see https://
www.adeq.state.ar.us/air/planning/ozone/.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55071
program was submitted to EPA on July
29, 2008. Arkansas is subject to federal
regional haze requirements which
address visibility-impairing pollutants.
Arkansas’s PSD program addresses
visibility protection. In 2008, Arkansas
submitted a Regional Haze SIP and EPA
partially approved and partially
disapproved it on March 12, 2012 (77
FR 14604). The State’s submittal
provides information to show that
Arkansas has experienced considerable
improvement in reductions of regional
haze emissions in relation to the
reasonable progress goals and uniform
rate of progress established in the State’s
Regional Haze SIP. The most recent data
from 2015 and current five-year rolling
averages show that visibility
impairment in Arkansas’ Federal Class I
areas is decreasing more rapidly than
the uniform rate of progress and 2018
reasonable progress goals submitted as
part of the State’s 2008 Regional Haze
SIP.
ADEQ has a complete EPA-approved
PSD permitting program in place
covering the required elements for all
regulated NSR pollutants, including
greenhouse gases (GHG). EPA had
previously published a finding of failure
to submit a PSD SIP for PM2.5 (79 FR
29354, May 22, 2014) and imposed a
Federal Implementation Plan for PSD
permitting of GHGs. 75 FR 82246
(December 30, 2010). However, ADEQ
submitted SIP revisions addressing 2006
PM2.5 PSD elements, which was
approved on March 4, 2015 (80 FR
11573), and GHG PSD permitting, which
was approved on April 2, 2013 (78 FR
19596). The Arkansas SIP requirements
relating to visibility and regional haze
are not affected when EPA establishes or
revises a NAAQS. Therefore, EPA
believes that there are no new visibility
protection requirements due to the
revision of the NAAQS, and
consequently there are no newly
applicable visibility protection
obligations pursuant to infrastructure
element (J).
(K) Air quality and modeling/data:
The SIP must provide for performing air
quality modeling, as prescribed by EPA,
to predict the effects on ambient air
quality of any emissions of any NAAQS
pollutant, and for submission of such
data to EPA upon request. APC&EC
Regulation 19, Chapter 3, requires that
ADEQ conduct ambient air monitoring
and computer modeling of regulated air
pollutant emissions in any area that can
reasonably be expected to be in excess
of the NAAQS and to review the
ambient air impacts of any new or
modified source of federally regulated
air emission that is the subject of the
requirements of the SIP. See APC&EC
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
55072
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Reg.19.302(A) and (B). Under APC&EC
Reg.19.302(B), all computer modeling
shall be performed using EPA-approved
models, and using averaging times
commensurate with averaging times
stated in the NAAQS. ADEQ has the
ability to submit data related to air
quality modeling to the EPA under Ark.
Code Ann. § 8–4–311(a)(2) which gives
ADEQ the power to advise, consult, and
cooperate with the federal government.
Modeling and emissions reductions
measures have been submitted by
Arkansas and approved into the SIP. For
example, we reference the air modeling
and emissions reductions data
submitted within the Crittenden County
Economic Development Zone SIP
revisions, as well as the demonstration
of maintenance of the 2008 8-hour
ozone standard in Crittenden County. 81
FR 24030 (April 25, 2016). The
measures in these SIPs were approved
by EPA and adopted into the SIP.
(L) Permitting Fees: The SIP must
require each major stationary source to
pay permitting fees to the permitting
authority, as a condition of any permit
required under the CAA, to cover the
cost of reviewing and acting upon any
application for such a permit, and, if the
permit is issued, the costs of
implementing and enforcing the terms
of the permit. The fee requirement
applies until a fee program established
by the State (pursuant to title V of the
CAA, relating to operating permits), is
approved by EPA.
The fee requirements of the APC&EC’s
Regulation 26, Regulations of the
Arkansas Operating Air Permit Program,
Chapter 11, were approved by EPA as
meeting the CAA requirements and
were incorporated into Arkansas’s SIP.
Arkansas’s title V operating permit
program in Chapter 11, was approved
October 9, 2001. APC&EC’s Chapter 11
titled ‘‘Permit Fees,’’ Reg. 26.1101, ‘‘Fee
Requirement,’’ requires that in
accordance with 40 CFR 70.9, as
promulgated July 21, 1992, and last
modified June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31607),
that the owners or operators of part 70
sources shall pay initial and annual fees
that are sufficient to cover the permit
program costs. The Department shall
ensure that any fee required by these
regulations will be used solely for
permit program costs. In addition,
APC&EC’s Reg. 26.1102, titled ‘‘Fee
schedule,’’ requires that the fee
schedule for part 70 permits is
contained in Regulation No. 9. The
APC&EC Regulation 9, Fee Regulation,
Chapter 5, Air Permit Fees, contains the
air permit fees applicable to non-part 70
permits, part 70 permits and general
permits. Revisions to air permitting fees
requirements in Chapter 5 were
approved by EPA on April 30, 2015 (80
FR 24216). Reg. 9.501, ‘‘Applicability,’’
requires that air permit fees contained
in this section are applicable to (1) nonpart 70 permits, (2) part 70 permits, and
(3) general permits.
(M) Consultation/participation by
affected local entities: CAA
110(A)(2)(M) requires the SIP to provide
for consultation and participation by
local political subdivisions affected by
the SIP. See the discussion for element
(J) above for a description of the SIP’s
public participation process, the
authority to advise and consult, and the
PSD SIP’s public participation
requirements. The Arkansas statute at
Ark. Code. Ann. Sec. 8–1–203 provides
that the APC&EC shall meet regularly in
publicly noticed open meetings to
discuss and rule upon matters of
environmental concern prior to the
adoption of any rule or regulation
implementing the substantive statutes
charged to the ADEQ for administration.
Additionally, the state noted that
pursuant to APC&EC Regulation 8,
Arkansas will continue to provide for
consultation and participation from
those affected by the SIP. Under
APC&EC Regulation 8, those
organizations affected by the SIP will be
able to participate in developing the SIP
via comments and potential public
hearings. ADEQ is the sole state-level
enforcer and implementer of the SIP.
See APC&EC Reg. 8.205 Public Notice of
Permit Application; APC&EC Reg. 8.206
Request for Public Hearing on
Application for Permit; APC&EC Reg.
8.207 Public Notice of Draft Permitting
Decision; APC&EC Reg. 8.208 Public
Comment on Draft Permitting Decision;
APC&EC Reg. 8.209 Public Hearings;
APC&EC Reg. 8.405 Public Notice of
Notices of Violations and Consent
Administrative Orders; APC&EC Reg.
8.801 Public Notice of Rulemaking.
27 We are proposing to address 2006 PM
2.5
NAAQs 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate
Transport-protection of visibility) in a future rule
making.
28 We are proposing to address Arkansas 2010
NO2 NAAQs 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate
Transport—protection of visibility) in future rule
making.
29 We are proposing to take a separate, future
rulemaking action(s) on 2012 PM2.5 and 2010 SO2
Arkansas i-SIP elements 110(a)(2)(D(i)(I) (prong 1:
Interstate Transport—significant contribution to
nonattainment areas, and prong 2: Interstate
Transport—Interfere with maintenance in other
states), and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate
Transport—protection of visibility).
30 We are not proposing to approve Interstate
provisions in CAA section 110(a)(2)(D(i)(I) (prong 1:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ADEQ participates in the Central State
Air Resources Agencies, which is an
organization of states, tribes, federal
agencies and other interested parties
concerned with air quality. The
interactions and public participation on
rule and plan development are
consistent with the requirements of
§ 110(a)(2)(M).
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
majority of the March 24, 2017 Arkansas
i-SIP submittal, which address the
requirements of the CAA sections 110(a)
(1) and (2) as applicable to 2006 PM2.5,
2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Specifically,
EPA is proposing to approve the
following infrastructure elements for
Arkansas infrastructure SIP:
For the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, we are
proposing to approve CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) that pertains to interstate
transport (‘‘prong 3’’) for Interstate
transport and international pollution
abatement for Arkansas infrastructure
SIP.27
For the 2008 Lead NAAQS, we are
proposing to approve all the
infrastructure elements in CAA
110(a)(2)(A–M) for the Arkansas SIP.
For the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, we are
proposing to approve the infrastructure
elements of CAA 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1, 2); CAA
110(a)(2)(D(i)(II) (prong 3: Interstate
transport—prevention of significant
deterioration); CAA 110(A)(2)(D)(ii), E,
F, H, I, J, K, L, and M).28
For the 2012 PM2.5 and 2010 SO2
NAAQS, we are proposing to approve
infrastructure elements CAA
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), D(i)(II) (prong 3:
Interstate transport—prevention of
significant deterioration), CAA
110(a)(2)(D)(ii), E, F, H, I, J, K, L, and
M).29
For the 2008 Ozone, we are proposing
to approve CAA 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3:
Interstate transport—prevention of
significant deterioration), CAA
110(a)(2)(D(ii), E, F, H, I, J, K, L, and
M).30
Table 1 (below) outlines the specific
actions EPA is proposing to take in this
action for the Arkansas March 24, 2017
i-SIP submittal.
Interstate Transport—significant contribution to
nonattainment areas, and prong 2: Interstate
Transport—Interfere with maintenance in other
states) which were not included in this submission.
We are proposing to address CAA Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate Transport—
protection of visibility) for 2008 Ozone NAQQS in
a separate, future rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
55073
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—PROPOSED ACTIONS ON THE ARKANSAS INFRASTRUCTURE SIP SUBMITTAL FOR VARIOUS NAAQS
Element
2006 PM2.5
(A): Emission limits and other control measures ............
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system .....
(C)(i): Enforcement of SIP measures .............................
(C)(ii): PSD program for major sources and major
modifications.
(C)(iii): Permitting program for minor sources and minor
modifications.
(D)(i)(I): Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with
maintenance of NAAQS (prongs 1 and 2).
(D)(i)(II): PSD (requirement 3) ........................................
(D)(i)(II): Visibility Protection (requirement 4) .................
(D)(ii): Interstate and International Pollution Abatement
(E)(i): Adequate resources ..............................................
(E)(ii): State boards .........................................................
(E)(iii): Necessary assurances with respect to local
agencies.
(F): Stationary source monitoring system .......................
(G): Emergency power ....................................................
(H): Future SIP revisions ................................................
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under
part D.
(J)(i): Consultation with government officials ..................
(J)(ii): Public notification ..................................................
(J)(iii): PSD ......................................................................
(J)(iv): Visibility protection ...............................................
(K): Air quality modeling and data ..................................
(L): Permitting fees .........................................................
(M): Consultation and participation by affected local entities.
A*
A*
A*
A*
2008 Pb
....................
....................
....................
....................
A
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
2008 Ozone
A
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
2010 NO2
A
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
2010 SO2
A
A
A
A
2012 PM2.5
......................
......................
......................
......................
A.
A.
A.
A.
A * ....................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A.
A * ....................
A ......................
* No submittal ..
A ......................
No action .........
No action.
A * ....................
No submittal ....
A ......................
A * ....................
A * ....................
A * ....................
A
A
A
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
A ......................
No action .........
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
No action .........
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
No action .........
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A ......................
A.
No action.
A.
A.
A.
A.
A * ....................
A * ....................
A * ....................
+ ......................
A
A
A
+
......................
......................
......................
......................
A
A
A
+
......................
......................
......................
......................
A
A
A
+
......................
......................
......................
......................
A
A
A
+
......................
......................
......................
......................
A.
A.
A.
+.
A * ....................
A * ....................
A * ....................
+ ......................
A * ....................
A * ....................
A * ....................
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
A.
A.
A.
+.
A.
A.
A.
Key to Table 1: Proposed action on AR infrastructure SIP submittals for various NAAQS.
A—Approve.
A * Previously approved for an earlier submittal.
+—Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
No action—EPA is taking no action on these infrastructure requirements in this rulemaking. EPA may address in separate future rulemaking action(s).
No submittal—Proposed disapproval for an earlier submittal. EPA may take future action(s) in separate rule making(s).
* No submittal * FIP in place.
Based upon review of the state’s
infrastructure SIP submission and
relevant statutory and regulatory
authorities and provisions referenced in
the submission or referenced in the
federally-approved Arkansas SIP, EPA
believes that Arkansas has the
infrastructure in place to address all
applicable required elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2) (except as noted in
Table 1 above) to ensure that the 2006
PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2,
2010 SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are
implemented in the state.
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
proposes to approve 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the proposed 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, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Interstate transport of pollution, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
55074
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 222 / Monday, November 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Dated: November 9, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2017–25045 Filed 11–17–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 170816768–7768–01]
RIN 0648–BH14
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish
Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico;
Modifications to Greater Amberjack
Allowable Harvest and Rebuilding Plan
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS proposes to implement
management measures described in a
framework action to the Fishery
Management Plan for the Reef Fish
Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP),
as prepared by the Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council (Council).
If implemented, this proposed rule
would revise the commercial and
recreational annual catch limits (ACLs)
and annual catch targets (ACTs), and
modify the recreational fixed closed
season for greater amberjack in the Gulf
of Mexico (Gulf) exclusive economic
zone. The purpose of this proposed rule
and the framework action is to adjust
the rebuilding time period, to revise the
sector ACLs and ACTs, and to
incorporate updated stock status
information to end overfishing and
rebuild the greater amberjack stock in
the Gulf.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 5, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the proposed rule, identified by
‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2017–0116’’ by any of
the following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20170116, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Kelli O’Donnell, Southeast Regional
nshattuck on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:06 Nov 17, 2017
Jkt 244001
Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South,
St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
• Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/
A’’ in the required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of the framework
action, which includes an
environmental assessment, a regulatory
impact review, and a Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) analysis may be
obtained from the Southeast Regional
Office Web site at
https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/
sustainable_fisheries/gulf_fisheries/
reef_fish/2017/GAJ_Framework/gaj_
framework.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelli O’Donnell, Southeast Regional
Office, NMFS, telephone: 727–824–
5305, email: Kelli.ODonnell@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf
reef fish fishery, which includes greater
amberjack, is managed under the FMP.
The Council prepared the FMP and
NMFS implements the FMP under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Steven Act) through
regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
Background
The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires
NMFS and regional fishery management
councils to prevent overfishing and to
achieve, on a continuing basis, the
optimum yield from federally managed
fish stocks to ensure that fishery
resources are managed for the greatest
overall benefit to the nation.
The greater amberjack resource in the
Gulf was declared overfished by NMFS
on February 9, 2001. Secretarial
Amendment 2 established a greater
amberjack rebuilding plan which started
in 2003 and ended in 2012 (68 FR
39898; July 3, 2003). In 2006, a
Southeast Data Assessment and Review
(SEDAR) benchmark stock assessment
(SEDAR 9) was completed for greater
amberjack and was subsequently
updated in 2010 (SEDAR 9 Update). In
response to results from SEDAR 9 that
showed the stock continued to be
overfished and undergoing overfishing,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the rebuilding plan was revised in
Amendment 30A to the FMP (73 FR
38139; July 3, 2008). Results from the
SEDAR 9 Update showed the stock
continued to be overfished and
undergoing overfishing, thereby
necessitating further adjustment of the
greater amberjack rebuilding plan,
implemented in Amendment 35 to the
FMP (77 FR 67574; December 13, 2012).
However, after the time period for
rebuilding the stock that was put in
effect through the final rule for
Secretarial Amendment 2 ended in
2012, NMFS determined in a 2014 stock
assessment (SEDAR 33) that the stock
was not rebuilt, and remained
overfished and was undergoing
overfishing. In response to the results of
SEDAR 33, the rebuilding plan was
revised and the catch levels were
reduced in a 2015 framework action (80
FR 75432; December 2, 2015). The
current rebuilding time period,
established by the 2015 framework
action, ends in 2019.
A 2016 update to SEDAR 33 (SEDAR
33 Update) indicated the Gulf greater
amberjack stock remained overfished
and was undergoing overfishing, and
would not rebuild by 2019, as
previously estimated. The Council’s
Scientific and Statistical Committee
(SSC) reviewed this assessment at their
March 2017 meeting and provided the
Council new overfishing limits (OFL)
and acceptable biological catches (ABC)
for a period of 3 years beginning in
2018. The ABCs recommended by the
Council’s SSC are: 1,182,000 lb (536,146
kg) for 2018; 1,489,000 lb (675,399 kg)
for 2019; and 1,794,000 lb (813,744 kg)
for 2020. All weights described in this
proposed rule are in pounds round
weight. Constraining catch to the ABC
(equivalent to 75 percent of the
maximum fishing mortality threshold) is
expected to end overfishing and rebuild
the stock by 2027.
In May 2017, pursuant to paragraph
(7) of section 304(e) of the MagnusonStevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1854(e)), NMFS
notified the Council of the 2016 SEDAR
33 Update results that indicated that the
greater amberjack stock continued to be
overfished and undergoing overfishing.
Following that notification, the Council
was required under section 304(e)(3) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act to prepare
regulations within 2 years to end
overfishing immediately and rebuild the
greater amberjack stock.
The Council decided to set the stock
ACL equal to the SSC’s ABC
recommendation for 2018 through 2020,
keeping the stock ACL for 2020 in effect
for subsequent years unless changed.
The Council did not consider any
change to the allocation of the stock
E:\FR\FM\20NOP1.SGM
20NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 222 (Monday, November 20, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55065-55074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25045]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0435; FRL-9970-19-Region 6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Arkansas; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of Arkansas to address the requirements of section 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2006 and 2012 fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), 2008 lead (Pb) NAAQS, 2008 ozone (O3)
NAAQS, 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010
sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. Under CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2), each state is required to submit a SIP that provides for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a revised primary or
secondary NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) require each state to
make a new SIP submission within three years after EPA promulgates a
new or revised NAAQS for approval into the existing SIP to assure that
the SIP meets the applicable requirements for such new and revised
NAAQS. This type of SIP submission is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure SIP or ``i-SIP.'' We propose approval of this action
under Section 110 of the Act.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 20,
2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2017-0435, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
salem.nevine@epa.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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 Ms. Nevine Salem, (214)
665-7222, salem.nevine@epa.gov. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nevine Salem, (214) 665-7222,
salem.nevine@epa.gov. To inspect the hard copy materials, please
schedule an appointment with her or Bill Deese at (214) 665-7253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' mean EPA.
I. Background
The EPA has revised certain NAAQS that are the subject of this SIP
revision proposal action. In 2006, following a periodic review of the
NAAQS for PM2.5, EPA revised the PM2.5 NAAQS to
35 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), and the annual standard was
retained at 15 [mu]g/m\3\. 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). In 2012, we
promulgated a final rule to address revised primary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). The primary
annual standard was revised to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\, and we retained the 24-
hour PM2.5 standards of 35 [mu]g/m\3\. In 2008, following a
periodic review of the NAAQS for Pb, we revised the NAAQS to 0.15
[mu]g/m\3\ for both the primary and secondary standards. 73 FR 66964
(November 12, 2008). In March 2008, following a periodic review, EPA
revised the primary and secondary O3 NAAQS. 73 FR 16436
(March 27, 2008) to establish a new primary standard of 0.075 parts per
million (ppm), expressed to three decimal places, based on a 3-year
average of the fourth-highest maximum 8-hour average concentration, and
revised the current 8-hour standard by making it identical to the
revised primary standard.
Likewise, in 2010, EPA revised the primary national ambient air
quality standard for oxides of nitrogen as measured by nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), for the 1-hour standard at a level of 100 ppb, based
on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution
of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, to supplement the existing
annual standard. 75 FR 6474 (February 9, 2010). In that same action,
EPA also established requirements for a NO2 monitoring
network that includes monitors at locations where maximum
NO2 concentrations are expected to occur, including within
50 meters of major roadways, as well as monitors sited to measure the
area-wide NO2 concentrations that occur more broadly across
communities. 75 FR 6474.
Additionally, in June 2010, the EPA revised the primary
SO2 NAAQS to establish a new 1-hour standard, with a level
of 75 ppb, based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of
1-hour daily maximum concentrations. 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to
submit i-SIPs that provide for the implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of a new or revised SAAQS within 3 years following the
promulgation of such new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists
specific requirements that that i-SIPs must include to adequately
address such new or revised NAAQS, as applicable.
On March 24, 2017, the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) submitted SIP revisions to address all of the revised NAAQS as
required by i-SIP requirements. Each state must submit an i-SIP within
three years after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Section
110(a)(2) of the CAA includes a list of specific elements the i-SIP
must meet. In an effort to assist states in complying with this
requirement, EPA issued guidance addressing the i-SIP elements for the
NAAQS.\1\ Our technical evaluation of
[[Page 55066]]
the Arkansas March, 24, 2017 i-SIP submittal is provided in the
Technical Support Document (TSD), which is in the docket for this
rulemaking.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),''
Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.
\2\ Please see our Technical Support Document (TSD) included in
the docket to this action for additional information on the
following: The history of the NAAQS pollutants, their levels, forms
and, determination of compliance; EPA's approach for reviewing i-
SIPs; the details of the SIP submittal and EPA's evaluation thereof;
the effect of recent court decisions on i-SIPs; the statutory and
regulatory citations in the Arkansas SIP specific to this i-SIP
review; citation to the specific i-SIP provisions applicable under
CAA and EPA regulations; our Federal Register actions on the
Arkansas minor New Source Review program and EPA approval
activities; as well as the Arkansas Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is proposing to approve the Arkansas i-SIP submittal except for
certain portions \3\ of the SIP pertaining to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for interstate transport \4\ for the 2008 ozone,\5\
2010 SO2, and the 2012 PM2.5 submittal(s) that
pertain to significant contribution to nonattainment or interference
with maintenance of the NAAQS in other states, and CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for 2006 and 2012 PM2.5, 2008
O3, 2010 NO2 and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
pertaining to the visibility protection requirements. EPA will take
action in separate, future rule making(s) for the portions of the 2008
ozone, 2010 SO2, and the 2012 PM2.5 submittal(s)
that pertain to significant contribution to nonattainment or
interference with maintenance of the NAAQS in other states and the
portions which will interfere with visibility protection measures in
other states for the 2012 PM2.5, 2008 O3, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve the remainder of
the Arkansas i-SIP submittal for the 2006 PM2.5; 2008 Pb;
2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, 2012
PM2.5 for i-SIP purposes.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The exceptions are: (1) The portions of the 2008 ozone NAAQS
submittal that pertain to interstate transport of Arkansas emissions
which will significantly contribute to nonattainment of the NAAQS in
other states, (2) the portions of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
submittal that pertain to interstate transport of Arkansas emissions
to other states, and (3) the portions of the submittal that pertain
to interstate transport of Arkansas emissions which will interfere
with visibility protection measures in other states for the 2012
PM2.5, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010
SO2 NAAQS. We will take future, separate action(s) on the
portions of the 2008 ozone, 2012 PM2.5, and 2010
SO2 NAAQS submittal that pertain to significant
contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance of
the NAAQS in other states.
\4\ An important aspect of the SIP is to ensure that emissions
from within the state do not have certain prohibited impacts upon
the ambient air in other states through the interstate transport of
pollutants. This SIP requirement is specified in section
110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA. Pursuant to 110(a)(2)(D), each state's SIP
must contain provisions adequate to prevent, among other things,
emissions that interfere with measures required to be included in
the SIP of any other state to prevent significant deterioration of
air quality in any other state. Each federally-approved SIP protects
air quality primarily by addressing air pollution at its point of
origin.
\5\ CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), which addresses the
contribution to nonattainment and interference with maintenance of
the 2008 Ozone NAAQS in other states was not included in this SIP
submittal.
\6\ See section III and Table I that follow (below) for more
details on EPA's proposed actions in this rule making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. EPA's Evaluation of Arkansas' NAAQS Infrastructure Submission
The State's submittal on March 24, 2017 demonstrates how the
existing Arkansas SIP meets the infrastructure requirements for 2006
PM2.5, 2008 Pb; 2008 O3, 2010 NO2,
2010 SO2 and, 2012 PM2.5. Below is a summary of
EPA's evaluation of the Arkansas i-SIP for each applicable element of
CAA 110(a)(2) A-M. More detailed information can be found in our TSD
that is in the docket to this rulemaking action.
(A) Emission limits and other control measures: The CAA Sec.
110(a)(2)(A) requires the SIP to include enforceable emission limits
and other control measures, means or techniques (including economic
incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions
rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be
necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of the Act
and other related matters as needed to implement, maintain and enforce
each of the NAAQS.\7\ The State of Arkansas provided information to
show that Arkansas's SIP contains enforceable emission limitations and
other control measures requirements. The relevant provisions to address
such requirements are a part of the Arkansas Water and Air Pollution
Control Act (AWAPCA), Arkansas Code Annotated (``Ark. Code Ann.'')
Sec. 8-4-101 et seq., and those provisions of the Arkansas Pollution
Control & Ecology Commission (APC&EC) Regulation 19, codified in 40
CFR. 52.170. The regulations in APC& EC Regulation 19 have been duly
adopted by the State and where these provisions relate to CAA section
110 requirements, SIP revisions have been submitted to and approved by
EPA. The EPA-approved SIP revisions are codified at 40 CFR part 52,
subpart E. Arkansas has an EPA-approved air permitting program for both
major and minor facilities, which ensures that all applicable
requirements are included in any applicable facility permit. A detailed
list of the applicable authorities and regulations is provided in the
TSD in the docket to this action. Arkansas' SIP contains enforceable
emission limits and other control measures, which are also in the
federally enforceable SIP. EPA is therefore proposing to find that the
Arkansas SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) of the Act
with respect to 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3,
2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ We note that the specific nonattainment area plan
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) are subject to the timing
requirements of CAA section 172, not the timing requirement of CAA
section 110(a)(1). Thus, CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) does not require
that states submit regulations or emissions limits specifically for
attaining the 2006 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3,
2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 or 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. Those SIP provisions are due as part of each state's
attainment plan, and will be addressed separately from the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A). See 73 FR 16025, 16206
(March 27, 2008). In the context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is
not evaluating the existing SIP provisions for this purpose.
Instead, EPA is only evaluating whether the state's SIP has basic
structural provisions for the implementation of the NAAQS to meet i-
SIP requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section
110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA requires SIPs to include provisions for
establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, collecting
and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available
to EPA upon request. The SIP-approved APC&EC Regulation 19, Chapter 3
provides ADEQ with the responsibility to conduct ambient air monitoring
in any area of the State that can be expected to be in excess of the
NAAQS. 65 FR 61103 (October 16, 2000). Arkansas' Statewide Air Quality
Surveillance Network was approved by EPA on August 6, 1981 (46 FR
40005), and consists of stations that measure ambient concentrations of
the six criteria pollutants. The ADEQ operates and maintains a
statewide network of air quality monitors--data are collected, results
are quality assured, and the data are submitted to EPA's Air Quality
System \8\ on a regular basis. Regulation 19, Chapters 3 and Chapter 7
provide ADEQ with the authority to collect air quality monitoring data,
quality-assure the results, and report the data. ADEQ maintains and
operates a monitoring network to measure levels of the pollutants in
accordance with EPA regulations specifying siting and monitoring
requirements. All monitoring data is measured using EPA approved
methods \9\ and subject to the EPA quality assurance requirements.\10\
[[Page 55067]]
ADEQ submits all required data to EPA, pursuant to EPA regulations as
specified in 40 CFR part 58. The monitoring network was approved into
the SIP and it undergoes annual review by EPA.\11\ The ADEQ Web site
provides the monitor locations and posts past and current
concentrations of criteria pollutants measured in the State's network
of monitors.\12\ Additional details of the applicable authorities and
regulations are provided in the TSD in the docket to this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A copy of the 2015-2016 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan
and EPA's approval letter are included in the docket for this
proposed rulemaking.
\9\ See Appendix C to 40 CFR Part 58--Ambient Air Quality
Monitoring Methodology.
\10\ See Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 58--Quality Assurance
Requirements for Monitors used in Evaluations of National Ambient
Air Quality Standards.
\11\ A copy of the 2015-2016 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan
and EPA's approval letter are included in the docket for this
proposed rulemaking.
\12\ See https://www.adeq.state.ar.us/air/planning/monitoring.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, Arkansas meets the requirement to establish, operate,
and maintain an ambient air monitoring network; collect and analyze the
monitoring data; and make the data available to EPA upon request. EPA
is proposing to find that the current Arkansas SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to 2006 and 2012
PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
(C) Program for enforcement of control measures: The CAA Sec.
110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to include the following three elements: (1)
A program providing for enforcement of the measures in paragraph A
above; (2) a program for the regulation of the modification and
construction of stationary sources as necessary to protect the
applicable NAAQS (i.e., state-wide permitting of minor sources); and
(3) a permit program to meet the major source permitting requirements
of the CAA (for areas designated as attainment or unclassifiable for
the NAAQS in question).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Please see the TSD for further detail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Enforcement of SIP Measures. As discussed previously, the
Arkansas Water and Air Pollution Control Act (AWAPCA) provides the ADEQ
with authority to enforce the State's environmental quality rules. The
ADEQ established rules governing emissions of the NAAQS and their
precursors throughout the state, and these rules are in the federally-
enforceable SIP. The rules in Regulation 19, Chapters 1, 3-5, 7-10, 13
and 14; Regulation 26, Chapters 3 and Regulation 31, Chapters 1, 3, 4
and 8 include allowable rates, compliance, control plan requirements,
actual and allowable emissions, monitoring and testing requirements,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and control schedules.
These rules clarify the boundaries beyond which regulated entities
in Arkansas can expect enforcement action. To meet the CAA requirement
for having a program for the regulation of the modification and
construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the
plan as necessary to assure that national ambient air quality standards
are achieved--including a permit program as required by Parts C and D--
generally, the State is required to have SIP-approved PSD,
Nonattainment, and Minor New Source Review permitting programs adequate
to implement the 2006 and 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008
O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. As
explained in footnote 7 above, we are not evaluating nonattainment-
related provisions--such as the Nonattainment NSR program required by
part D in 110(a)(2)(C) and measures for attainment required by section
110(a)(2)(I), as part of the infrastructure SIPs for these NAAQS--
because these submittals are required beyond the date (3 years from
NAAQS promulgation) that CAA section 110 infrastructure submittals are
required.
(2) Minor New Source Review. Section 110(a)(2)(C) also requires
that the SIP include measures to regulate construction and modification
of stationary sources to protect the NAAQS. The Arkansas minor NSR
permitting requirements are approved as part of the SIP.\14\ Arkansas'
minor source permitting requirements are contained at APC&EC Regulation
19, Chapter 4 and revisions to the rule were previously approved by EPA
at 72 FR 18394 (April 12, 2007).\15\ The SIP continues to require
preconstruction permits for minor sources and minor modifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove the
existing Arkansas minor NSR program to the extent that it may be
inconsistent with the EPA's regulations governing this program. The
EPA has maintained that the CAA does not require that new
infrastructure SIP submissions correct any defects in existing EPA-
approved provisions of minor NSR programs in order for the EPA to
approve the infrastructure SIP for element C (e.g., 76 FR 41076-
41079). The EPA believes that a number of states may have minor NSR
provisions that are contrary to the existing EPA regulations for
this program. The statutory requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
provide for considerable flexibility in designing minor NSR
programs.
\15\ The EPA has since proposed approval of revisions to the
State's minor NSR rules at 82 FR 43506 (September 18, 2017).
Comments must have been received by October 18, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit program.
The Arkansas' PSD program was initially approved into the SIP on
January 14, 1982 (47 FR 02112). Subsequent revisions to Arkansas' PSD
program were approved into the SIP on February 10, 1986 (51 FR 04910),
May 2, 1991 (56 FR 20137), October 16, 2000 (65 FR 61103), and April
12, 2007 (72 FR 18394). On December 4, 2014, Arkansas submitted final
SIP revisions to address the 2006 PM2.5 PSD elements. EPA's
final approval was published on March 4, 2015 (80 FR 11573). ADEQ has
the authority to implement the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and regulate
and permit PM2.5 emissions, and its precursors through the
Arkansas PSD program. Arkansas submitted SIP revisions relating to
Greenhouse Gases (GHG's) on July 2010 and a revision to that SIP on
November 6, 2010 addressing the PSD program for EPA approval, which we
approved on April 2, 2013 (78 FR 19596), whereby we also rescinded the
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) that was in place which addressed
permitting for the GHG purposes in Arkansas. With the approval of the
SIP revisions to address GHG PSD permitting and 2006 PM2.5
PSD elements, ADEQ has a complete SIP approved PSD permitting program
in place covering the required elements for all regulated New Source
Review (NSR) pollutants. Arkansas' PSD portion of the federally-
approved SIP covers all NSR regulated pollutants as well as the
requirements to meet CAA 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2006 and 2012
PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS. Additional details of the applicable
authorities and regulations are provided in the TSD in the docket to
this action.
(D)(i) Interstate Pollution Transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
of the CAA requires that the State's SIP contain adequate provisions to
address interstate transport of certain emissions. The State's SIP must
address any emissions activity in one state that contributes
significantly to nonattainment, or interferes with maintenance, of the
NAAQS in another state. The EPA refers to this requirement as prong 1
(significant contribution to nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference
with maintenance).
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA requires SIPs to include
provisions prohibiting any sources or other types of emissions activity
in one state from interfering with measures required of any other state
to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or from interfering
with measures required of any other state to protect visibility
(referring to visibility of Class I areas). The EPA sometimes refers to
this requirement under CAA subsection 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as prong 3
(interference with PSD) and prong 4 (interference with visibility
protection). The EPA interprets CAA section
[[Page 55068]]
110(a)(2) to require air agencies to address prong 3 and prong 4 as
part of each infrastructure SIP submission.
We previously approved the portions of Arkansas' 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS i-SIP which addressed the requirements that
emissions within Arkansas be prohibited from contributing to the
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in other
states (prong 1 and 2). 78 FR 53269 (August 29, 2013). In this proposed
rulemaking, EPA is not acting on provisions pertaining to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prong 1 and prong 2 for the following pollutants:
2012 PM2.5, 2008 Ozone, and 2010 SO2. We will
address these requirements in a separate, future rulemaking(s). Also,
EPA is proposing only to approve CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong
3- PSD portion) for 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Pb, 2008 O3,
2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA will address
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) prong 4 for all the above pollutants in a separate,
future rule making. However, EPA is proposing to approve subsections of
110(a)(D)(i) and 110(a)(D)(ii) for 2008 Lead (Pb) and 2010
NO2 NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the CAA requires SIPs to include
adequate provisions to ensure compliance with sections 115 and 126 of
the Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.
Section 126(a) of the CAA requires new or modified sources to notify
neighboring states of potential impacts from the source. Section 115 of
the CAA relates to the international pollution abatement portion of
110(a)((2)(D)(ii).
The i-SIP must prohibit emissions within Arkansas from contributing
significantly to the nonattainment of the NAAQS in other states, and
from interfering with the maintenance of the NAAQS in other states (CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)). The SIP must also prohibit emissions
within Arkansas both from interfering with measures required to prevent
significant deterioration in other states and from interfering with
measures required to protect visibility in other states (CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)).
Lead: We propose to approve the portion of the State's submittal
which addresses the requirement that emissions within Arkansas be
prohibited from contributing to the nonattainment of the Pb NAAQS in
other states, and from interfering with the maintenance of the Pb NAAQS
in other states. The physical properties of Pb, which is a metal and
very dense, prevent Pb emissions from experiencing a significant degree
of travel in the ambient air. No complex chemistry is needed to form Pb
or Pb compounds in the ambient air; therefore, ambient concentrations
of Pb are typically highest near Pb sources. More specifically, there
is a sharp decrease in ambient Pb concentrations as the distance from
the source increases. According to EPA's report entitled Our Nation's
Air: Status and Trends Through 2010, Pb concentrations that are not
near a source of Pb are approximately 8 times less than the typical
concentrations near the source.\16\ There are no areas within the State
of Arkansas designated as nonattainment with respect to the 2008 lead
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/2011/report/fullreport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADEQ has determined that there are few sources of lead emissions
located in close proximity to Arkansas' borders (e.g., within 2 miles),
considering the physical properties of Pb explained above which prevent
Pb emissions from experiencing the same travel or formation phenomena
as PM2.5 or ozone and there is a sharp decrease in Pb
concentrations as the distance from a Pb source increases. Significant
impacts from Pb emissions from stationary sources are limited to short
distances from emitting sources, therefore, visibility is not affected
by lead emissions.\17\ Given this information, we propose to approve
the portion of the Pb i-SIP submittal related to the protection of
visibility in other states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Please see our TSD for more detailed information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2): We propose to approve the portion of the
submittal which addresses the prevention of emissions which
significantly contribute to the nonattainment of the NO2
NAAQS in other states and interfere with the maintenance of the
NO2 NAAQS in other states. On February 17, 2012, EPA
designated the entire United States as ``unclassifiable/attainment''
for the 2010 NO2.\18\ The available air quality data show
that all areas in the country meet the 2010 NO2 NAAQS for
2008-2010. No state or tribal entity recommended an area be designated
``nonattainment.'' As listed in our NO2 Design Values
report,\19\ only one maintenance area exists for the prior annual
NO2 NAAQS (Los Angeles, California). With no nonattainment
or maintenance areas in surrounding states, Arkansas does not
significantly contribute to nonattainment or maintenance of the
NO2 NAAQS in any of the contiguous states. As further
evidence that Arkansas NO2 emissions do not contribute to
nonattainment or maintenance of NAAQS, we reviewed more recent
monitoring data for NO2 throughout the United States. Using
previous EPA methodology,\20\ we evaluated specific monitors identified
as having nonattainment and/or maintenance problems, which we refer to
as ``receptors.'' We identify nonattainment receptors as any monitor
that violated the NO2 NAAQS in the most recent three-year
period. Meanwhile, we identify NO2 maintenance receptors as
any monitor that violated the NO2 NAAQS in either of the
prior monitoring cycles (2010-2012 and 2011-2013), but attained in the
most recent monitoring cycle (2012-2014). During the three most recent
design value periods of 2010 through 2012, 2011 through 2013 and 2012
through 2014, we found no monitors violating the 2010 NO2
NAAQS in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 77 FR 9532 (February 17, 2012).
\19\ https://epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
\20\ See NOX SIP call, 63 FR 57371 (October 27,
1998); CAIR, 7025172 (May 12, 2005; and Transport Rule or Cross-
State Air Pollution Rule 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also proposing to approve the portion of the SIP pertaining
to the prevention of significant deterioration in other states for Pb
and NO2, as Arkansas has a fully approvable PSD program. The
program regulates all NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs)
which prevents significant deterioration in nearby states.
2012 PM, O3, SO2: At this time, we are not proposing action on the
i-SIP submittals which address the prevention of emissions which
significantly contribute to the nonattainment of 2012 PM2.5,
2008 Ozone, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS in other states, and the
interference with the maintenance 2012 PM2.5, 2008 Ozone,
2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS in other states. We
plan to act on these portions of the i-SIP in future, separate
rulemaking actions.
Based on information presented in the State's SIP submission, we
are proposing to approve the portion of the SIP submittal related to
the prevention of significant deterioration in other states, as
Arkansas has a fully approved PSD program that addresses all regulated
new source review pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHG) which
prevent significant deterioration in nearby states.
(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air
Pollution: In addition, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that the
SIP contain adequate provisions insuring compliance with the applicable
requirements of section 126 of the Act (relating to interstate
pollution abatement) and 115 of the Act
[[Page 55069]]
(relating to international pollution abatement). Section 126(a) of the
CAA requires new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of
potential impacts from the source. Arkansas meets the CAA section 126
requirements as it has a fully approved PSD SIP and no source or
sources have been identified by the EPA as having any interstate
impacts under CAA section 126 in any pending action related to any air
pollutant. Arkansas meets the section 115 requirements as there are no
final findings by the EPA that Arkansas air emissions affect other
countries. Therefore, we propose to approve the portion of the Arkansas
SIP for these NAAQS: 2006 PM2.5, 2008 Ozone, 2008 Pb, 2010
NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 i-SIP
pertaining to CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). For additional detail,
please refer to the TSD.
(E) Adequate authority, resources, implementation, and oversight:
CAA 110(a)(2)(E) requires that the SIP must provide for the following:
(1) Necessary assurances that the state (and other entities within the
state responsible for implementing the SIP) will have adequate
personnel, funding, and authority under state or local law to implement
the SIP, and that there are no legal impediments to such
implementation; (2) compliance with requirements relating to state
boards as required under section 128 of the CAA; and (3) necessary
assurances that the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate
implementation of any plan provision for which it relies on local
governments or other entities to carry out. Both elements (A) and (E)
herein address the requirement that a state have adequate authority to
implement and enforce the SIP without legal impediments.
The i-SIP submission for the referenced NAAQS pollutants describes
the SIP regulations governing the various functions of personnel within
the ADEQ, including the administrative, technical support, planning,
enforcement, and permitting functions of the program.
With respect to necessary assurances, and the requirement to
address funding, Arkansas has authority to collect fees for the NSR
permit programs, and other inspections, maintenance and renewals
required of other air pollution sources also provide necessary funds to
help implement the State's air programs. Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-1-
103(1)(A) grants APC&EC the authority to establish, by regulation,
reasonable fees for initial issuance, annual review, and modification
of permits. Under Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-1-103(3), ADEQ is authorized
to collect the fees established by APC&EC and shall deny the issuance
of an initial permit, a renewal permit, or a modification permit if and
when a facility fails or refuses to pay the fees after reasonable
notice. APC&EC Regulation 9, Fee Regulation. Chapter 5, Air Permit
Fees, contains the air permit fees applicable to non-part 70 permits,
part 70 permits and general permits. More specific information on
permitting fees is provided in the TSD.
With respect to authority and personnel, Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-1-
202(b)(2)(D) states that the Director of ADEQ's duties include the day-
to-day administration of all activities that the Department is
empowered by law to perform, including, but not limited to, the
employment and supervision of such technical, legal, and administrative
staff, within approved appropriations, as is necessary to carry out the
responsibilities vested with ADEQ. The AWAPCA provides the ADEQ
adequate authority, in part ``to administer and enforce all laws and
regulations relating to pollution of the air.'' Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-
4-311(7). APC&EC Regulation 19.301 gives ADEQ the responsibility of
meeting all applicable regulations and requirements contained in the
CAA, as amended, if any area of the state is determined to be in
violation of the NAAQS. APC&EC Reg. 19.410 gives ADEQ the authority to
revoke, suspend, or modify any permit for cause. For further details,
please refer to the TSD.
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the State's SIP comply with
CAA section 128 that requires: (1) That the majority of members of the
state body that approves permits or enforcement orders do not derive
any significant portions of their income from entities subject to
permitting or enforcement orders under the CAA; and (2) any potential
conflicts of interest by such body be adequately disclosed. In 1982,
the EPA approved the State's SIP submittal to demonstrate compliance of
the SIP with Section 128 of the CAA. 47 FR 19136 (May 04, 1982). The
submittal cited AWAPCA section 82-1901 as demonstrating compliance with
CAA section 128(a)(1) and cited Arkansas Code of Ethics Law Act 570 of
1979, Section 3: Use of Public Office to Obtain Special Privilege
Prohibited: Section 4: Use and Disclosure of Information--Acquired by
Reason of Office Activities Requiring Disclosure; Section 5:
Requirement to File Statement and Section 6: Statements Period Retained
Public Access Signature Required. Under APC&EC Reg. 8.202, the Director
or the Director's delegate shall issue all permits with nothing in
APC&EC Regulation 8 being construed to authorize APC&EC to issue a
permit, including the power to reverse or affirm a permitting decision
by the Director.
Under Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 21-8-1001, no member of a state board or
commission or board member of an entity receiving state funds shall
participate in, vote on, influence or attempt to influence an official
decision if the member has pecuniary interest in the matter under
consideration by the board, commission, or entity. In addition, no
member of a state board or commission or board member of an entity
receiving state funds shall participate in any discussion or vote on a
rule or regulation that exclusively benefits the member. As required by
the CAA, the SIP stipulates that any board or body, which approves
permits or enforcement orders, must have at least a majority of members
who represent the public interest and do not derive any ``significant
portion'' of their income from persons subject to permits and
enforcement orders or who appear before the board on issues related to
the CAA. The members of the board or body, or the head of an agency
with similar powers, are required to adequately disclose any potential
conflicts of interest. While the ADEQ has no board or commission, the
ADEQ submitted a letter dated January 19, 2012, that clarified that the
Director of the ADEQ is considered the ``the head of an executive
agency with similar powers,'' and must meet the requirement to
adequately disclose any potential conflicts of interest.\21\ The
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) concerning local
governments or other entities, are not applicable to Arkansas because
it does not rely on local agencies for specific SIP implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The ADEQ submitted a letter to EPA Region 6 to clarify that
the requirements of Sec. 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) do apply to the Director
of the ADEQ, and that EPA has already approved a state submittal to
this effect. The letter is included in the docket to this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(F) Stationary source monitoring system: CAA 110(A)(2)(F) requires
the SIP provide for the establishment of a system to monitor emissions
from stationary sources and to submit periodic emission reports. It
must require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of
equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners
or operators of stationary sources, to monitor emissions from such
sources. The SIP shall also require periodic reports on the nature and
amounts of emissions and emissions-related data from such sources. It
shall require that the state correlate the source reports with emission
limitations or standards established under the CAA. These
[[Page 55070]]
reports must be made available for public inspection at reasonable
times.
The relevant regulatory requirements have been codified in APC&E
Regulation 19, Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for
Air Pollution Control, Chapter 7 (pertaining to sampling and testing).
Provisions in APC&EC Chapter 7, Regulation 19.705 provide for the
reporting of emissions inventories in a format established by the ADEQ
on a schedule set forth in that section. In addition, APC&EC Regulation
19.705 requires the submission of emission statements as required by
the CAA. Area, mobile, and non-road data are required to be reported on
a three-year cycle.
Enforceable emission limitations and other control measures are
covered in the Arkansas Water and Air Pollution Control Act and those
provisions of Ark. Code Ann. Sec. Sec. 8-4-310 and 8-4-311. Elements
of the program for enforcement are found in the monitoring,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for sources in these control
measures as well as individual SIP permits. Additional details and
citations to the relevant regulatory authorities and provisions are
discussed in the TSD. We are proposing that the Arkansas SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F).
(G) Emergency authority: CAA 110(A)(2)(G) requires a demonstration
that the ADEQ has authority to restrain any source from causing
imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare or
the environment. The SIP must include an adequate contingency plan to
implement ADEQ's emergency authority.
Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-1-202(b)(2)(C) empowers the ADEQ to issue
orders under circumstances that reasonably require emergency measures
to be taken to protect the environment or the public health and safety.
APC&EC Reg. 8.502 requires ADEQ to publish a Notice of Emergency Order
in a newspaper covering the affected area, or in a newspaper of
statewide circulation. The notice must contain a description of the
action, ADEQ's authority for taking the action and other information
appropriate to ensure the public is informed about the action.
Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-4-202(e)(1) empowers APC&EC to declare an
emergency and implement emergency rules, regulations, suspensions, or
moratoria on categories or types of permits if APC&EC determines that
imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare requires
immediate change in the rules or immediate suspension or moratorium on
categories or types of permits. APC&EC Regulation 8, Administrative
Procedures, Reg. 8.807 authorizes the Commission to waive or reduce the
notice requirements in cases involving emergency rulemaking. No
emergency rule shall be effective for more than 180 days.
(H) Future SIP revisions: CAA 110(a)(2)(H) requires that States
have the authority to revise their SIPs in response to changes in the
NAAQS, availability of improved methods for attaining the NAAQS, or in
response to an EPA finding that the SIP is substantially inadequate to
attain the NAAQS.
The AWAPCA, Section 82-1935(1), empowers the APC&EC to ``formulate
and promulgate, amend, repeal, and enforce rules and regulations
implementing or effectuating the powers and duties of the Commission [.
. .] to control air pollution''. Therefore, Arkansas has the authority
to revise its SIP as may be necessary to take into account revisions of
primary or secondary NAAQS, or the availability of improved or more
expeditious methods of attaining such standards. Furthermore, Arkansas
also has the authority under the AWAPCA provisions to revise its SIP in
the event the EPA (pursuant to the Act) finds the SIP to be
substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS. APC&EC Regulation 19,
Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air Pollution
Control, Chapter 1, provides a clear delineation of those regulations
that are promulgated by APC&EC in satisfaction of certain requirements
of the CAA. Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-4-311(a)(7) empowers ADEQ to
administer and enforce all laws and regulations relating to pollution
of the air. Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-4-202(d)(4)(A)(ii) authorizes APC&EC
to refer to the Code of Federal Regulations for any APC&EC standard or
regulation that is identical to a regulation promulgated by the EPA.
The Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission's Regulation
19, Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of Implementation for Air
Pollution Control, Chapter 1, demonstrates that those regulations that
are promulgated by the Commission satisfy the requirements of this
provision of the CAA.
(I) Nonattainment areas: The CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) requires that
in the case of a plan or plan revision for areas designated as
nonattainment areas, states must meet applicable requirements of Part D
of the CAA, relating to SIP requirements for designated nonattainment
area. SIP revisions that implement the control strategies necessary to
bring a nonattainment area into attainment of the NAAQSs are not
required by CAA to be submitted within three years of the promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS. Therefore, as stated earlier, CAA 110(a)(1)
does not require this element to be demonstrated as part of an
infrastructure SIP submittal. 73 FR 16025 16206 (March 27, 2008).
(J) Consultation with government officials, public notification,
PSD and visibility protection: The SIP must meet the following four CAA
requirements: (1) Those listed in section 121 of the CAA, relating to
interagency consultation; (2) those listed in CAA section 127, relating
to public notification of NAAQS exceedances and related issues; (3)
prevention of significant deterioration of air quality and (4)
visibility protection.
Under APC&EC Regulation 19, Chapter 9, Arkansas has incorporated by
reference the requirements in 40 CFR part 52 for PSD in their entirety,
with the exception of 40 CFR 52.21(b)(2)(iii)(a), 52.21(b)(49),
52.21(b)(50), 52.21(b)(55-58), 52.21(i) and 52.21(cc). These provisions
were approved by EPA as part of the federally-approved SIP. These
incorporated provisions also provide for protection of visibility in
Federal Class I areas. All new major sources and major modifications
are subject to a comprehensive EPA-approved PSD permitting program,
including GHG PSD permitting that was approved on April 2, 2013 (78 FR
19596) and PM2.5 PSD permitting approved on March 4, 2015
(80 FR 11573). Chapter 9 of APC&EC Regulation 19 authorizes enforcement
of regulations governing the prevention of significant deterioration of
air quality and regulations governing the protection of visibility in
mandatory Federal Class I areas.
The visibility sub-element of Element J is not being addressed
because EPA stated in a September 13, 2013 ``Guidance on Infrastructure
State Implementation Plan (SIP Elements under CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2)'' that we believe that there are no newly applicable
visibility protection obligations pursuant to Element J after the
promulgation of new or revised NAAQS.
(1) Consultation With Identified Official on Certain Actions: The
i-SIP needs to show that there is an established process for
consultation with general purpose local governments, designated
organization of elected officials of local governments and any federal
land manager having authority over federal land to which the plan
applies, consistent with CAA section 121, which lists the specific
types of
[[Page 55071]]
actions for which consultation is required. If the relevant statute is
self-executing such that there is no associated regulation or other
documents, then the statute would need to be included in the SIP. If a
regulation or other document meeting the CAA requirements exists, then
the regulation or other document would need to be included in the SIP
submission, and the authorizing statute should be referenced but the
statute is not required to be part of the EPA approved SIP. Under the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.240, the SIP would need to identify
organizations ``that will participate in developing, implementing, and
enforcing the plan and the responsibilities of such organizations.''
The plan should include any agreements or memoranda of understanding
among the organizations.
The AWAPCA, as codified under Ark Code Ann. A.C.A. Sec. 8-1-203
provides that the APC&EC ``shall meet regularly in publicly noticed
open meetings to discuss and rule upon matters of environmental
concern'' prior to the adoption of any rule or regulation implementing
the substantive statutes charged to the ADEQ for administration. In
addition, Ark. Code Ann. section 8-4-311(a)(2) provides that the ADEQ
or its successor shall have the power and duty ``to advise, consult,
and cooperate with other agencies of the state, political subdivisions,
industries, other states, the federal government, and with affected
groups in the furtherance of the purposes of this chapter.'' Further,
Regulation 19.904(D) provides that ADEQ shall make determinations that
a source may affect air quality or visibility in a mandatory Class I
federal area based on screening criteria agreed upon by the Department
and the Federal Land Manager.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See 72 FR 18394 (April 12, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Public Notification: The i-SIP submission needs to demonstrate
that the air agency does regularly notify the public of instances or
areas in which the new or revised primary NAAQS was exceeded; it needs
to advise the public of health hazards associated with such exceedances
and of ways in which the public can participate in regulatory and other
efforts to improve air quality. Public notification begins with the air
quality forecasts, which advise the public of conditions capable of
exceeding the 8-hour ozone \23\ and PM2.5 NAAQS. The air
quality forecasts can be found on the ADEQ Web site: For 8-hour ozone
and PM2.5, the forecast includes two regions \24\ in the
State. Ozone forecasts are made daily during the ozone season for each
of the forecast areas.\25\ The ozone forecasts are made, in most cases,
a day in advance by 2:00 p.m. local time and are valid for the next
day. When the forecast indicates that ozone levels will be above the 8-
hour ozone standard, the ADEQ and the Arkansas Department of Health
issue an Ozone Health Advisory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The ADEQ forecasts for 8-hour ozone are based on the 2008
ozone standard, which is 75 ppb.
\24\ The 2 forecast areas for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
are Little Rock and Springdale. See www.adeq.state.ar.us/techsvs/default.htm.
\25\ Ozone is a gas composed of three oxygen atoms. Ground level
ozone is generally not emitted directly from a vehicle's exhaust or
an industrial smokestack, but is created by a chemical reaction
between NOX and VOCs in the presence of sunlight and high
ambient temperatures. Thus, ozone is known primarily as a summertime
air pollutant. For Arkansas, the ozone season runs from March 1
through November 31 (see 40 CFR 58, APPENDIX D, Table D-3). The
Arkansas air quality control regions are defined at 45 FR 6571
(January 29, 1980).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the State implements an Ozone Action Day (OAD) program
\26\ and will issue an ozone alert in the afternoon on the day before
an elevated level of ozone is expected to occur. Announcements for an
OAD will be broadcast through television and other news media, and to
employers participating in the OAD program. The OAD program includes
examples of actions that can be implemented by individuals and
organizations to reduce ozone levels and exposure to ozone. Also
through the Metroplan Web site, the public can subscribe to an
electronic information system that provides air quality forecast and
ozone alert information via email. Ozone data are posted on the ADEQ
Web site; current, regional hourly and regional 8-hour ozone data are
posted hourly (See https://www.adeq.state.ar.us/techsvs/ozonemonitors.asp). Provisions regarding public availability of
emission data were also approved into the Arkansas SIP on April 12,
2007 (72 FR 18394).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ For coordinating agencies, participating counties and other
information, please see https://www.adeq.state.ar.us/air/planning/ozone/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) PSD and Visibility Protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires
states to meet applicable requirements of Part C related to prevention
of significant deterioration and visibility protection. EPA approved
Arkansas's Visibility Protection Plan (Protection of Visibility in
Mandatory Class I Federal Areas) into the Arkansas SIP on February 10,
1986 (51 FR 4910). EPA approved revisions to the Arkansas Visibility
Protection Plan and approved a Long-Term Strategy for Visibility
Protection into the Arkansas SIP on July 21, 1988 (53 FR 27514). The
State's SIP revision to its Regional Haze program was submitted to EPA
on July 29, 2008. Arkansas is subject to federal regional haze
requirements which address visibility-impairing pollutants. Arkansas's
PSD program addresses visibility protection. In 2008, Arkansas
submitted a Regional Haze SIP and EPA partially approved and partially
disapproved it on March 12, 2012 (77 FR 14604). The State's submittal
provides information to show that Arkansas has experienced considerable
improvement in reductions of regional haze emissions in relation to the
reasonable progress goals and uniform rate of progress established in
the State's Regional Haze SIP. The most recent data from 2015 and
current five-year rolling averages show that visibility impairment in
Arkansas' Federal Class I areas is decreasing more rapidly than the
uniform rate of progress and 2018 reasonable progress goals submitted
as part of the State's 2008 Regional Haze SIP.
ADEQ has a complete EPA-approved PSD permitting program in place
covering the required elements for all regulated NSR pollutants,
including greenhouse gases (GHG). EPA had previously published a
finding of failure to submit a PSD SIP for PM2.5 (79 FR
29354, May 22, 2014) and imposed a Federal Implementation Plan for PSD
permitting of GHGs. 75 FR 82246 (December 30, 2010). However, ADEQ
submitted SIP revisions addressing 2006 PM2.5 PSD elements,
which was approved on March 4, 2015 (80 FR 11573), and GHG PSD
permitting, which was approved on April 2, 2013 (78 FR 19596). The
Arkansas SIP requirements relating to visibility and regional haze are
not affected when EPA establishes or revises a NAAQS. Therefore, EPA
believes that there are no new visibility protection requirements due
to the revision of the NAAQS, and consequently there are no newly
applicable visibility protection obligations pursuant to infrastructure
element (J).
(K) Air quality and modeling/data: The SIP must provide for
performing air quality modeling, as prescribed by EPA, to predict the
effects on ambient air quality of any emissions of any NAAQS pollutant,
and for submission of such data to EPA upon request. APC&EC Regulation
19, Chapter 3, requires that ADEQ conduct ambient air monitoring and
computer modeling of regulated air pollutant emissions in any area that
can reasonably be expected to be in excess of the NAAQS and to review
the ambient air impacts of any new or modified source of federally
regulated air emission that is the subject of the requirements of the
SIP. See APC&EC
[[Page 55072]]
Reg.19.302(A) and (B). Under APC&EC Reg.19.302(B), all computer
modeling shall be performed using EPA-approved models, and using
averaging times commensurate with averaging times stated in the NAAQS.
ADEQ has the ability to submit data related to air quality modeling to
the EPA under Ark. Code Ann. Sec. 8-4-311(a)(2) which gives ADEQ the
power to advise, consult, and cooperate with the federal government.
Modeling and emissions reductions measures have been submitted by
Arkansas and approved into the SIP. For example, we reference the air
modeling and emissions reductions data submitted within the Crittenden
County Economic Development Zone SIP revisions, as well as the
demonstration of maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in
Crittenden County. 81 FR 24030 (April 25, 2016). The measures in these
SIPs were approved by EPA and adopted into the SIP.
(L) Permitting Fees: The SIP must require each major stationary
source to pay permitting fees to the permitting authority, as a
condition of any permit required under the CAA, to cover the cost of
reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and, if
the permit is issued, the costs of implementing and enforcing the terms
of the permit. The fee requirement applies until a fee program
established by the State (pursuant to title V of the CAA, relating to
operating permits), is approved by EPA.
The fee requirements of the APC&EC's Regulation 26, Regulations of
the Arkansas Operating Air Permit Program, Chapter 11, were approved by
EPA as meeting the CAA requirements and were incorporated into
Arkansas's SIP. Arkansas's title V operating permit program in Chapter
11, was approved October 9, 2001. APC&EC's Chapter 11 titled ``Permit
Fees,'' Reg. 26.1101, ``Fee Requirement,'' requires that in accordance
with 40 CFR 70.9, as promulgated July 21, 1992, and last modified June
3, 2010 (75 FR 31607), that the owners or operators of part 70 sources
shall pay initial and annual fees that are sufficient to cover the
permit program costs. The Department shall ensure that any fee required
by these regulations will be used solely for permit program costs. In
addition, APC&EC's Reg. 26.1102, titled ``Fee schedule,'' requires that
the fee schedule for part 70 permits is contained in Regulation No. 9.
The APC&EC Regulation 9, Fee Regulation, Chapter 5, Air Permit Fees,
contains the air permit fees applicable to non-part 70 permits, part 70
permits and general permits. Revisions to air permitting fees
requirements in Chapter 5 were approved by EPA on April 30, 2015 (80 FR
24216). Reg. 9.501, ``Applicability,'' requires that air permit fees
contained in this section are applicable to (1) non-part 70 permits,
(2) part 70 permits, and (3) general permits.
(M) Consultation/participation by affected local entities: CAA
110(A)(2)(M) requires the SIP to provide for consultation and
participation by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP. See
the discussion for element (J) above for a description of the SIP's
public participation process, the authority to advise and consult, and
the PSD SIP's public participation requirements. The Arkansas statute
at Ark. Code. Ann. Sec. 8-1-203 provides that the APC&EC shall meet
regularly in publicly noticed open meetings to discuss and rule upon
matters of environmental concern prior to the adoption of any rule or
regulation implementing the substantive statutes charged to the ADEQ
for administration. Additionally, the state noted that pursuant to
APC&EC Regulation 8, Arkansas will continue to provide for consultation
and participation from those affected by the SIP. Under APC&EC
Regulation 8, those organizations affected by the SIP will be able to
participate in developing the SIP via comments and potential public
hearings. ADEQ is the sole state-level enforcer and implementer of the
SIP. See APC&EC Reg. 8.205 Public Notice of Permit Application; APC&EC
Reg. 8.206 Request for Public Hearing on Application for Permit; APC&EC
Reg. 8.207 Public Notice of Draft Permitting Decision; APC&EC Reg.
8.208 Public Comment on Draft Permitting Decision; APC&EC Reg. 8.209
Public Hearings; APC&EC Reg. 8.405 Public Notice of Notices of
Violations and Consent Administrative Orders; APC&EC Reg. 8.801 Public
Notice of Rulemaking.
ADEQ participates in the Central State Air Resources Agencies,
which is an organization of states, tribes, federal agencies and other
interested parties concerned with air quality. The interactions and
public participation on rule and plan development are consistent with
the requirements of Sec. 110(a)(2)(M).
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the majority of the March 24, 2017
Arkansas i-SIP submittal, which address the requirements of the CAA
sections 110(a) (1) and (2) as applicable to 2006 PM2.5,
2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Specifically, EPA is proposing to
approve the following infrastructure elements for Arkansas
infrastructure SIP:
For the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, we are proposing to approve
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) that pertains to interstate transport
(``prong 3'') for Interstate transport and international pollution
abatement for Arkansas infrastructure SIP.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ We are proposing to address 2006 PM2.5 NAAQs
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate Transport-protection of
visibility) in a future rule making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the 2008 Lead NAAQS, we are proposing to approve all the
infrastructure elements in CAA 110(a)(2)(A-M) for the Arkansas SIP.
For the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, we are proposing to approve the
infrastructure elements of CAA 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(I)
(prongs 1, 2); CAA 110(a)(2)(D(i)(II) (prong 3: Interstate transport--
prevention of significant deterioration); CAA 110(A)(2)(D)(ii), E, F,
H, I, J, K, L, and M).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ We are proposing to address Arkansas 2010 NO2
NAAQs 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate Transport--protection
of visibility) in future rule making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the 2012 PM2.5 and 2010 SO2 NAAQS, we are
proposing to approve infrastructure elements CAA 110(a)(2)(A), (B),
(C), D(i)(II) (prong 3: Interstate transport--prevention of significant
deterioration), CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), E, F, H, I, J, K, L, and M).\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ We are proposing to take a separate, future rulemaking
action(s) on 2012 PM2.5 and 2010 SO2 Arkansas
i-SIP elements 110(a)(2)(D(i)(I) (prong 1: Interstate Transport--
significant contribution to nonattainment areas, and prong 2:
Interstate Transport--Interfere with maintenance in other states),
and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate Transport--protection
of visibility).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the 2008 Ozone, we are proposing to approve CAA 110(a)(2)(A),
(B), (C), CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3: Interstate transport--
prevention of significant deterioration), CAA 110(a)(2)(D(ii), E, F, H,
I, J, K, L, and M).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ We are not proposing to approve Interstate provisions in
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D(i)(I) (prong 1: Interstate Transport--
significant contribution to nonattainment areas, and prong 2:
Interstate Transport--Interfere with maintenance in other states)
which were not included in this submission. We are proposing to
address CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4: Interstate
Transport--protection of visibility) for 2008 Ozone NAQQS in a
separate, future rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 (below) outlines the specific actions EPA is proposing to
take in this action for the Arkansas March 24, 2017 i-SIP submittal.
[[Page 55073]]
Table 1--Proposed Actions on the Arkansas Infrastructure SIP Submittal for Various NAAQS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element 2006 PM2.5 2008 Pb 2008 Ozone 2010 NO2 2010 SO2 2012 PM2.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
control measures.
(B): Ambient air quality A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
monitoring and data system.
(C)(i): Enforcement of SIP A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
measures.
(C)(ii): PSD program for major A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
sources and major
modifications.
(C)(iii): Permitting program A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
for minor sources and minor
modifications.
(D)(i)(I): Contribute to A *................ A................. * No submittal.... A................. No action......... No action.
nonattainment/interfere with
maintenance of NAAQS (prongs 1
and 2).
(D)(i)(II): PSD (requirement 3) A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(D)(i)(II): Visibility No submittal....... A................. No action......... No action......... No action......... No action.
Protection (requirement 4).
(D)(ii): Interstate and A.................. A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
International Pollution
Abatement.
(E)(i): Adequate resources..... A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(E)(ii): State boards.......... A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(E)(iii): Necessary assurances A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
with respect to local agencies.
(F): Stationary source A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
monitoring system.
(G): Emergency power........... A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(H): Future SIP revisions...... A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(I): Nonattainment area plan or +.................. +................. +................. +................. +................. +.
plan revisions under part D.
(J)(i): Consultation with A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
government officials.
(J)(ii): Public notification... A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(J)(iii): PSD.................. A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(J)(iv): Visibility protection. +.................. +................. +................. +................. +................. +.
(K): Air quality modeling and A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
data.
(L): Permitting fees........... A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
(M): Consultation and A *................ A................. A................. A................. A................. A.
participation by affected
local entities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key to Table 1: Proposed action on AR infrastructure SIP submittals for various NAAQS.
A--Approve.
A * Previously approved for an earlier submittal.
+--Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
No action--EPA is taking no action on these infrastructure requirements in this rulemaking. EPA may address in separate future rulemaking action(s).
No submittal--Proposed disapproval for an earlier submittal. EPA may take future action(s) in separate rule making(s).
* No submittal * FIP in place.
Based upon review of the state's infrastructure SIP submission and
relevant statutory and regulatory authorities and provisions referenced
in the submission or referenced in the federally-approved Arkansas SIP,
EPA believes that Arkansas has the infrastructure in place to address
all applicable required elements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) (except
as noted in Table 1 above) to ensure that the 2006 PM2.5,
2008 Pb, 2008 O3, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2,
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are implemented in the state.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve 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 FR3821, January 21,
2011);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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 practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the proposed
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, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Interstate transport of
pollution, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
[[Page 55074]]
Dated: November 9, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2017-25045 Filed 11-17-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
