Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Hayden and Miami Areas; Lead and Sulfur Dioxide Control Measures-Copper Smelters, 56736-56739 [2018-24743]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
56736
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by January 14, 2019.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 31, 2018.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Subpart D—Arizona
2. Section 52.120 in paragraph (e),
Table 1 is amended by adding, under
the table heading ‘‘Part D Elements and
Plans (Other than for the Metropolitan
Phoenix and Tucson Areas),’’ an entry
for ‘‘SIP Revision: Hayden Lead
Nonattainment Area, excluding
Appendix C.’’ after the entry for
‘‘Maintenance Plan Renewal, 1971
Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air
Quality Standards, Douglas
Maintenance Area.’’ The addition reads
as follows:
■
§ 52.120
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
TABLE 1—EPA-APPROVED NON-REGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES
[Excluding certain resolutions and statutes, which are listed in tables 2 and 3, respectively] 1
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area or title/subject
Name of SIP provision
State submittal date
EPA approval date
Explanation
The State of Arizona Air Pollution Control Implementation Plan
*
SIP Revision: Hayden Lead Nonattainment Area, excluding Appendix C.
*
*
*
Hayden, AZ Lead Nonattainment
Area.
*
*
*
March 3, 2017 ........
*
*
*
[INSERT Federal Register CITATION], November 14, 2018.
*
*
Adopted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
on March 3, 2017.
*
*
1 Table
1 is divided into three parts: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2) State Implementation Plan Elements (excluding Part D Elements and Plans), Part D Elements
and Plans (other than for the Metropolitan Phoenix or Tucson Areas), and Part D Elements and Plans for the Metropolitan Phoenix and Tucson Areas.
*
*
*
*
*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
revisions concern emissions of lead and
sulfur dioxide (SO2) from the copper
smelter at Hayden, AZ and SO2 from the
copper smelter at Miami, AZ. We are
approving local rules that regulate these
emission sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act).
40 CFR Part 52
DATES:
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0661; FRL–9986–32–
Region 9]
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2018–24740 Filed 11–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
This rule will be effective on
December 14, 2018.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve revisions to the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0661. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
1 In addition to the rules addressed in this action,
ADEQ’s April 6, 2017 submittal also included R18–
2–B1301.01—Limits on Lead-Bearing Fugitive Dust
from the Hayden Smelter; R18–2–B1302—Limits on
SO2 Emissions from the Hayden Smelter; R18–2–
715—Standards of Performance for Existing Primary
Copper Smelters: Site-Specific Requirements; and
R18–2–715.01—Standards of Performance for
Existing Primary Copper Smelters; Compliance and
Monitoring. The EPA has already approved R18–2–
Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Hayden
and Miami Areas; Lead and Sulfur
Dioxide Control Measures—Copper
Smelters
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Nov 13, 2018
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Gong, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3073, gong.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On March 30, 2018 (83 FR 13716), the
EPA proposed to approve the following
rules into the Arizona SIP.1
B1301.01 into the SIP, 83 FR 7614 (February 22,
2018) and intends to take action on the remaining
rules in a separate rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
56737
Rule citation
Rule title
Effective
R18–2–B1301 ................
Limits on Lead Emissions from the Hayden
Smelter.
4/6/2017
R18–2–C1302 ................
Limits on SO2 Emissions from the Miami Smelter
Appendix 14 ...................
Procedures for Sulfur Dioxide and Lead Fugitive
Emissions Studies for the Hayden Smelter.
Standards of Performance for Existing Primary
Copper Smelters; Fugitive Emissions.
7/1/2018 or 180 calendar days after completion
of all Converter Retrofit Project improvements
authorized by Significant Permit Revision No.
60647.
On the later of the effective date of the EPA Administrator’s action approving it as part of the
state implementation plan or January 1, 2018.
5/7/2017 ................................................................
5/7/2017 ................................................................
4/6/2017
R18–2–715.02 ...............
We proposed to approve these rules
because we determined that they
comply with the relevant CAA
requirements. Our proposed action
contains more information on the rules
and our evaluation.
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
The EPA’s notice of proposed
rulemaking provided a 30-day public
comment period. During this period, we
received 15 comments. Nine of these
comments address issues not related to
the subject of this rulemaking,
including: Environmental quality issues
in Asia, climate change policy, and
other federal requirements not related to
SO2 or lead pollution in Arizona. Six
comments are germane to this
rulemaking, and are supportive of the
EPA’s proposal to approve these
regulations. One of these commenters
raised a concern about the State and the
EPA’s statement that controlling
emissions from the 1,000-foot stack
would result in improved air quality at
the ground level monitors at Hillcrest
and Globe Highway in the Hayden Area.
This commenter also suggested that the
EPA should pay additional attention to
fugitive lead emissions that may result
from other smelter processes, including
furnace dust and from residue from
converter bed cleaning. We thank the
commenter for the questions and
suggestion and address the issues raised
below.
The Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the
EPA believe that the prime contributors
to lead nonattainment are fugitive
emissions from smelter operations and
leaded dust surrounding the smelter.
Rule R18–2–B1301.01, approved into
the Arizona SIP in 83 FR 7614,
addresses leaded dust control measures
for non-smelting process sources, which
includes sources such as the bedding
plant and reverts piles. Dust and
material generated from smelter process
sources, such as furnace and converter
dust, are collected and deposited in
these non-smelting process sources for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Nov 13, 2018
Jkt 247001
Submitted
4/6/2017
4/6/2017
disposal or reintroduction into the
smelter process. Rule R18–2–B1301
addresses fugitive emissions from
smelter operations by establishing
operational standards for process
equipment and control devices,
requirements for the process gas capture
system and control devices operations
and maintenance plan (O&M plan),
performance testing and compliance
demonstration requirements, and
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements. However, Rule R18–2–
B1301 does not include a numeric
fugitive lead emissions limit. The EPA
recognized this issue during the rule
development process and requested that
ADEQ provide supplementary analysis
to address this concern. ADEQ
responded on October 11, 2018, stating
that continuous monitoring of fugitive
lead emissions is technically infeasible,
and that parametric monitoring of
capture and control device efficiency
(which would minimize uncontrolled
fugitive emissions, and increase the
volume of process gas directed to
control devices and ultimately the
1,000-foot stack) was a suitable proxy
for a numeric fugitive lead limit. ADEQ
also reiterated that the fugitive
emissions analyses required by
Appendix 14 would be used to validate
this approach.2 The EPA generally
agrees with this reasoning.
The EPA also requested that ADEQ
address an issue regarding the
allowance for alternative sampling
points for SO2 at the Miami Smelter.
Specifically, we requested that ADEQ
eliminate a provision that allowed for
the owner or operator of the Miami
Smelter to petition for an alternative
sampling point if the current locations
proved infeasible. Such flexibility might
have been necessary at the time of rule
development, as capture and control
upgrades were still being installed;
however, now that the upgrades are
complete, we do not believe this
flexibility is still necessary. ADEQ
agreed to withdraw subsection (E)(6) of
Rule R18–2–C1302 allowing for
alternative sampling point since none
are needed at the Miami Smelter.3
The comments and additional
analysis from ADEQ have been added to
the docket for this action and are
accessible at https://www.
regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R09OAR-2017-0661.
2 Letter from Timothy S. Franquist, Director, Air
Quality Division, Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality, to Michael Stoker, Regional
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9, ‘‘Re: Justification and
Clarification on Arizona Administrative Code R18–
2–B1301, Limits on Lead Emissions from the
Hayden Smelter,’’ dated October 11, 2018.
3 Letter from Timothy S. Franquist, Director, Air
Quality Division, Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality, to Michael Stoker, Regional
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9, ‘‘Re: Request to Withdraw from
EPA Consideration, Arizona Administrative Code
R18–2–C1302, Subsection (E)(6),’’ dated August 27,
2018.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that
change our assessment of the rules as
described in our proposed action.
Therefore, as authorized in section
110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is
approving these rules into the Arizona
SIP, with the exception of subsection
(E)(6) in Rule R18–2–C1302, which was
withdrawn by ADEQ. The EPA is also
approving Appendix 14 and revised
R18–2–715.02.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule the EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of the ADEQ
rules described in the amendments to 40
CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA
has made, and will continue to make,
these documents available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been
approved by the EPA for inclusion in
the SIP, have been incorporated by
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
56738
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
reference by the EPA into that plan, are
fully federally enforceable under
sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of
the effective date of the final rulemaking
of the EPA’s approval, and will be
incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.4
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, 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, the
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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 the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. Section 804,
however, exempts from section 801 the
following types of rules: Rules of
particular applicability; rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and
rules of agency organization, procedure,
or practice that do not substantially
affect the rights or obligations of nonagency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). Because
this is a rule of particular applicability,
the EPA is not required to submit a rule
report regarding this action under
section 801.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by January 14, 2019. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: October 30, 2018.
Michael Stoker,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D—Arizona
2. In § 52.120, table 2 in paragraph (c)
is amended by:
■ a. Revising the entry ‘‘R18–2–715.02’’;
■ b. Adding the entry ‘‘R18–2–B1301’’
after the subheading ‘‘Article 13 (State
Implementation Plan Rules for Specific
Locations)’’; and
■ c. Adding the entries ‘‘R18–2–C1302,
excluding subsection (E)(6)’’ and
‘‘Appendix 14’’ after the entry ‘‘R18–2–
B1301.01’’.
The revision and additions read as
follows:
■
§ 52.120
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED ARIZONA REGULATIONS
State citation
*
State effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
*
*
Article 7 (Existing Stationary Source Performance Standards)
4 62
FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Nov 13, 2018
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
*
56739
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 220 / Wednesday, November 14, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED ARIZONA REGULATIONS—Continued
State citation
Title/subject
*
R18–2–715.02 ........
*
*
Standards of Performance for Existing
Primary Copper Smelters; Fugitive
Emissions.
*
*
*
State effective
date
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
*
5/7/2017
*
11/14/2018, [insert
Federal Register
citation].
*
*
Submitted by the Governor’s designee
on April 6, 2017.
*
*
*
*
Article 13 (State Implementation Plan Rules for Specific Locations)
R18–2–B1301 .........
Limits on Lead Emissions from the Hayden Smelter.
7/1/2018
11/14/2018, [insert
Federal Register
citation].
Submitted by the Governor’s designee
on April 6, 2017.
*
R18–2–C1302, excluding subsection
(E)(6).
*
*
Limits on SO2 Emissions from the
Miami Smelter.
*
12/14/2018
*
11/14/2018, [insert
Federal Register
citation].
Appendix 14 ............
Procedures for Sulfur Dioxide and Lead
Fugitive Emissions Studies for the
Hayden Smelter.
5/7/2017
11/14/2018, [insert
Federal Register
citation].
*
*
Submitted by the Governor’s designee
on April 6, 2017. Subsection (E)(6)
was withdrawn by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
Submitted by the Governor’s designee
on April 6, 2017.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Part 509
[GSAR Change 96; GSAR Case 2017–G503;
Docket No. 2018–0012; Sequence No. 1]
RIN 3090–AJ87
General Services Administration
Acquisition Regulation; Removing
Duplicative Responsibility
Determination Guidance
Office of Acquisition Policy,
General Services Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
GSA is amending the General
Services Administration Acquisition
Regulation (GSAR) to remove
duplicative text already contained in the
Federal Acquisition Regulation.
DATES: Effective date: This rule is
effective January 14, 2019 unless GSA
receives adverse comments during the
comment period. If GSA receives
adverse comments, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
Comment date: Comments are due
December 14, 2018 by any of the
methods listed in the Addresses section
of this rule.
SUMMARY:
18:08 Nov 13, 2018
*
Submit comments in
response to GSAR Case 2017–G503 by
any of the following methods:
• Regulations.gov: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
searching for ‘‘GSAR Case 2017–G503’’.
Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘GSAR Case 2017–
G503.’’ Follow the instructions provided
on the screen. Please include your
name, company name (if any), and
‘‘GSAR Case 2017–G503’’ on your
attached document.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
Division (MVCB), ATTN: Lois Mandell,
1800 F Street NW, 2nd floor,
Washington, DC 20405.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite ‘‘GSAR Case 2017–G503’’
in all correspondence related to this
case. All comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal and/or business confidential
information provided. To confirm
receipt of your comment(s), please
check https://www.regulations.gov,
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting (except
allow 30 days for posting of comments
submitted by mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Johnnie McDowell, Procurement
Analyst, at 202–718–6112 or
johnnie.mcdowell@gsa.gov, for
clarification of content. For information
pertaining to status or publication
schedules, contact the Regulatory
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2018–24743 Filed 11–13–18; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
Secretariat Division at 202–501–4755.
Please cite GSAR Case 2017–G503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
FAR 1.304(b) states that agency
regulations shall not ‘‘unnecessarily
repeat, paraphrase, or otherwise restate
material contained in the FAR.’’ Here,
both GSAR 509.105–1(b) and FAR
9.105(b) provide guidance to obtaining
information from Government sources
for a responsibility determination of
potential Government contractors.
II. Discussion and Analysis
Both GSAR 509.105–1(b) and FAR
9.105–1(b) pertain to how contracting
officers obtain information regarding a
contractor’s responsibility. GSAR
509.105–1(b) states ‘‘[t]he contracting
officer may solicit and consider
information from any appropriate
activities[.]’’ FAR 9.105–1(b) states
‘‘[g]enerally, the contracting officer shall
obtain information regarding the
responsibility of prospective
contractors, including requesting preaward surveys when necessary (see
9.106) promptly after bid opening or
receipt of offers . . .’’ GSAR 509.105–
1(b) simply paraphrases FAR 9.105–1(b)
as it restates that a contracting officer
should obtain information regarding a
contractor’s responsibility through ‘‘any
appropriate activities’’ which is implied
through FAR 9.105–1(b)’s language.
Further, FAR 9.105 includes that
standards and procedures for requesting
and obtaining information sufficient to
determine the responsibility of a
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 14, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56736-56739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24743]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0661; FRL-9986-32-Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Hayden and Miami Areas; Lead and
Sulfur Dioxide Control Measures--Copper Smelters
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan
(SIP). These revisions concern emissions of lead and sulfur dioxide
(SO2) from the copper smelter at Hayden, AZ and
SO2 from the copper smelter at Miami, AZ. We are approving
local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule will be effective on December 14, 2018.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0661. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Gong, EPA Region IX, (415) 972-
3073, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On March 30, 2018 (83 FR 13716), the EPA proposed to approve the
following rules into the Arizona SIP.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition to the rules addressed in this action, ADEQ's
April 6, 2017 submittal also included R18-2-B1301.01--Limits on
Lead-Bearing Fugitive Dust from the Hayden Smelter; R18-2-B1302--
Limits on SO2 Emissions from the Hayden Smelter; R18-2-
715--Standards of Performance for Existing Primary Copper Smelters:
Site-Specific Requirements; and R18-2-715.01--Standards of
Performance for Existing Primary Copper Smelters; Compliance and
Monitoring. The EPA has already approved R18-2-B1301.01 into the
SIP, 83 FR 7614 (February 22, 2018) and intends to take action on
the remaining rules in a separate rulemaking.
[[Page 56737]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule citation Rule title Effective Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R18-2-B1301......................... Limits on Lead Emissions 7/1/2018 or 180 calendar 4/6/2017
from the Hayden Smelter. days after completion of
all Converter Retrofit
Project improvements
authorized by Significant
Permit Revision No. 60647.
R18-2-C1302......................... Limits on SO2 Emissions from On the later of the 4/6/2017
the Miami Smelter. effective date of the EPA
Administrator's action
approving it as part of the
state implementation plan
or January 1, 2018.
Appendix 14......................... Procedures for Sulfur 5/7/2017.................... 4/6/2017
Dioxide and Lead Fugitive
Emissions Studies for the
Hayden Smelter.
R18-2-715.02........................ Standards of Performance for 5/7/2017.................... 4/6/2017
Existing Primary Copper
Smelters; Fugitive
Emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We proposed to approve these rules because we determined that they
comply with the relevant CAA requirements. Our proposed action contains
more information on the rules and our evaluation.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
The EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking provided a 30-day public
comment period. During this period, we received 15 comments. Nine of
these comments address issues not related to the subject of this
rulemaking, including: Environmental quality issues in Asia, climate
change policy, and other federal requirements not related to
SO2 or lead pollution in Arizona. Six comments are germane
to this rulemaking, and are supportive of the EPA's proposal to approve
these regulations. One of these commenters raised a concern about the
State and the EPA's statement that controlling emissions from the
1,000-foot stack would result in improved air quality at the ground
level monitors at Hillcrest and Globe Highway in the Hayden Area. This
commenter also suggested that the EPA should pay additional attention
to fugitive lead emissions that may result from other smelter
processes, including furnace dust and from residue from converter bed
cleaning. We thank the commenter for the questions and suggestion and
address the issues raised below.
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the EPA
believe that the prime contributors to lead nonattainment are fugitive
emissions from smelter operations and leaded dust surrounding the
smelter. Rule R18-2-B1301.01, approved into the Arizona SIP in 83 FR
7614, addresses leaded dust control measures for non-smelting process
sources, which includes sources such as the bedding plant and reverts
piles. Dust and material generated from smelter process sources, such
as furnace and converter dust, are collected and deposited in these
non-smelting process sources for disposal or reintroduction into the
smelter process. Rule R18-2-B1301 addresses fugitive emissions from
smelter operations by establishing operational standards for process
equipment and control devices, requirements for the process gas capture
system and control devices operations and maintenance plan (O&M plan),
performance testing and compliance demonstration requirements, and
recordkeeping and reporting requirements. However, Rule R18-2-B1301
does not include a numeric fugitive lead emissions limit. The EPA
recognized this issue during the rule development process and requested
that ADEQ provide supplementary analysis to address this concern. ADEQ
responded on October 11, 2018, stating that continuous monitoring of
fugitive lead emissions is technically infeasible, and that parametric
monitoring of capture and control device efficiency (which would
minimize uncontrolled fugitive emissions, and increase the volume of
process gas directed to control devices and ultimately the 1,000-foot
stack) was a suitable proxy for a numeric fugitive lead limit. ADEQ
also reiterated that the fugitive emissions analyses required by
Appendix 14 would be used to validate this approach.\2\ The EPA
generally agrees with this reasoning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Letter from Timothy S. Franquist, Director, Air Quality
Division, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Michael
Stoker, Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9, ``Re: Justification and Clarification on Arizona
Administrative Code R18-2-B1301, Limits on Lead Emissions from the
Hayden Smelter,'' dated October 11, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also requested that ADEQ address an issue regarding the
allowance for alternative sampling points for SO2 at the
Miami Smelter. Specifically, we requested that ADEQ eliminate a
provision that allowed for the owner or operator of the Miami Smelter
to petition for an alternative sampling point if the current locations
proved infeasible. Such flexibility might have been necessary at the
time of rule development, as capture and control upgrades were still
being installed; however, now that the upgrades are complete, we do not
believe this flexibility is still necessary. ADEQ agreed to withdraw
subsection (E)(6) of Rule R18-2-C1302 allowing for alternative sampling
point since none are needed at the Miami Smelter.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Letter from Timothy S. Franquist, Director, Air Quality
Division, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Michael
Stoker, Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9, ``Re: Request to Withdraw from EPA Consideration,
Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-C1302, Subsection (E)(6),'' dated
August 27, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The comments and additional analysis from ADEQ have been added to
the docket for this action and are accessible at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0661.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rules
as described in our proposed action. Therefore, as authorized in
section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is approving these rules into the
Arizona SIP, with the exception of subsection (E)(6) in Rule R18-2-
C1302, which was withdrawn by ADEQ. The EPA is also approving Appendix
14 and revised R18-2-715.02.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the ADEQ
rules described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below.
The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents available
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information). Therefore, these
materials have been approved by the EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have
been incorporated by
[[Page 56738]]
reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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 the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the
following types of rules: Rules of particular applicability; rules
relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect
the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3).
Because this is a rule of particular applicability, the EPA is not
required to submit a rule report regarding this action under section
801.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 14, 2019. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: October 30, 2018.
Michael Stoker,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D--Arizona
0
2. In Sec. 52.120, table 2 in paragraph (c) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the entry ``R18-2-715.02'';
0
b. Adding the entry ``R18-2-B1301'' after the subheading ``Article 13
(State Implementation Plan Rules for Specific Locations)''; and
0
c. Adding the entries ``R18-2-C1302, excluding subsection (E)(6)'' and
``Appendix 14'' after the entry ``R18-2-B1301.01''.
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 2--EPA-Approved Arizona Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Additional
State citation Title/subject effective date EPA approval date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 7 (Existing Stationary Source Performance Standards)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 56739]]
* * * * * * *
R18-2-715.02.................. Standards of 5/7/2017 11/14/2018, Submitted by the
Performance for [insert Federal Governor's designee
Existing Primary Register on April 6, 2017.
Copper Smelters; citation].
Fugitive Emissions.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 13 (State Implementation Plan Rules for Specific Locations)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R18-2-B1301................... Limits on Lead 7/1/2018 11/14/2018, Submitted by the
Emissions from the [insert Federal Governor's designee
Hayden Smelter. Register on April 6, 2017.
citation].
* * * * * * *
R18-2-C1302, excluding Limits on SO2 12/14/2018 11/14/2018, Submitted by the
subsection (E)(6). Emissions from the [insert Federal Governor's designee
Miami Smelter. Register on April 6, 2017.
citation]. Subsection (E)(6)
was withdrawn by the
Arizona Department
of Environmental
Quality.
Appendix 14................... Procedures for Sulfur 5/7/2017 11/14/2018, Submitted by the
Dioxide and Lead [insert Federal Governor's designee
Fugitive Emissions Register on April 6, 2017.
Studies for the citation].
Hayden Smelter.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-24743 Filed 11-13-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
