Air Quality State Implementation Plans: Arizona; Approval and Conditional Approval of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Maricopa County Air Quality Department; Stationary Source Permits, 13543-13550 [2019-06384]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
premanufacture to limit exposure to
dust.
(ii) Release to water. Requirements as
specified in § 721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and
(c)(4) where N=34.
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph (b).
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in
§ 721.125(a) through (c), (i), and (k) are
applicable to manufacturers and
processors of this substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of
certain notification requirements. The
provisions of § 721.185 apply to this
section.
(3) Determining whether a specific use
is subject to this section. The provisions
of § 721.1725(b)(1) apply to paragraph
(a)(2)(i) of this section.
(a) Chemical substance and
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance identified as
glucosyltransferase, International Union
of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Number: 2.4.1.5 (PMN P–16–575, CAS
No. 9032–14–8) is subject to reporting
under this section for the significant
new uses described in paragraph (a)(2)
of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. It is a significant
new use to manufacture, process, or use
the substance in any manner that results
in inhalation exposure.
(ii) [Reserved]
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph (b).
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in
§ 721.125(a) through (c), and (i) are
applicable to manufacturers and
processors of this substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of
certain notification requirements. The
provisions of § 721.185 apply to this
section.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Alpha 1,3-polysaccharide
(a) Chemical substance and
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance generically
identified as alpha 1,3-polysaccharide
(generic) (PMN P–16–581) is subject to
reporting under this section for the
significant new uses described in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. It is a significant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
[FR Doc. 2019–06624 Filed 4–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
§ 721.11192 Glucosyltransferase,
International Union of Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Number: 2.4.1.5.
§ 721.11193
(generic).
new use to use the substance other than
as a polymer additive, paper coating
component, composite component, or
fiber additive. It is a significant new use
to manufacture, process or use the PMN
substance with particle size less than 10
micrometers.
(ii) [Reserved]
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph (b).
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in
§ 721.125(a) through (c) and (i) are
applicable to manufacturers and
processors of this substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of
certain notification requirements. The
provisions of § 721.185 apply to this
section.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0481; FRL–9991–53–
Region 9]
Air Quality State Implementation
Plans: Arizona; Approval and
Conditional Approval of State
Implementation Plan Revisions;
Maricopa County Air Quality
Department; Stationary Source Permits
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing revisions to
the Maricopa County Air Quality
Department’s (MCAQD) portion of the
state implementation plan (SIP) for the
State of Arizona. We are finalizing full
approval of Rules 210, 220, 240, and
241, and conditional approval of Rules
100 and 200. The revisions update the
MCAQD’s New Source Review (NSR)
permitting program for new and
modified sources of air pollution.
DATES: This rule is effective on May 6,
2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established
docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2017–
0481 for this action. Generally,
documents in the docket for this action
are available electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street
(AIR–3), San Francisco, California
94105–3901. While all documents in the
docket are listed at https://
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13543
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps, multi-volume
reports), and some may not be available
in either location (e.g., confidential
business information (CBI)). To inspect
the hard copy materials, please schedule
an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shaheerah Kelly, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (AIR–3), San
Francisco, CA 94105–3901, (415) 947–
4156, kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, the terms
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Summary of Public Comments and EPA
Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The initials ADEQ mean or refer to
the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(ii) The initials BACT mean or refer to
Best Available Control Technology.
(iii) The word or initials CAA or Act
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act.
(iv) The initials CFR mean or refer to
Code of Federal Regulations.
(v) The initials or words EPA, we, us
or our mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(vi) The initials FR mean or refer to
Federal Register.
(vii) The word or initials MCAQD,
‘‘the County’’ or ‘‘Maricopa County’’
mean or refer to the Maricopa County
Air Quality Department, the agency
with jurisdiction over stationary sources
within Maricopa County, Arizona.
(viii) The phrase minor NSR means
the permit program applicable to new or
modified sources that do not result in a
new major source or a major
modification.
(ix) The initials NAAQS mean or refer
to the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
(x) The initials NSR mean or refer to
New Source Review, which includes
NNSR, PSD and minor NSR.
(xi) The initials NNSR mean or refer
to nonattainment New Source Review.
(xii) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer
to particulate matter less than 2.5
micrometers.
(xiii) The initials PM10 mean or refer
to particulate matter less than 10
micrometers.
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
13544
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
(xiv) The initials PSD mean or refer to
Prevention of Significant Deterioration.
(xv) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
(xvi) The word State means or refers
to the State of Arizona.
(xvii) The initials TSD mean or refer
to the Technical Support Document.
I. Proposed Action
On June 11, 2018, the EPA proposed
to approve or conditionally approve the
rules listed in Table 1 for incorporation
into the Arizona SIP.1 The submittals
for these rules, which we refer to
collectively herein as ‘‘MCAQD’s NSR
submittal’’ or ‘‘the submittal,’’ represent
a comprehensive revision to the
MCAQD’s preconstruction review and
permitting program and are intended to
satisfy the requirements under part D
(NNSR) of title I of the Act as well as
the general preconstruction review
requirements under section 110(a)(2)(C)
of the Act. Our detailed analysis of these
rules is provided in the TSD and
Federal Register notice for the proposed
rulemaking for this SIP revision
approval action.
TABLE 1—MCAQD SUBMITTED RULES
Rule title
Regulation I, Rule 100 ......
General Provisions; General Provisions and Definitions.
Permits and Fees; Permit Requirements ..................
Permits and Fees; Title V Permit Provisions ............
Permits and Fees; Non-Title V Permit Provisions .....
Permits and Fees; Federal Major New Source Review.
Permits and Fees; Minor New Source Review .........
Regulation
Regulation
Regulation
Regulation
II,
II,
II,
II,
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
200 .....
210 2 ...
220 .....
240 .....
Regulation II, Rule 241 .....
We proposed to approve and
conditionally approve these rules
because we determined that they
strengthen the SIP and are mostly
consistent with the relevant CAA
requirements. We proposed to fully
approve Rules 210, 240 and 241 as part
of the MCAQD’s general and major
source NSR permitting program because
we determined that these rules satisfy
the substantive statutory and regulatory
requirements for NSR permit programs
as contained in part D of title I of the
Act (sections 172, 173 and 182(a)), the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(C), 40 CFR 51.160–51.165, and
40 CFR 51.307.
We proposed to conditionally approve
Rules 100, 200, and 220 because we
determined that, while they mostly
satisfy the statutory and regulatory
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(C) and part D of title I of the
Act, the rules also contained eight
deficiencies that prevented full
approval. In our proposed action we
determined that:
1. The definitions of ‘‘PM2.5’’ and
‘‘PM10’’ in Rule 100, Sections 200.91
and 200.92 are inconsistent with the
definition contained in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii), and are therefore
deficient;
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Adoption or
amendment
date
Regulation & rule No.
1 83
FR 26912 (June 11, 2018).
210 also contains requirements to address
the CAA title V requirements for operating permit
programs, though we are not evaluating the rule for
title V purposes at this time. We will evaluate Rule
210 for compliance with the requirements of title
V of the Act and the EPA’s implementing
regulations in 40 CFR part 70 following receipt of
an official part 70 program revision submittal from
Maricopa County containing this rule.
2 Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
Submittal date
Final action
2/3/2016
5/18/2016
Conditional Approval.
2/3/2016
2/3/2016
2/3/2016
2/3/2016
5/18/2016
5/18/2016
5/18/2016
5/18/2016
Conditional Approval.
Full Approval.
Full Approval.3
Full Approval.
9/7/2016
11/25/2016
Full Approval.
2. the definition of ‘‘good engineering
practice stack height’’ in Rule 200,
Section 201 is inconsistent with the
definition for this term provided in 40
CFR 51.100(ii), and is therefore
deficient;
3. the MCAQD must provide a basis
under 40 CFR 51.160(e) to demonstrate
that regulation of the equipment (i.e.,
agricultural equipment used in normal
farm operations) exempted in Rule 200,
Section 305.1.c is not needed for the
MCAQD’s program to meet federal NSR
requirements for attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS or review
for compliance with the control strategy;
4. Rule 220, Sections 404.3.e and
404.3.f, for reconstructed sources and
for changes associated with an emission
increase greater than 10 percent of the
major source threshold, are deficient
because these provisions allow changes
with potentially significant emission
increases and should not be listed as
changes that can be made after
providing only a notification to the
MCAQD;
5. Rule 200, Section 403.2 does not
ensure the continuity of the NSR terms
and conditions when a Title V or NonTitle V permit expires and is therefore
deficient;
6. references to Appendix G
(Incorporated Materials) in certain
provisions in Rules 100 and 200 are
deficient because Appendix G is neither
included in the existing SIP nor has it
been included in MCAQD’s NSR
submittal.
7. references to the Arizona Testing
Manual (ATM) in Rules 100 and 200 are
deficient because they rely on
provisions that are not SIP approved,
and the ATM is significantly out of date
and not appropriate to be relied upon as
the sole basis for testing procedures; and
8. certain definitions that the MCAQD
proposed be removed from the approved
SIP are used in other SIP rules and
therefore cannot be removed from the
SIP without further justification.
These deficiencies were the basis for
the EPA’s proposed conditional
approval of MCAQD’s NSR submittal.
Before our proposal, the MCAQD and
the ADEQ submitted letters committing
to adopt and submit revisions to the
EPA to address the identified
deficiencies not later than one year from
the date we take final action to approve
the MCAQD’s NSR program revisions,
consistent with the requirements of
CAA section 110(k)(4).
We also proposed to remove the
following definitions from the MCAQD
3 In our notice of proposed rulemaking we
proposed conditional approval of Rule 220 because
it appeared that certain provisions in Section 404.3
could allow emissions increases greater than the
minor NSR permit thresholds to be exempted from
permit review. (Id. at footnote 1). However, upon
further review of the MACAQD’s minor NSR
program, we found that this determination was
made in error. The provisions in Section 404 of
Rule 220 are pre-empted by the requirements of
Section 403, which stipulate that any change that
would also result in a minor NSR modification will
always require a permit revision, notwithstanding
the provisions of Section 404.3. Therefore, the
provisions in Rule 220, Section 404 are not
deficient and we are finalizing full approval of the
rule. See Section II, Response 6 of this action, for
more information.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
portion of the Arizona SIP because these
13545
terms are now defined in other rules or
are no longer used in the SIP.
TABLE 2—DEFINITIONS BEING REMOVED FROM THE ARIZONA SIP
Defined term
Current SIP rule
Accepted .............................................................................................
Begin Actual Construction ..................................................................
Bureau .................................................................................................
Calorie .................................................................................................
Combustion .........................................................................................
Device, Machine, Equipment or Other Article ....................................
Elevated Terrain ..................................................................................
FR (Federal Register) .........................................................................
Minor Source .......................................................................................
Mobile or Portable Sources ................................................................
Molybdenum Roaster ..........................................................................
Permit Unit ..........................................................................................
Plume Impaction .................................................................................
Process and Process Equipment .......................................................
Reclaiming Machinery .........................................................................
Resource Recovery Facility ................................................................
Stationary Rotating Machinery ............................................................
Statutory Major Source .......................................................................
Volatility ...............................................................................................
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
II. Summary of Public Comments and
EPA Responses
Our June 11, 2018 proposed
rulemaking 4 provided a 30-day public
comment period. We received a joint
comment letter from the Sierra Club and
Center for Biological Diversity and also
received a comment from an anonymous
source. Our Response to Comments
document in the docket for this action
summarizes the comments and includes
the EPA’s full responses.5 Below, we
briefly summarize the significant
comments and our responses.
Comment 1: The EPA informed the
County that its definition of ‘‘begin
actual construction’’ in Rule 100 was
inconsistent with federal permit
requirements in 40 CFR 51.165 and
specified the issues pertaining to its
definition. While we acknowledge that
the definition was withdrawn from the
EPA’s consideration as part of the SIP,
the EPA should have required the
County to revise the definition of the
term ‘‘begin actual construction.’’
Response 1: At the time of the EPA’s
proposed action on MCAQD’s NSR
submittal, the option to disapprove the
definition of ‘‘begin actual
construction’’ was no longer available
because the County had withdrawn the
definition from its submittal.
Accordingly, the comments regarding
the EPA’s approval or disapproval of
4 Id
at footnote 1.
full text of the public comments, as well as
all other documents relevant to this action, are
available in the docket (visit https://
www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID:
EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0481).
5 The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
Rule
2, Section 1.
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 20).
2, Section 19; Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 24).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 26).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 33).
2, Section 25.
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 55).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 69).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 99).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 100).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 101).
2, Section 68.
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 124).
2, Section 73.
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 134).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 139).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 156).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 158).
21, Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph 170).
this definition are not germane to our
final rulemaking action.
Comment 2: The minor NSR Rules
200 and 241 are unenforceable because
the minor NSR rules in the SIP will
have no federally enforceable definition
of ‘‘begin actual construction.’’ Because
this definition is still in effect at the
county level, the County will still be
allowing certain on-site construction
activities before a permit is issued. Such
cases could prejudice the Control
Officer’s determination regarding permit
approval. This situation compromises
the integrity of the entire minor NSR
program. Therefore, the EPA should
disapprove all the minor NSR
permitting rules until an adequate
definition of the term ‘‘begin actual
construction’’ for the minor NSR
program is submitted for SIP approval.
Response 2: The EPA disagrees that
all the minor NSR program rules should
be disapproved because they lack a
definition for the term ‘‘begin actual
construction.’’ The general permit
program requirements found in 40 CFR
51.160–164, which specify the
minimum requirements that apply to all
NSR programs, do not contain a
requirement like the ones found in 40
CFR 51.165 and 51.166, which provide
that major NSR program rules must
include specified definitions. While
some permit agencies rely on the same
definitions contained in their major
NSR programs for their minor NSR
program, there is no regulatory
requirement to do so. Therefore, the lack
of a definition for the term ‘‘begin actual
construction’’ is not inconsistent with
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the EPA regulations for minor NSR
programs.
Maricopa County’s current SIPapproved permit program does not
contain a definition of the term ‘‘begin
actual construction’’ for minor sources.
Maricopa County’s local rules have
contained the current definition of
‘‘begin actual construction’’ since
February 3, 2016. However, we are not
aware of any situations where the lack
of such a definition or the current
definition has prejudiced the Control
Officer when determining if a permit
should be issued and the commenter
did not provide any examples. We note
that Maricopa County has provided the
EPA with a copy of proposed rule
revisions, which include a definition for
the term ‘‘begin actual construction’’
that is consistent with the definition of
the same term found in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xv).
Comment 3: The EPA must require
Maricopa County to demonstrate that
minor modifications at existing sources
with emission increases below the
minor NSR modification thresholds will
not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS or violate
the control strategy, because without
such a demonstration, the EPA cannot
ensure that Maricopa County’s minor
NSR program satisfies the core
requirement that the County be able to
prevent modification of a source if it
would interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS pursuant to
40 CFR 51.160 and section 110(a)(2)(C)
of the CAA.
Response 3: The EPA disagrees with
the conclusions provided in the
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
13546
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
comment regarding the type of
demonstration required to satisfy the
provisions of 40 CFR 51.160(a), (b) and
(e). The commenters do not claim that
any of these individual provisions were
not met, but instead claim that in order
to approve Maricopa County’s minor
source NSR program, the EPA must
require Maricopa County to provide an
analysis demonstrating that emission
increases lower than the minor NSR
modification thresholds will not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS. This is an
incorrect reading of the requirements of
the cited provisions.
CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) requires a
permit program to regulate the
construction and modification of
sources as necessary to assure the
NAAQS are achieved. The regulation of
minor sources and modifications
through a permit program is only one of
many regulatory components
considered when adopting an
attainment plan to achieve a particular
NAAQS. Recognizing that states have
significant leeway to craft their minor
source permit programs, 40 CFR
51.160(e) requires permit agencies to
‘‘identify types and sizes of facilities,
buildings, structures, or installations
which will be subject to review’’ and
‘‘discuss the basis for determining
which facilities will be subject to
review.’’ The provisions of 40 CFR
51.160(a) and (b) are only applicable to
the sources identified under 40 CFR
51.160(e) as being subject to review, and
paragraph (e) only requires the
submittal to discuss ‘‘which facilities
will be subject to review.’’ There is no
requirement to demonstrate that sources
not subject to the minor source permit
program will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS. Instead, the entire NSR
program must subject a sufficient
number of sources (or emissions) to
review to assure, in conjunction with all
other plan provisions, that the NAAQS
will be achieved.6
The EPA reviewed the submitted
analysis and found MCAQD’s NSR
submittal satisfied the requirements of
40 CFR 51.160(e) and CAA section
110(a)(2)(C) because we believe that in
conjunction with other SIP provisions,
an NSR program that will regulate
approximately 74–83% of new
stationary source emissions by requiring
BACT level controls on such sources
provides adequate regulation to ensure
the NAAQS will be met.
Comment 4: EPA proposed to
conditionally approve several
provisions in the Maricopa County rules
6 76
FR 38748, 38752 (July 1, 2011).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
but did not provide any justification for
the use of a conditional approval in two
cases: The definitions for PM10 and
PM2.5 in Rule 100, and certain
procedures that do not require a NonTitle V permit revision in Rule 220. The
conditional approval commitment letter
provided by the ADEQ was not specific
enough in its commitment to submit the
Maricopa County’s SIP revision to EPA
within one year from the EPA’s final
action to conditionally approve
MCAQD’s NSR submittal.
Response 4: As discussed in
Responses 5 and 6, the EPA has found
that the two specific provisions raised
by the commenters are not deficient.
Since the EPA is no longer conditionally
approving these provisions, it is not
necessary to respond to the claim that
the EPA did not provide an adequate
justification for proposing conditional
approval for these provisions. The EPA
agrees that the April 6, 2018
commitment letter provided by ADEQ
was not specific enough in its
commitment to submit the Maricopa
County’s SIP revision to the EPA within
one year of final action. However, for
other provisions that the EPA is
conditionally approving, we note that,
on October 5, 2018, the ADEQ provided
the EPA with a clarification letter that
includes a commitment by the ADEQ to
submit Maricopa County’s corrections of
the identified deficiencies in this
rulemaking within one year of the EPA’s
final action conditionally approving
MCAQD’s NSR submittal. This
commitment by the ADEQ is sufficiently
specific to justify the conditional
approvals within this rulemaking.
Comment 5: Failure to properly define
PM10 and PM2.5 represents a significant
deficiency in the permit programs and
conditional approval means neither the
major nor minor NSR program will
adequately provide for protection of the
PM10 and PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA
should disapprove the definitions of
PM10 and PM2.5 rather than
conditionally approving the County’s
permit programs.
Response 5: The EPA proposed
conditional approval of Rule 100, in
part because the EPA found that the
definitions of PM10 and PM2.5 did not
include gaseous emissions, which form
particulates. Upon further review, the
EPA has determined that our initial
analysis was incorrect. The definition of
‘‘Regulated NSR Pollutant’’ contained in
both Rule 100 and 240 incorporates the
definition of this same term as found in
40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(D). The
incorporated definition states that
‘‘PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions
shall include gaseous emissions from a
source or activity which condense to
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
form particulate matter at ambient
temperatures.’’ Because Rule 100 is not
deficient for the reasons the EPA cited
in our proposed action, the merits of
this comment and our proposed
disapproval are moot and are not
discussed further. The EPA
recommends, however, that Maricopa
County consider revising the definitions
of these terms in Rule 100 to provide
clarity to the regulated community.
Comment 6: All the provisions of Rule
220, Section 404.3, (except subsection
d.), are not approvable because the
changes could adversely impact air
quality and because of the significance
of the changes that could be allowed at
a facility.
Response 6: The EPA disagrees that
these provisions are not approvable. In
our proposed action, the EPA failed to
note that the provisions of Rule 220,
Section 404 are pre-empted by the
requirements of Section 403, which lists
the types of changes requiring a permit
revision. Pursuant to Subsection
403.2.k., any change that would also
result in a minor NSR modification will
always require a permit revision,
notwithstanding the provisions of
Section 404.3. Thus the ‘‘exemptions’’
allowed under Section 404.3 are limited
to changes resulting in emission
increases lower than the minor NSR
modification thresholds. As the EPA
discussed earlier in Response 3,
Maricopa County provided an analysis
in the MCAQD’s NSR submittal that
provides a reasonable basis for choosing
the size of sources (based on emission
increases) that require permit regulation
to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
Accordingly, the EPA no longer finds
paragraphs e. and f. of Section 404.3
deficient and is fully approving Rule
220, including Section 404.3.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that
change our assessment that the
MCAQD’s Rules 210, 220, 240, and 241
satisfy the applicable CAA
requirements, nor were any comments
submitted that change our assessment
discussed in our proposal that certain
MCAQD rules should be removed from
the Arizona SIP. Therefore, as
authorized under CAA sections
110(k)(3) and 301(a), and for the reasons
set forth in our June 11, 2018 proposed
rule, we are finalizing full approval of
Rules 210, 220, 240, and 241, as
described in Table 1, in the MCAQD
portion of the Arizona SIP, and
removing from the MCAQD portion of
the Arizona SIP the rules identified in
Table 2.
While we cannot grant full approval
of Rules 100 and 200 at this time, the
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
MCAQD and the ADEQ have
satisfactorily committed to address the
identified deficiencies by committing to
provide the EPA with a SIP submission
within one year of this final action,
which will include specific rule
revisions
and/or demonstrations that would
adequately address the issues identified
in our proposal and Section II above. If
the MCAQD, through the ADEQ,
submits the rule revisions and/or
demonstrations that it has committed to
submit by this deadline, and the EPA
approves the submission, then the
identified deficiencies will be cured.
However, if the MCAQD, through the
ADEQ, fails to submit these revisions
and/or demonstrations within the
required timeframe, the conditional
approval will become a disapproval,
and the EPA will issue a finding of
disapproval. The EPA is not required to
propose the finding of disapproval.
We did not receive any comments that
would cause us to change the
determinations that were the basis for
our proposed conditional approval
action; thus, we are finalizing a
conditional approval of the MCAQD’s
Rules 100 and 200 pursuant to CAA
section 110(k)(4). As discussed in
Section II of this action, the list of
identified rule deficiencies has changed
as follows: (1) We are no longer finding
the Rule 100 definitions of PM10 and
PM2.5 to be deficient; (2) we are no
longer finding the provisions of Rule
220, Sections 404.3.e. and f. to be
deficient; and (3) we are approving
removal of the definition of ‘‘Begin
Actual Construction’’ in Rule 21,
Section D.1 (AZ R9–3–101, Paragraph
20) in the current SIP.
This action incorporates these rules
into the federally enforceable SIP
through revisions to 40 CFR 52.120
(Identification of plan) and 40 CFR
52.119 (Identification of plans—
conditional approvals).
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
MCAQD rules described in Table 1 of
this preamble. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these materials
available through https://
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
the Arizona SIP, have been incorporated
by reference by the EPA into that plan,
are 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.7
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 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 applicable criteria of the
Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive 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
7 62
PO 00000
FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13547
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by June 4, 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 CAA
section 307(b)(2).).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Administrative practice and
procedure, Environmental protection,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
13548
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: March 20, 2019.
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
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D—Arizona
2. Section 52.119 is amended by
adding in paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.119 Identification of plan—conditional
approvals.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A plan revision for the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department
(MCAQD) submitted May 18, 2016, by
the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ), the
Governor’s designee, updating the
MCAQD’s Clean Air Act (CAA) new
source review (NSR) program with
respect to deficiencies identified by the
EPA in Regulation I, Rule 100 and
Regulation II, Rule 200. This plan
revision is conditionally approved as
follows:
(1) The conditional approval is based
on the April 6, 2018 and October 5,
2018 commitments from the ADEQ, and
on the April 2, 2018 letter from the
MCAQD to the ADEQ requesting
submittal of a letter of commitment for
conditional approval, to submit a SIP
revision consisting of rule revisions
and/or demonstrations to the ADEQ
within eleven (11) months after the
EPA’s approval, to allow the ADEQ to
make the final submission to the EPA
not later than twelve (12) months after
the EPA’s approval that will correct the
deficiencies identified in this final
notice. If the State fails to meet its
commitment by that date that is twelve
(12) months after the EPA’s approval,
the conditional approval will be treated
as a disapproval to deficiencies
identified by the EPA in Regulation I,
Rule 100; and Regulation II, Rule 200.
(2) [Reserved]
3. Section 52.120 is amended in
paragraph (c) by revising Table 4 to read
as follows:
■
§ 52.120
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
TABLE 4—EPA-APPROVED MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
County citation
Title/subject
State
effective date
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
Pre-July 1988 Rule Codification
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Regulation I—General Provisions
Rule 2, No. 11 ‘‘Alteration
or Modification’’.
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
June 18, 1982, 47 FR
26382.
Rule 2, No. 27 ‘‘Dust’’ ........
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 29 ‘‘Emission’’
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 34 ‘‘Existing
Source Performance
Standards’’.
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 37 ‘‘Fly Ash’’ ...
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 39 ‘‘Fuel’’ ........
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 42 ‘‘Fume’’ ......
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 55 ‘‘Motor Vehicle’’.
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 59 ‘‘Non-Point
Source’’.
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Submitted on March 8, 1982.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION] to remove the definition for No. 33 ‘‘Existing Source’’ which was superseded by Rule 100
submitted on May 18, 2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
13549
TABLE 4—EPA-APPROVED MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS—Continued
County citation
Title/subject
State
effective date
Rule 2, No. 60 ‘‘Odors’’ ......
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 64 ‘‘Organic
Solvent’’.
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 70 ‘‘Plume’’ .....
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 80 ‘‘Smoke’’ ....
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
Rule 2, No. 91 ‘‘Vapor’’ ......
Definitions ..........................
June 23, 1980 ......
April 12, 1982, 47 FR
15579.
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on June 23, 1980.
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 71 defined terms which were
superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Regulation II—Permits
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph 52
‘‘Dust’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph 56
‘‘Emission’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph 63
‘‘Existing Source Performance Standards’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph 70
‘‘Fuel’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph 71
‘‘Fuel Burning Equipment’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph 74
‘‘Fume’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
103 ‘‘Motor Vehicle’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
114 ‘‘Non-Point Source’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
122 ‘‘Photochemically
Reactive Solvent’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
123 ‘‘Plume’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
13550
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4—EPA-APPROVED MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS—Continued
County citation
State
effective date
Title/subject
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Submitted on March 4, 1983.†
Revised on April 5, 2019, [INSERT Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed 152 defined terms which
were superseded by Rule 100 submitted on May 18,
2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
128 ‘‘Process’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
129 ‘‘Process Source’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
150 ‘‘Smoke’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
152 ‘‘Soot’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
160 ‘‘Supplementary
Control System (SCS)’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
166 ‘‘Vapor’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
167 ‘‘Vapor Pressure’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ
R9–3–101, Paragraph
168 ‘‘Visible Emissions’’).
Procedures for obtaining
an installation permit.
October 25, 1982
August 10, 1988, 53 FR
30224; vacated; restored
on January 29, 1991, 56
FR 3219.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Post-July 1988 Rule Codification
Regulation I—General Provisions
Rule 100 (except Sections
200.24, 200.73,
200.104(c)).
General Provisions and
Definitions.
*
*
February 3, 2016
April 5, 2019, [INSERT
Federal Register CITATION].
*
*
Submitted on May 18, 2016.
*
*
*
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Regulation II—Permits and Fees
Rule 200 .............................
Permit Requirements .........
February 3, 2016
Rule 210 .............................
Title V Permit Provisions ...
February 3, 2016
Rule 220 .............................
Non-Title V Permit Provisions.
February 3, 2016
Rule 240 (except Section
305).
Federal Major New Source
Review (NSR).
February 3, 2016
Rule 241 .............................
Minor New Source Review
(NSR).
February 3, 2016
*
*
[INSERT Federal Register
CITATION], April 5, 2019.
April 5, 2019, [INSERT
Federal Register CITATION].
April 5, 2019, [INSERT
Federal Register CITATION].
April 5, 2019, [INSERT
Federal Register CITATION].
April 5, 2019, [INSERT
Federal Register CITATION].
*
*
Submitted on May 18, 2016.
Submitted on May 18, 2016.
Submitted on May 18, 2016.
Submitted on May 18, 2016.
Submitted on November 25, 2016.
*
*
*
†Vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Delaney v. EPA, 898 F.2d 687 (9th Cir. 1990). Restored on January 29, 1991, 56 FR 3219.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–06384 Filed 4–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:56 Apr 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05APR1.SGM
05APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 66 (Friday, April 5, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13543-13550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06384]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0481; FRL-9991-53-Region 9]
Air Quality State Implementation Plans: Arizona; Approval and
Conditional Approval of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Maricopa
County Air Quality Department; Stationary Source Permits
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing
revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department's (MCAQD)
portion of the state implementation plan (SIP) for the State of
Arizona. We are finalizing full approval of Rules 210, 220, 240, and
241, and conditional approval of Rules 100 and 200. The revisions
update the MCAQD's New Source Review (NSR) permitting program for new
and modified sources of air pollution.
DATES: This rule is effective on May 6, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0481
for this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street (AIR-3), San Francisco,
California 94105-3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at
https://www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available
only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps,
multi-volume reports), and some may not be available in either location
(e.g., confidential business information (CBI)). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaheerah Kelly, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (AIR-3), San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, (415) 947-4156,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Summary of Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The initials ADEQ mean or refer to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
(ii) The initials BACT mean or refer to Best Available Control
Technology.
(iii) The word or initials CAA or Act mean or refer to the Clean
Air Act.
(iv) The initials CFR mean or refer to Code of Federal Regulations.
(v) The initials or words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(vi) The initials FR mean or refer to Federal Register.
(vii) The word or initials MCAQD, ``the County'' or ``Maricopa
County'' mean or refer to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department,
the agency with jurisdiction over stationary sources within Maricopa
County, Arizona.
(viii) The phrase minor NSR means the permit program applicable to
new or modified sources that do not result in a new major source or a
major modification.
(ix) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.
(x) The initials NSR mean or refer to New Source Review, which
includes NNSR, PSD and minor NSR.
(xi) The initials NNSR mean or refer to nonattainment New Source
Review.
(xii) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter less
than 2.5 micrometers.
(xiii) The initials PM10 mean or refer to particulate matter less
than 10 micrometers.
[[Page 13544]]
(xiv) The initials PSD mean or refer to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.
(xv) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(xvi) The word State means or refers to the State of Arizona.
(xvii) The initials TSD mean or refer to the Technical Support
Document.
I. Proposed Action
On June 11, 2018, the EPA proposed to approve or conditionally
approve the rules listed in Table 1 for incorporation into the Arizona
SIP.\1\ The submittals for these rules, which we refer to collectively
herein as ``MCAQD's NSR submittal'' or ``the submittal,'' represent a
comprehensive revision to the MCAQD's preconstruction review and
permitting program and are intended to satisfy the requirements under
part D (NNSR) of title I of the Act as well as the general
preconstruction review requirements under section 110(a)(2)(C) of the
Act. Our detailed analysis of these rules is provided in the TSD and
Federal Register notice for the proposed rulemaking for this SIP
revision approval action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 83 FR 26912 (June 11, 2018).
Table 1--MCAQD Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adoption or
Regulation & rule No. Rule title amendment date Submittal date Final action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation I, Rule 100........... General Provisions; 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 Conditional
General Provisions and Approval.
Definitions.
Regulation II, Rule 200.......... Permits and Fees; Permit 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 Conditional
Requirements. Approval.
Regulation II, Rule 210 \2\...... Permits and Fees; Title 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 Full Approval.
V Permit Provisions.
Regulation II, Rule 220.......... Permits and Fees; Non- 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 Full Approval.\3\
Title V Permit
Provisions.
Regulation II, Rule 240.......... Permits and Fees; 2/3/2016 5/18/2016 Full Approval.
Federal Major New
Source Review.
Regulation II, Rule 241.......... Permits and Fees; Minor 9/7/2016 11/25/2016 Full Approval.
New Source Review.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We proposed to approve and conditionally approve these rules
because we determined that they strengthen the SIP and are mostly
consistent with the relevant CAA requirements. We proposed to fully
approve Rules 210, 240 and 241 as part of the MCAQD's general and major
source NSR permitting program because we determined that these rules
satisfy the substantive statutory and regulatory requirements for NSR
permit programs as contained in part D of title I of the Act (sections
172, 173 and 182(a)), the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), 40
CFR 51.160-51.165, and 40 CFR 51.307.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Rule 210 also contains requirements to address the CAA title
V requirements for operating permit programs, though we are not
evaluating the rule for title V purposes at this time. We will
evaluate Rule 210 for compliance with the requirements of title V of
the Act and the EPA's implementing regulations in 40 CFR part 70
following receipt of an official part 70 program revision submittal
from Maricopa County containing this rule.
\3\ In our notice of proposed rulemaking we proposed conditional
approval of Rule 220 because it appeared that certain provisions in
Section 404.3 could allow emissions increases greater than the minor
NSR permit thresholds to be exempted from permit review. (Id. at
footnote 1). However, upon further review of the MACAQD's minor NSR
program, we found that this determination was made in error. The
provisions in Section 404 of Rule 220 are pre-empted by the
requirements of Section 403, which stipulate that any change that
would also result in a minor NSR modification will always require a
permit revision, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 404.3.
Therefore, the provisions in Rule 220, Section 404 are not deficient
and we are finalizing full approval of the rule. See Section II,
Response 6 of this action, for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We proposed to conditionally approve Rules 100, 200, and 220
because we determined that, while they mostly satisfy the statutory and
regulatory requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and part D of title
I of the Act, the rules also contained eight deficiencies that
prevented full approval. In our proposed action we determined that:
1. The definitions of ``PM2.5'' and ``PM10''
in Rule 100, Sections 200.91 and 200.92 are inconsistent with the
definition contained in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii), and are therefore
deficient;
2. the definition of ``good engineering practice stack height'' in
Rule 200, Section 201 is inconsistent with the definition for this term
provided in 40 CFR 51.100(ii), and is therefore deficient;
3. the MCAQD must provide a basis under 40 CFR 51.160(e) to
demonstrate that regulation of the equipment (i.e., agricultural
equipment used in normal farm operations) exempted in Rule 200, Section
305.1.c is not needed for the MCAQD's program to meet federal NSR
requirements for attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS or review for
compliance with the control strategy;
4. Rule 220, Sections 404.3.e and 404.3.f, for reconstructed
sources and for changes associated with an emission increase greater
than 10 percent of the major source threshold, are deficient because
these provisions allow changes with potentially significant emission
increases and should not be listed as changes that can be made after
providing only a notification to the MCAQD;
5. Rule 200, Section 403.2 does not ensure the continuity of the
NSR terms and conditions when a Title V or Non-Title V permit expires
and is therefore deficient;
6. references to Appendix G (Incorporated Materials) in certain
provisions in Rules 100 and 200 are deficient because Appendix G is
neither included in the existing SIP nor has it been included in
MCAQD's NSR submittal.
7. references to the Arizona Testing Manual (ATM) in Rules 100 and
200 are deficient because they rely on provisions that are not SIP
approved, and the ATM is significantly out of date and not appropriate
to be relied upon as the sole basis for testing procedures; and
8. certain definitions that the MCAQD proposed be removed from the
approved SIP are used in other SIP rules and therefore cannot be
removed from the SIP without further justification.
These deficiencies were the basis for the EPA's proposed
conditional approval of MCAQD's NSR submittal. Before our proposal, the
MCAQD and the ADEQ submitted letters committing to adopt and submit
revisions to the EPA to address the identified deficiencies not later
than one year from the date we take final action to approve the MCAQD's
NSR program revisions, consistent with the requirements of CAA section
110(k)(4).
We also proposed to remove the following definitions from the MCAQD
[[Page 13545]]
portion of the Arizona SIP because these terms are now defined in other
rules or are no longer used in the SIP.
Table 2--Definitions Being Removed From the Arizona SIP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defined term Current SIP rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accepted.............................. Rule 2, Section 1.
Begin Actual Construction............. Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 20).
Bureau................................ Rule 2, Section 19; Rule 21,
Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-101,
Paragraph 24).
Calorie............................... Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 26).
Combustion............................ Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 33).
Device, Machine, Equipment or Other Rule 2, Section 25.
Article.
Elevated Terrain...................... Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 55).
FR (Federal Register)................. Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 69).
Minor Source.......................... Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 99).
Mobile or Portable Sources............ Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 100).
Molybdenum Roaster.................... Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 101).
Permit Unit........................... Rule 2, Section 68.
Plume Impaction....................... Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 124).
Process and Process Equipment......... Rule 2, Section 73.
Reclaiming Machinery.................. Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 134).
Resource Recovery Facility............ Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 139).
Stationary Rotating Machinery......... Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 156).
Statutory Major Source................ Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 158).
Volatility............................ Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-
101, Paragraph 170).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Summary of Public Comments and EPA Responses
Our June 11, 2018 proposed rulemaking \4\ provided a 30-day public
comment period. We received a joint comment letter from the Sierra Club
and Center for Biological Diversity and also received a comment from an
anonymous source. Our Response to Comments document in the docket for
this action summarizes the comments and includes the EPA's full
responses.\5\ Below, we briefly summarize the significant comments and
our responses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Id at footnote 1.
\5\ The full text of the public comments, as well as all other
documents relevant to this action, are available in the docket
(visit https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID: EPA-
R09-OAR-2017-0481).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 1: The EPA informed the County that its definition of
``begin actual construction'' in Rule 100 was inconsistent with federal
permit requirements in 40 CFR 51.165 and specified the issues
pertaining to its definition. While we acknowledge that the definition
was withdrawn from the EPA's consideration as part of the SIP, the EPA
should have required the County to revise the definition of the term
``begin actual construction.''
Response 1: At the time of the EPA's proposed action on MCAQD's NSR
submittal, the option to disapprove the definition of ``begin actual
construction'' was no longer available because the County had withdrawn
the definition from its submittal. Accordingly, the comments regarding
the EPA's approval or disapproval of this definition are not germane to
our final rulemaking action.
Comment 2: The minor NSR Rules 200 and 241 are unenforceable
because the minor NSR rules in the SIP will have no federally
enforceable definition of ``begin actual construction.'' Because this
definition is still in effect at the county level, the County will
still be allowing certain on-site construction activities before a
permit is issued. Such cases could prejudice the Control Officer's
determination regarding permit approval. This situation compromises the
integrity of the entire minor NSR program. Therefore, the EPA should
disapprove all the minor NSR permitting rules until an adequate
definition of the term ``begin actual construction'' for the minor NSR
program is submitted for SIP approval.
Response 2: The EPA disagrees that all the minor NSR program rules
should be disapproved because they lack a definition for the term
``begin actual construction.'' The general permit program requirements
found in 40 CFR 51.160-164, which specify the minimum requirements that
apply to all NSR programs, do not contain a requirement like the ones
found in 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166, which provide that major NSR program
rules must include specified definitions. While some permit agencies
rely on the same definitions contained in their major NSR programs for
their minor NSR program, there is no regulatory requirement to do so.
Therefore, the lack of a definition for the term ``begin actual
construction'' is not inconsistent with the EPA regulations for minor
NSR programs.
Maricopa County's current SIP-approved permit program does not
contain a definition of the term ``begin actual construction'' for
minor sources. Maricopa County's local rules have contained the current
definition of ``begin actual construction'' since February 3, 2016.
However, we are not aware of any situations where the lack of such a
definition or the current definition has prejudiced the Control Officer
when determining if a permit should be issued and the commenter did not
provide any examples. We note that Maricopa County has provided the EPA
with a copy of proposed rule revisions, which include a definition for
the term ``begin actual construction'' that is consistent with the
definition of the same term found in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xv).
Comment 3: The EPA must require Maricopa County to demonstrate that
minor modifications at existing sources with emission increases below
the minor NSR modification thresholds will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or violate the control strategy,
because without such a demonstration, the EPA cannot ensure that
Maricopa County's minor NSR program satisfies the core requirement that
the County be able to prevent modification of a source if it would
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS pursuant to 40
CFR 51.160 and section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA.
Response 3: The EPA disagrees with the conclusions provided in the
[[Page 13546]]
comment regarding the type of demonstration required to satisfy the
provisions of 40 CFR 51.160(a), (b) and (e). The commenters do not
claim that any of these individual provisions were not met, but instead
claim that in order to approve Maricopa County's minor source NSR
program, the EPA must require Maricopa County to provide an analysis
demonstrating that emission increases lower than the minor NSR
modification thresholds will not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS. This is an incorrect reading of the
requirements of the cited provisions.
CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) requires a permit program to regulate the
construction and modification of sources as necessary to assure the
NAAQS are achieved. The regulation of minor sources and modifications
through a permit program is only one of many regulatory components
considered when adopting an attainment plan to achieve a particular
NAAQS. Recognizing that states have significant leeway to craft their
minor source permit programs, 40 CFR 51.160(e) requires permit agencies
to ``identify types and sizes of facilities, buildings, structures, or
installations which will be subject to review'' and ``discuss the basis
for determining which facilities will be subject to review.'' The
provisions of 40 CFR 51.160(a) and (b) are only applicable to the
sources identified under 40 CFR 51.160(e) as being subject to review,
and paragraph (e) only requires the submittal to discuss ``which
facilities will be subject to review.'' There is no requirement to
demonstrate that sources not subject to the minor source permit program
will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS.
Instead, the entire NSR program must subject a sufficient number of
sources (or emissions) to review to assure, in conjunction with all
other plan provisions, that the NAAQS will be achieved.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 76 FR 38748, 38752 (July 1, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA reviewed the submitted analysis and found MCAQD's NSR
submittal satisfied the requirements of 40 CFR 51.160(e) and CAA
section 110(a)(2)(C) because we believe that in conjunction with other
SIP provisions, an NSR program that will regulate approximately 74-83%
of new stationary source emissions by requiring BACT level controls on
such sources provides adequate regulation to ensure the NAAQS will be
met.
Comment 4: EPA proposed to conditionally approve several provisions
in the Maricopa County rules but did not provide any justification for
the use of a conditional approval in two cases: The definitions for
PM10 and PM2.5 in Rule 100, and certain
procedures that do not require a Non-Title V permit revision in Rule
220. The conditional approval commitment letter provided by the ADEQ
was not specific enough in its commitment to submit the Maricopa
County's SIP revision to EPA within one year from the EPA's final
action to conditionally approve MCAQD's NSR submittal.
Response 4: As discussed in Responses 5 and 6, the EPA has found
that the two specific provisions raised by the commenters are not
deficient. Since the EPA is no longer conditionally approving these
provisions, it is not necessary to respond to the claim that the EPA
did not provide an adequate justification for proposing conditional
approval for these provisions. The EPA agrees that the April 6, 2018
commitment letter provided by ADEQ was not specific enough in its
commitment to submit the Maricopa County's SIP revision to the EPA
within one year of final action. However, for other provisions that the
EPA is conditionally approving, we note that, on October 5, 2018, the
ADEQ provided the EPA with a clarification letter that includes a
commitment by the ADEQ to submit Maricopa County's corrections of the
identified deficiencies in this rulemaking within one year of the EPA's
final action conditionally approving MCAQD's NSR submittal. This
commitment by the ADEQ is sufficiently specific to justify the
conditional approvals within this rulemaking.
Comment 5: Failure to properly define PM10 and
PM2.5 represents a significant deficiency in the permit
programs and conditional approval means neither the major nor minor NSR
program will adequately provide for protection of the PM10
and PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA should disapprove the definitions
of PM10 and PM2.5 rather than conditionally
approving the County's permit programs.
Response 5: The EPA proposed conditional approval of Rule 100, in
part because the EPA found that the definitions of PM10 and
PM2.5 did not include gaseous emissions, which form
particulates. Upon further review, the EPA has determined that our
initial analysis was incorrect. The definition of ``Regulated NSR
Pollutant'' contained in both Rule 100 and 240 incorporates the
definition of this same term as found in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii)(D). The incorporated definition states that
``PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions shall
include gaseous emissions from a source or activity which condense to
form particulate matter at ambient temperatures.'' Because Rule 100 is
not deficient for the reasons the EPA cited in our proposed action, the
merits of this comment and our proposed disapproval are moot and are
not discussed further. The EPA recommends, however, that Maricopa
County consider revising the definitions of these terms in Rule 100 to
provide clarity to the regulated community.
Comment 6: All the provisions of Rule 220, Section 404.3, (except
subsection d.), are not approvable because the changes could adversely
impact air quality and because of the significance of the changes that
could be allowed at a facility.
Response 6: The EPA disagrees that these provisions are not
approvable. In our proposed action, the EPA failed to note that the
provisions of Rule 220, Section 404 are pre-empted by the requirements
of Section 403, which lists the types of changes requiring a permit
revision. Pursuant to Subsection 403.2.k., any change that would also
result in a minor NSR modification will always require a permit
revision, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 404.3. Thus the
``exemptions'' allowed under Section 404.3 are limited to changes
resulting in emission increases lower than the minor NSR modification
thresholds. As the EPA discussed earlier in Response 3, Maricopa County
provided an analysis in the MCAQD's NSR submittal that provides a
reasonable basis for choosing the size of sources (based on emission
increases) that require permit regulation to attain or maintain the
NAAQS. Accordingly, the EPA no longer finds paragraphs e. and f. of
Section 404.3 deficient and is fully approving Rule 220, including
Section 404.3.
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that change our assessment that the
MCAQD's Rules 210, 220, 240, and 241 satisfy the applicable CAA
requirements, nor were any comments submitted that change our
assessment discussed in our proposal that certain MCAQD rules should be
removed from the Arizona SIP. Therefore, as authorized under CAA
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a), and for the reasons set forth in our
June 11, 2018 proposed rule, we are finalizing full approval of Rules
210, 220, 240, and 241, as described in Table 1, in the MCAQD portion
of the Arizona SIP, and removing from the MCAQD portion of the Arizona
SIP the rules identified in Table 2.
While we cannot grant full approval of Rules 100 and 200 at this
time, the
[[Page 13547]]
MCAQD and the ADEQ have satisfactorily committed to address the
identified deficiencies by committing to provide the EPA with a SIP
submission within one year of this final action, which will include
specific rule revisions and/or demonstrations that would adequately
address the issues identified in our proposal and Section II above. If
the MCAQD, through the ADEQ, submits the rule revisions and/or
demonstrations that it has committed to submit by this deadline, and
the EPA approves the submission, then the identified deficiencies will
be cured. However, if the MCAQD, through the ADEQ, fails to submit
these revisions and/or demonstrations within the required timeframe,
the conditional approval will become a disapproval, and the EPA will
issue a finding of disapproval. The EPA is not required to propose the
finding of disapproval.
We did not receive any comments that would cause us to change the
determinations that were the basis for our proposed conditional
approval action; thus, we are finalizing a conditional approval of the
MCAQD's Rules 100 and 200 pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(4). As
discussed in Section II of this action, the list of identified rule
deficiencies has changed as follows: (1) We are no longer finding the
Rule 100 definitions of PM10 and PM2.5 to be
deficient; (2) we are no longer finding the provisions of Rule 220,
Sections 404.3.e. and f. to be deficient; and (3) we are approving
removal of the definition of ``Begin Actual Construction'' in Rule 21,
Section D.1 (AZ R9-3-101, Paragraph 20) in the current SIP.
This action incorporates these rules into the federally enforceable
SIP through revisions to 40 CFR 52.120 (Identification of plan) and 40
CFR 52.119 (Identification of plans--conditional approvals).
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 MCAQD
rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials available through https://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 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
Arizona SIP, have been incorporated by reference by the EPA into that
plan, are 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 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 applicable criteria of the Clean
Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
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. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 4, 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 CAA section 307(b)(2).).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental protection,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
[[Page 13548]]
Dated: March 20, 2019.
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
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart D--Arizona
0
2. Section 52.119 is amended by adding in paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.119 Identification of plan--conditional approvals.
* * * * *
(b) A plan revision for the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
(MCAQD) submitted May 18, 2016, by the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ), the Governor's designee, updating the
MCAQD's Clean Air Act (CAA) new source review (NSR) program with
respect to deficiencies identified by the EPA in Regulation I, Rule 100
and Regulation II, Rule 200. This plan revision is conditionally
approved as follows:
(1) The conditional approval is based on the April 6, 2018 and
October 5, 2018 commitments from the ADEQ, and on the April 2, 2018
letter from the MCAQD to the ADEQ requesting submittal of a letter of
commitment for conditional approval, to submit a SIP revision
consisting of rule revisions and/or demonstrations to the ADEQ within
eleven (11) months after the EPA's approval, to allow the ADEQ to make
the final submission to the EPA not later than twelve (12) months after
the EPA's approval that will correct the deficiencies identified in
this final notice. If the State fails to meet its commitment by that
date that is twelve (12) months after the EPA's approval, the
conditional approval will be treated as a disapproval to deficiencies
identified by the EPA in Regulation I, Rule 100; and Regulation II,
Rule 200.
(2) [Reserved]
0
3. Section 52.120 is amended in paragraph (c) by revising Table 4 to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 4--EPA-Approved Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA approval Additional
County citation Title/subject State effective date date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-July 1988 Rule Codification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation I--General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2, No. 11 ``Alteration or Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ June 18, 1982, Submitted on March 8,
Modification''. 47 FR 26382. 1982.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION] to remove
the definition for
No. 33 ``Existing
Source'' which was
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 27 ``Dust''....... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 29 ``Emission''... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 34 ``Existing Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
Source Performance 47 FR 15579. 1980.
Standards''. Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 37 ``Fly Ash''.... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 39 ``Fuel''....... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 42 ``Fume''....... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 55 ``Motor Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
Vehicle''. 47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 59 ``Non-Point Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
Source''. 47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
[[Page 13549]]
Rule 2, No. 60 ``Odors''...... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 64 ``Organic Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
Solvent''. 47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 70 ``Plume''...... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 80 ``Smoke''...... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 2, No. 91 ``Vapor''...... Definitions..... June 23, 1980........ April 12, 1982, Submitted on June 23,
47 FR 15579. 1980.
Revised on April 5,
2019, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION]. Removed
71 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation II--Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 52 ``Dust''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 56 obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
``Emission''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 63 ``Existing obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Source Performance installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
Standards''). permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 70 ``Fuel''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 71 ``Fuel obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Burning Equipment''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 74 ``Fume''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 103 ``Motor obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Vehicle''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 114 ``Non- obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Point Source''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 122 obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
``Photochemically Reactive installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
Solvent''). permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 123 ``Plume''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
[[Page 13550]]
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 128 obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
``Process''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 129 ``Process obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Source''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 150 ``Smoke''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 152 ``Soot''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 160 obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
``Supplementary Control installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
System (SCS)''). permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 166 ``Vapor''). obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 167 ``Vapor obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Pressure''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
Rule 21, Section D.1 (AZ R9-3- Procedures for October 25, 1982..... August 10, 1988, Submitted on March 4,
101, Paragraph 168 ``Visible obtaining an 53 FR 30224; 1983.[dagger]
Emissions''). installation vacated; Revised on April 5,
permit. restored on 2019, [INSERT
January 29, Federal Register
1991, 56 FR CITATION]. Removed
3219. 152 defined terms
which were
superseded by Rule
100 submitted on May
18, 2016.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post-July 1988 Rule Codification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation I--General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 100 (except Sections General February 3, 2016..... April 5, 2019, Submitted on May 18,
200.24, 200.73, 200.104(c)). Provisions and [INSERT Federal 2016.
Definitions. Register
CITATION].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation II--Permits and Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 200...................... Permit February 3, 2016..... [INSERT Federal Submitted on May 18,
Requirements. Register 2016.
CITATION],
April 5, 2019.
Rule 210...................... Title V Permit February 3, 2016..... April 5, 2019, Submitted on May 18,
Provisions. [INSERT Federal 2016.
Register
CITATION].
Rule 220...................... Non-Title V February 3, 2016..... April 5, 2019, Submitted on May 18,
Permit [INSERT Federal 2016.
Provisions. Register
CITATION].
Rule 240 (except Section 305). Federal Major February 3, 2016..... April 5, 2019, Submitted on May 18,
New Source [INSERT Federal 2016.
Review (NSR). Register
CITATION].
Rule 241...................... Minor New Source February 3, 2016..... April 5, 2019, Submitted on November
Review (NSR). [INSERT Federal 25, 2016.
Register
CITATION].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[dagger]Vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Delaney v. EPA, 898 F.2d 687 (9th Cir.
1990). Restored on January 29, 1991, 56 FR 3219.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-06384 Filed 4-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
