[Federal Register: November 10, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 217)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 68388-68390]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10no05-27]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R09-OAR-2005-AZ-0007, FRL-7994-7]
Revisions to the Arizona State Implementation Plan, Pinal County
Air Quality Control District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Pinal County Air
Quality Control District (PCAQCD) portion of the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean Air Act as
amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act), we are proposing to approve a local
rule that addresses opacity standards.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number R09-OAR-2005-
AZ-0007, by one of the following methods:
Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA
prefers receiving comments through this electronic public docket and
comment
[[Page 68389]]
system. Follow the on-line instructions to submit comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions.
E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/
rmepub/, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be
clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through the
agency Web site, eRulemaking portal, or e-mail. The agency Web site and
eRulemaking portal are ``anonymous access'' systems, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may
be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly available in either location
(e.g., 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 below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Petersen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118, petersen.alfred@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What are the purposes of the submitted rule revisions?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public comment and final action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are proposing to approve with the date
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).
Table 1.--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Agency Rule No. Rule Title Revised Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAQCD.................................... 2-8-300 Performance standards........ 05/18/05 09/12/05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 28, 2005, the rule submittal was found to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
On April 28, 2004 (69 FR 23103), EPA finalized a limited approval
and limited disapproval of a version of Rule 2-8-300.
C. What are the purposes of the submitted rule revisions?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations
that control volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen,
particulate matter, and other air pollutants which harm human health
and the environment. This rule was developed as part of the local
agency's program to control particulate matter.
The purposes of the rule revisions relative to the SIP rule are as
follows:
The clarification is added that provisions of the rule
apply to an ``existing source,'' a ``point source,'' and a ``stationary
source,'' which are appropriately defined.
The opacity standard is decreased from 40% in all areas to
(a) 20% in nonattainment or maintenance attainment areas after June 2,
2005 and (b) 20% in attainment or unclassified areas after April 23,
2006.
A provision is added to allow submittal of a petition to
the Control Officer (CO) by September 15, 2005 for an alternative
opacity standard (AOS), if the source complies with the applicable
particulate matter (PM) mass rate standard, but cannot comply with the
20% opacity standard. Requirements for the petition contents are
listed. If an AOS is approved by the CO, he shall submit the AOS to the
EPA Administrator for approval as a SIP revision. If an AOS is not
approved, the source shall comply with the 20% opacity standard or
submit a compliance plan before April 23, 2006.
A definition of ``process weight rate'' is added to
clarify its applicability to continuous processes and batch processes.
The TSD has more information about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
CAA), must require reasonably available control measures (RACM),
including reasonably available control technology (RACT) in moderate
PM-10 nonattaiment areas (see section 189(a)), must require best
available control measures (BACM), including best available control
technology (BACT) in serious PM-10 nonattaiment areas (see section
189(b)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l)
and 193). A portion of PCAQCD is designated attainment, a portion is
designated moderate nonattainment, and a portion is designated serious
nonattainment for PM-10.
The following guidance documents were used for reference:
Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 51.
PM-10 Guideline Document (EPA-452/R-93-008).
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
The deficiency cited in the previous limited approval/limited
disapproval action of PCAQCD Rule 2-8-300 is as follows: The 40%
opacity standard does not meet the requirements of BACM/BACT. Analogous
generic 20% opacity standards meet the requirements of RACM/RACT in
other parts of the country, and we believe BACM/BACT in PCAQCD should
be at least as stringent. See 69 FR 23103 (April 28, 2004).
[[Page 68390]]
The revision to a 20% opacity standard in the submitted rule
corrects the cited deficiency for unclassified, attainment,
maintenance, and moderate nonattainment areas to a level comparable to
RACM/RACT in other parts of the country. We believe that BACM/BACT, as
required for the serious nonattainment area in PCAQCD, should be at
least as stringent as RACM/RACT. We do not have justification for an
opacity standard more stringent than 20% to fulfill BACM/BACT for
general PM-10 sources in the serious nonattainment area. Therefore, we
believe that the 20% opacity standard fulfills RACM/RACT and BACM/BACT
for the general PM-10 sources to which the rule is applicable, even
though some specific PM-10 sources might achieve a more stringent
opacity standard in fulfilling BACM/BACT.
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations, and fulfilling the
requirements of RACM/RACT and BACM/BACT and should be given full
approval.
C. Public comment and final action
Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant
requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in
section 110(k)(3) of the CAA. We will accept comments from the public
on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new
information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final
approval action that will incorporate the rule into the federally
enforceable SIP.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Public Law 104-4).
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 19, 2005.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 05-22377 Filed 11-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P