[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 26, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43013-43020]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-16104]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[AZ-113-0054a; FRL-7233-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: Arizona
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving the moderate area plan and maintenance plan
for the Payson area in Arizona and granting a request submitted by the
State to redesignate the area from nonattainment to attainment for the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter
with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10
micrometers (PM10). Elsewhere in this Federal Register, we
are proposing approval and soliciting written comment on this action;
if adverse written comments are received, we will withdraw the direct
final rule and address the comments received in a new final rule;
otherwise no further rulemaking will occur on this approval action.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective August 26, 2002, without
further notice, unless we receive adverse comments by July 26, 2002. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Please address your comments to Dave Jesson, Air Planning
Office (AIR-2), Air Division, U.S. EPA, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. You may inspect and copy the rulemaking
docket for this notice at the following location during normal business
hours. We may charge you a reasonable fee for copying parts of the
docket.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, Air Division, Air Planning
Office (AIR-2), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at
the address listed below: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality,
Library, First Floor, 3033 N. Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85012-2809.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Jesson, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), EPA Region 9, at (415) 972-3957 or: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Action
II. Introduction
A. What National Ambient Air Quality Standards are considered in
today's rulemaking?
B. What is a State Implementation Plan?
C. What is the classification of this area?
D. What are the applicable CAA provisions for PM10
moderate area plans?
1. Statutory provisions.
2. Clean data area approach.
E. What are the applicable provisions for PM10
maintenance plans?
1. Statutory provisions.
2. Limited maintenance plan (LMP) option.
F. What are the applicable provisions for redesignation to
attainment for PM10?
III. Review of the Arizona State Submittals Addressing these
Provisions
A. Is the moderate area plan approvable?
1. Did the State meet the CAA procedural provisions?
2. Has the State demonstrated that the area qualifies for the
clean data policy?
3. Do the emissions inventories meet CAA provisions?
4. Do the plans meet the CAA provisions for RACM and RACT?
5. Are the CAA provisions for new source review satisfied?
B. Is the maintenance plan approvable?
1. Has the State demonstrated that the area qualifies for the
limited maintenance plan option?
2. Do the emissions inventories meet CAA provisions?
3. Do the plans meet the CAA provisions for contingency
measures?
4. Has the State committed to continue to operate an appropriate
PM10 air quality monitoring network?
C. Is the redesignation request approvable?
1. Has the area attained the 24-hour and annual PM10
NAAQS?
2. Has the area met all relevant requirements under section 110
and Part D of the Act?
3. Does the area have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k)
of the Act?
4. Has the State shown that the air quality improvement in the
area is permanent and enforceable?
5. Does the area have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant
to section 175A of the Act?
D. Conformity
1. Transportation conformity
2. General conformity
IV. Proposed Action
V. Administrative Requirements
I. Summary of Action
We are approving the moderate area plan and the maintenance plan
for the Payson PM10 nonattainment area (``Payson'') \1\ and
redesignating the area to attainment for the 24-hour and annual
PM10 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the definition of the Payson nonattainment area, see 40
CFR 81.303. Payson is a city with a 2000 decennial census count of
13,620, located in Gila County, about 100 miles northeast of
Phoenix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 29, 2002, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) submitted the plan for the Payson PM10 nonattainment
area as well as a request for redesignation of the area from
nonattainment to attainment. On May 31, 2002, we found that the
submittal met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.
II. Introduction
A. What National Ambient Air Quality Standards are considered in
today's rulemaking?
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10
micrometers (PM10) is the pollutant that is the subject of
this action. The NAAQS are safety thresholds for certain ambient air
pollutants set to protect public health and welfare. PM10 is
among the ambient air pollutants for which we have established such a
health-based standard.
PM10 causes adverse health effects by penetrating deep
in the lung, aggravating the cardiopulmonary system. Children, the
elderly, and
[[Page 43014]]
people with asthma and heart conditions are the most vulnerable.
On July 1, 1987 (52 FR 24634), we revised the NAAQS for particulate
matter with an indicator that includes only those particles with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers.
(See 40 CFR 50.6).
The annual primary PM10 standard is 50 ug/m\3\ as an
annual arithmetic mean. The 24-hour PM10 standard is 150 ug/
m\3\ with no more than one expected exceedance per year. The secondary
PM10 standards, promulgated to protect against adverse
welfare effects, are identical to the primary standards.
B. What is a State Implementation Plan?
The Clean Air Act requires States to attain and maintain ambient
air quality equal to or better than the NAAQS. The State's commitments
for attaining and maintaining the NAAQS are outlined in the State
Implementation Plan (or SIP) for that State. The SIP is a planning
document that, when implemented, is designed to ensure the achievement
of the NAAQS. Each State currently has a SIP in place, and the Act
requires that SIP revisions be made periodically as necessary to
provide continued compliance with the standards.
SIPs include, among other things, the following: (1) An inventory
of emission sources; (2) statutes and regulations adopted by the State
legislature and executive agencies; (3) air quality analyses that
include demonstrations that adequate controls are in place to meet the
NAAQS; and (4) contingency measures to be undertaken if an area fails
to attain the standard or make reasonable progress toward attainment by
the required date.
The State must make the SIP available for public review and comment
through a public hearing, it must be adopted by the State, and
submitted to EPA by the Governor or her designee. EPA takes Federal
action on the SIP submittal thus rendering the rules and regulations
Federally enforceable. The approved SIP serves as the State's
commitment to take actions that will reduce or eliminate air quality
problems. Any subsequent revisions to the SIP must go through the
formal SIP revision process specified in the Act.
C. What is the classification of this area?
Upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (Act),
PM10 areas meeting the requirements of either (i) or (ii) of
section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Act were designated nonattainment for
PM10 by operation of law and classified ``moderate.'' See
generally, 42 U.S.C. 7407(d)(4)(B). These areas included all former
Group I PM10 planning areas identified in 52 FR 29383
(August 7, 1987) and further clarified in 55 FR 45799 (October 31,
1990), and any other areas violating the NAAQS for PM10
prior to January 1, 1989 (many of these areas were identified by
footnote 4 in the October 31, 1990 Federal Register document). A
Federal Register notice announcing the areas designated nonattainment
for PM10 upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments, known as
``initial'' PM10 nonattainment areas, was published on March
15, 1991 (56 FR 11101). A subsequent Federal Register document
correcting some of these areas was published on August 8, 1991 (56 FR
37654). These nonattainment designations and moderate area
classifications were codified in 40 CFR part 81 in a Federal Register
document published on November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694). All other areas
in the nation not designated nonattainment at enactment were designated
unclassifiable (see section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the Act).
In January and February of 1991, we notified the Governors of those
States which recorded violations of the PM10 standard after
January 1, 1989 that EPA believed that those areas should be
redesignated as nonattainment for PM10. In September 1992 we
proposed that several areas be redesignated nonattainment for
PM10 and took final action on December 21, 1993 (58 FR
67335). Payson was among those areas listed. The effective date of the
final action redesignating this area as nonattainment for the
PM10 NAAQS was January 20, 1994.
D. What are the applicable CAA provisions for PM10 moderate
area plans?
The air quality planning requirements for moderate PM10
nonattainment areas are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of title I of the
Act. We have issued guidance in a General Preamble describing our views
on how we will review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under title I of
the Act, including those containing moderate PM10
nonattainment area SIP provisions. 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR
18070 (April 28, 1992). The General Preamble provides a detailed
discussion of our interpretation of the Title I requirements.
1. Statutory Provisions
States with initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas
were required to submit, among other things, the following provisions
by November 15, 1991:
(a) Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures
(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in
the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of
reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented no
later than December 10, 1993;
(b) Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that
the plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than December 31, 1994, or a demonstration that attainment
by that date is impracticable;
(c) Pursuant to section 189(c)(1), for plan revisions demonstrating
attainment, quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3
years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward
attainment by December 31, 1994; and
(d) Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable
to major stationary sources of PM10 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors, except where the
Administrator determines that such sources do not contribute
significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the
area.
In addition, States must submit a permit program for the
construction of new and modified major stationary sources in 1992 and
contingency measures in 1993. See sections 189(a) and 172(c)(9).
2. Clean Data Area Approach
The clean data areas approach applies the clean data policy concept
already in place for ozone to selected PM10 nonattainment
areas in order to approve control measures for these areas into the
SIP. The approach only applies to PM10 areas with simple
PM10 source problems, such as residential wood combustion
and fugitive dust problems. If an area meets the following
requirements, the State will no longer be required to develop an
attainment demonstration. The requirements for the approach are:
(a) The area must be attaining the PM10 NAAQS with the
three most recent years of quality assured air quality data.
(b) The State must continue to operate an appropriate
PM10 air quality monitoring network, in accordance with 40
CFR part 58, in order to verify the attainment status of the area.
(c) The control measures for the area, which were responsible for
bringing the area into attainment, must be approved by EPA. EPA would
also need to find that the area has adopted RACM/RACT, and make a
finding that the area attained the 24-hour and annual PM10
NAAQS.
[[Page 43015]]
(d) An emissions inventory must be completed for the area. In
addition to the above requirements for the use of the clean data areas
approach, any requirements that are connected solely to designation or
classification, such as new source review (NSR) and RACM/RACT, will
remain in effect. However, the requirements under CAA section 172(c)
for developing attainment demonstrations, RFP demonstrations and
contingency measures are waived due to the fact that the areas which
are eligible under this approach have already attained the
PM10 NAAQS and have met RFP.
Any sanctions clocks that may be running for an area due to failure
to submit, or disapproval of any attainment demonstration, RFP or
contingency measure requirements, are stopped. In addition, areas are
still required to demonstrate transportation conformity using the
build/no-build test, or the no-greater-than-1990 test. 40 CFR 93.119.
The emissions budget test would not be required, because the
requirements for an attainment demonstration and RFP, which establish
the budgets, no longer apply. The applicable tests for general
conformity still apply. The use of the clean data areas approach does
not constitute a CAA section 107(d) redesignation, but only serves to
approve nonattainment area SIPs required under Part D of the CAA.
E. What are the applicable provisions for PM10 maintenance
plans?
1. Statutory Provisions
CAA section 175A provides the general framework for maintenance
plans. The maintenance plan must provide for maintenance of the NAAQS
for at least 10 years after redesignation, and must include any
additional control measures as may be necessary to ensure such
maintenance. In addition, maintenance plans are to contain such
contingency provisions as we deem necessary to assure the prompt
correction of a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.
The contingency measures must include, at a minimum, a requirement that
the State will implement all control measures contained in the
nonattainment SIP prior to redesignation. Beyond these provisions,
however, CAA section 175A does not define the content of a maintenance
plan. Our primary guidance on maintenance plans and redesignation
requests is a September 4, 1992 memo from John Calcagni, entitled
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment'' (``Calcagni memo'').
2. Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) Option
On August 9, 2001, EPA issued new guidance on streamlined
maintenance plan provisions for certain moderate PM10
nonattainment areas seeking redesignation to attainment (Memo from
Lydia Wegman entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM10 Nonattainment Areas''). This policy allows maintenance
plans for areas having a low risk of future exceedances to omit air
quality modeling, future year emission inventories, and some of the
standard analyses to determine transportation conformity with the SIP.
To qualify for the LMP option, the area should be maintaining the
NAAQS, and the average PM10 design value for the area, based
upon the most recent 5 years of air quality data at all monitors in the
area, should be at or below 40 ug/m\3\ for the annual and 98 ug/m\3\
for the 24 hour PM10 NAAQS with no violations at any monitor
in the nonattainment area. See section IV of the LMP Option memo cited
above. The 40 and 98 ug/m\3\ limits are margin of safety (MOS) limits
for the relevant PM10 standard for a given area. In
addition, the area should expect only limited growth in on-road motor
vehicle PM10 emissions (including fugitive dust) and should
have passed a motor vehicle regional emissions analysis test.
As discussed below in Section III.B.1, the State has demonstrated
that the LMP option is appropriate for the Payson nonattainment area.
F. What are the applicable provisions for redesignation to attainment
for PM10?
The 1990 CAA Amendments revised section 107(d)(3)(E) to provide
five specific requirements that an area must meet in order to be
redesignated from nonattainment to attainment:
(1) the area must have attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) the area has met all relevant requirements under section 110
and Part D of the Act;
(3) the area has a fully approved SIP under section 110(k) of the
Act;
(4) the air quality improvement must be due to permanent and
enforceable reductions; and,
(5) the area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant
to section 175A of the Act.
III. Review of the Arizona State Submittal Addressing These Provisions
A. Moderate Area Plan
1. Did the State meet the CAA procedural provisions?
Prior to adoption by the State, the plan received proper public
notice and was the subject of a public hearing in Payson on February
19, 2002.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In June 1995, ADEQ submitted a PM10 plan for
Payson. That plan, which addressed the moderate SIP provisions, is
superseded by the current submittal, which covers both moderate plan
and maintenance plan provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Has the State demonstrated that the area qualifies for the clean
data policy?
a. Based on the past 3 years of air quality data, is the area
attaining both the 24-hour and annual PM10 NAAQS? An area
has attained the 24-hour standard when the average number of expected
exceedances per year is less than or equal to one, when averaged over a
three-year period. (40 CFR 50.6) To make this determination, three
consecutive years of complete ambient air quality data were collected
in accordance with Federal requirements (40 CFR part 58, including
appendices). On February 15, 2002, EPA issued a determination that the
Payson area had attained the PM-10 NAAQS. 67 FR 7082.
The Payson area has one PM10 monitoring site, currently
located at the Payson water treatment plant at 204 W. Aero Drive.
Street. The area has attained both the annual and 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS for the past 3 years; indeed, the area has not
exceeded either NAAQS since 1990. Thus, the submittal demonstrates that
the area has met the ambient attainment requirements for both the 24-
hour and annual PM10 NAAQS.
b. Is the State continuing to operate an appropriate
PM10 air quality monitoring network? Demonstrating that an
area has attained the PM10 NAAQS involves submittal of
ambient air quality data from an ambient air monitoring network
representing peak PM10 concentrations, which should be
stored in the EPA Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). Once
the area has been redesignated, the State will continue to operate an
appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58, to verify the attainment status of the area. The maintenance
plan contains provisions for continued operation of air quality
monitors that provide such verification. ADEQ has committed to continue
operating an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in
[[Page 43016]]
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment status of the
area. This commitment satisfies the obligation to maintain an adequate
monitoring program in the area.
c. Has EPA approved the control measures responsible for bringing
the areas into attainment? The measures implemented in Payson beginning
in 1990 and used for the attainment demonstration are listed below.
These measures address the source categories responsible for the
exceedances recorded in the Payson area: reentrained dust from paved
and unpaved roads and wood smoke.
1. Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) installed 2 miles of
curbs and gutters on Arizona State Highway 87 from the intersection of
Highways 87 and 260 to Roundup Road in 1992.
2. ADOT installed 5 miles of paved shoulders on Highway 87 North
and Highway 260 East when those stretches were widened to 4 lanes in
1992.
3. The Town of Payson paved 4 miles of unpaved roads that were
unpaved in 1990.
4. Gila County paved nearly 18 miles of previously unpaved roads
starting in 1989.
5. ADEQ implemented Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-607 that
requires control of storage piles to minimize fugitive emissions.
6. In 1988, EPA implemented New Source Performance Standards for
woodstoves.
Implementation of these measures helped bring the area into timely
attainment of both the 24-hour and annual PM10 NAAQS, and
the measures thus meet the CAA requirement for RACM. Measures 1-4 are
fully constructed and are permanent by their very nature. Measure 5 has
previously been approved by EPA and remains a Federally enforceable
component of the SIP. Therefore, we conclude that the submittal
demonstrates that the controls responsible for bringing the area into
attainment have been fully carried out or are fully approved SIP
regulations.
In addition to these permanent or SIP enforceable controls, the
Town of Payson implemented an ordinance requiring the paving of
commercial parking facilities and the paving of unpaved roads as
condition of minor land divisions. Kaibab Industries' lumber and
sawmill operation closed and the facility was dismantled in June 1993,
and the Lewis M. Pyle Memorial Hospital's medical waste incinerator was
shutdown and removed in 1993. Smoke management plan requirements were
implemented by the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and
Arizona Department of State Lands, in cooperation with ADEQ. These
supplemental strategies contributed still further PM-10 emission
reductions and public health protection. Continued implementation of
the measures will help ensure that the Payson area maintains the 24-
hour and annual PM10 NAAQS.
3. Do the emissions inventories meet CAA provisions?
The Payson plan includes emission inventories for 1999 to show
emission levels in a recent, representative year during which there
were no violations of the PM10 standards. This inventory is
summarized in Table IV-1, while Table IV-3 presents an inventory of
industrial sources, all of which emit less than 3 tons per year of
PM10. This inventory is consistent with our most recent
guidance on emission inventories for nonattainment areas, and reflects
the latest information available, including 2000 census data.\3\ We
approve the emissions inventory under CAA section 172(c)(3) as current,
accurate, and complete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ PM-10 Emission Inventory Requirements, EPA-450/2-93, USEPA
1993. Emissions factors were generally derived using methodologies
from the Procedures Document for National Emission Inventory,
Criteria Air Pollutants 1985-1999 (NEI Procedures), USEPA 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Do the plans meet the CAA provisions for RACM and RACT?
The measures listed above in Section III.A.2.c. reflect effective
control for an important emissions category in the Payson area:
Reentrained dust from traffic on paved and unpaved roads. These
measures were implemented expeditiously and have proven sufficient to
prevent violations of the NAAQS over the past 10 years. We therefore
conclude that the controls reflect RACM and we approve the plan as
meeting the RACM provisions of CAA Section 189(a)(1)(C).
CAA Section 189(e) requires RACT provisions for gaseous precursors
of PM10 except where EPA determines that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM10 levels exceeding the
standard. There are no major stationary sources in the nonattainment
area, and total emissions associated with all industrial sources
account for only 0.93 percent of PM10 emissions in 1999. For
this reason and because the historic violations of the PM10
NAAQS were the direct result of reentrained dust and wood smoke
emissions in the late 1980's, no sources within the Payson area are
subject to the RACT requirement, either with respect to primary or
secondary PM10 emissions.
5. Are the CAA provisions for new source review satisfied?
For the Payson nonattainment area, ADEQ administers the
preconstruction review and permitting provisions of Arizona
Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapter 2, Articles 1, 3, 4, and 5. All
new major sources and modifications to existing major sources are
subject to the new source review (NSR) and prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) requirements of these rules. We have not yet fully
approved the State's NSR rules but, for major sources and modifications
of PM10 emissions, we have delegated to Arizona the
authority to administer the PSD program.
Section 172(c)(5) requires NSR permits for the construction and
operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in
nonattainment areas. We have determined that areas being redesignated
from nonattainment to attainment do not need to comply with the
requirement that an NSR program be approved prior to redesignation
provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the standard without
part D nonattainment NSR in effect. The rationale for this decision is
described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols dated October 14, 1994
(``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment''). We have determined that the
ADEQ maintenance demonstration for Payson does not rely on
nonattainment NSR and, therefore, the State need not have a fully
approved nonattainment NSR program prior to approval of the
redesignation request. The ADEQ's PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21 will
become effective in the area with respect to PM-10 upon redesignation
of the area to attainment, pursuant to the delegation agreement between
EPA and ADEQ dated March 12, 1999.
B. Maintenance Plan
1. Has the State demonstrated that the area qualifies for the LMP
option?
Section II.E. of the plan discusses how the area meets each of the
LMP option criteria for use of this option.
First, the area should be attaining the NAAQS. Table III-3 of the
plan summarizes quality assured ambient data showing that the Payson
area has continued to meet both the 24-hour and annual PM10
NAAQS for the period 1996-2000.
Second, the design values for the past 5 years must be at or below
the margin of safety levels identified in the LMP option. The annual
average PM10 design value for the area from 1996
[[Page 43017]]
through 2000 data is 26 ug/m\3\, and the 24-hour average design value
is 88 ug/m\3\, both of which are below the MOS limits of 40 and 98 ug/
m\3\, respectively.
Third, the area must meet the motor vehicle regional emissions
analysis test in the LMP option. The calculated value is 28.3 ug/m\3\
for the annual average PM10 standard, which is less than the
40 ug/m\3\ MOS limit for annual, and the calculated value is 95.7 ug/
m\3\ for the 24-hour average PM10 standard, which is less
than the 98 ug/m\3\ MOS limit.
Therefore, the State has shown that the area qualifies for the
streamlined maintenance plan provisions under the LMP option. We have
concluded in Section III.A. that the plan submittal meets the moderate
area plan provisions for emissions inventories, permanent and
enforceable control measures, and maintenance of adequate monitoring.
There is one remaining maintenance plan provision under the LMP option
not previously discussed: contingency measures.
2. Does the plan meet the CAA provisions for contingency measures?
The maintenance plan must include contingency control measures
which will go into effect automatically to correct any future violation
of the NAAQS. These provisions must include a requirement that the
State will implement all measures contained in the nonattainment area
SIP. The August 9, 2000 LMP option memo states that the contingency
measures do not have to be fully adopted at the time of redesignation.
ADEQ has included 6 contingency measures in the maintenance plan
(see table below entitled ``Payson Area Contingency Measures'').
Payson Area Contingency Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency measures Implementing entity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revise Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-702 ADEQ.
B opacity limits from 40% to 20%.
If any PM-10 industrial source operating ADEQ.
within the maintenance area is found to be
contributing to monitored readings above the
LMP allowable limits, ADEQ will review
existing air quality permit(s) to identify
additional PM10 control measures which may
be needed. If the PM10 source does not have
a permit, the permitting authority will
determine if an air quality permit and PM10
controls are needed.
If wood burning sources are found to be ADEQ.
contributing to monitored readings above the
LMP allowable limits, ADEQ will review State
regulations and programs to determine
appropriate action.
Pave or stabilize public unpaved roads, Town of Payson and/or
vacant lots, or unpaved parking lots located Gila County.
in the PM10 maintenance area subject to
limits of statutory authority.
Continuation of Smoke Management Plan--State U.S. Forest Service, U.S.
and Federal land managers conducting Bureau of Land
prescribed burning must register with ADEQ Management, Arizona
for proposed burning activities--Arizona State Land Department,
Administrative Code (A.A.C.) R-18-2-Article ADEQ.
15 (Forest & Range Management Burns.
Review of the requirement for dust control ADEQ.
measures for material storage piles to
determine if additional action is needed
(A.A.C. R-18-2-607).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State also committed to determine whether or not violations
have been recorded within 6 months of the close of each calendar year,
and to review and determine the appropriate contingency measure(s) by
the end of the same calendar year. Finally, the State committed to
implement the selected contingency measure(s) within 1 year of
determining that a violation has occurred. We conclude that these
measures and commitments meet the contingency measure provision of CAA
Section 175A(d).
C. Redesignation Requests
1. Has Payson attained the 24-hour and annual PM10 NAAQS?
The area has attained the 24-hour standard when the average number
of expected exceedances per year is less than or equal to one, when
averaged over a three-year period. (40 CFR 50.6) To make this
determination, three consecutive years of complete ambient air quality
data were collected in accordance with Federal requirements (40 CFR
part 58, including appendices).
As discussed above, there have been no recorded exceedances of
either the annual or 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in the area in the
past 3 years. The area has attained both the annual and 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS for the past 3 years.
2. Has the area met all relevant requirements under section 110 and
Part D of the Act?
The Calcagni memo directs States to meet all of the applicable
section 110 and part D planning requirements for redesignation
purposes. EPA interprets the Act to require State adoption and EPA
approval of the applicable programs under section 110 and part D that
were due prior to the submittal of a redesignation request, before EPA
may approve a redesignation request.
Section 110(a)(2) of the Act contains general requirements for
nonattainment plans. These requirements include, but are not limited
to, submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after
reasonable notice and public hearing, provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate apparatus, methods, systems, and procedures
necessary to monitor ambient air quality, implementation of a permit
program, provisions for Part C--Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Part D--New Source Review (NSR) permit programs, criteria for
stationary source emission control measures, monitoring and reporting,
provisions for modeling, and provisions for public and local agency
participation.
Part D includes additional provisions for nonattainment areas,
listed generally in CAA section 172(c) and specifically for
PM10 in sections 188-9. These additional Part D provisions
include: implementation of RACM as expeditiously as practicable,
reasonable further progress, emissions inventories, and quantification
of growth allowances (if the State elects to establish such
allowances). See the General Preamble for further explanation of these
requirements.
For purposes of redesignation, the Arizona SIP was reviewed to
ensure that all requirements under the Act were satisfied. The Arizona
SIP was approved under section 110 of the Act as satisfying all
applicable section 110 and Part D provisions. These approvals are
codified in 40 CFR 52.123. We are approving the SIP with respect to the
special Part D provisions for PM10 nonattainment areas (CAA
sections 188-9) in Section III.A. above.
[[Page 43018]]
3. Does the Payson Area have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k)
of the Act?
We are approving in today's action the moderate area and
maintenance plan for the Payson Area, and confirming that the SIP meets
other applicable provisions of the CAA.
4. Has the State shown that the air quality improvement in the area is
permanent and enforceable?
The submittal shows that the improvements in air quality were not
due to temporary economic downturn or unusually favorable meteorology
(p. 12). On the contrary, economic growth has continued over the past
10 years since the area attained the NAAQS, and the area has
experienced the full range of weather conditions in that period. As
discussed above, attainment is the result of the establishment of
permanent and enforceable controls on fugitive dust emissions.
5. Does the area have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to
section 175A of the Act?
We are fully approving the maintenance plan, as allowed by the LMP
guidance, in Section III.B. above.
D. Conformity
The transportation conformity rule and the general conformity rule
apply to nonattainment areas and attainment areas with maintenance
plans. Both rules provide that conformity can be demonstrated by
showing that the expected emissions from planned actions are consistent
with the emissions budget for the area.
1. Transportation Conformity
Under the limited maintenance plan option, emissions budgets are
treated as essentially not constraining for the length of the
maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect that qualifying
areas would experience so much growth in that period that a NAAQS
violation would result.
While areas with maintenance plans approved under the limited
maintenance plan option are not subject to the budget test, the areas
remain subject to other transportation conformity requirements of 40
CFR Part 93, Subpart A. Thus, the metropolitan planning organization
(MPO) in the area or the State will still need to document and ensure
that: (1) Transportation plans and projects provide for timely
implementation of SIP transportation control measures (TCMs) in
accordance with 40 CFR 93.113; (2) transportation plans and projects
comply with the fiscal constraint element per 40 CFR 93.108; (3) the
MPO's interagency consultation procedures meet applicable requirements
of 40 CFR 93.105; (4) conformity of transportation plans is determined
no less frequently than every three years, and conformity of plan
amendments and transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance
with the timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104; (5) the latest
planning assumptions and emissions model are used as set forth in 40
CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111; (6) projects do not cause or contribute
to any new localized carbon monoxide or particulate matter violations,
in accordance with procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and (7)
project sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
The adequacy review period for these SIP submissions is concurrent
with the public comment period on this direct final rule. Because
limited maintenance plans do not contain budgets, the adequacy review
period for these maintenance plans serves to allow the public to
comment on whether limited maintenance is appropriate for these areas.
Interested parties may comment on the adequacy and approval of the
limited maintenance plans by submitting their comments on the proposed
rule published concurrently with this direct final rule.
Our action on the limited maintenance plans for these areas has
been announced on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/traq. Once there, click on the ``Conformity'' button, then look for
``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity.''
2. General Conformity
For Federal actions which are required to address the specific
requirements of the general conformity rule, one set of requirements
applies particularly to ensuring that emissions from the action will
not cause or contribute to new violations of the NAAQS, exacerbate
current violations, or delay timely attainment. One way that this
requirement can be met is to demonstrate that ``the total of direct and
indirect emissions from the action (or portion thereof) is determined
and documented by the State agency primarily responsible for the
applicable SIP to result in a level of emissions which, together with
all other emissions in the nonattainment area, would not exceed the
emissions budgets specified in the applicable SIP.'' 40 CFR
93.158(a)(5)(i)(A).
The decision about whether to include specific allocations of
allowable emissions increases to sources is one made by the State and
local air quality agencies. Such emissions budgets are unlike and not
to be confused with those used in transportation conformity. Emissions
budgets in transportation conformity are required to limit and restrain
emissions. Emissions budgets in general conformity allow increases in
emissions up to specified levels.
ADEQ has not chosen to include any specific emissions allocations
for Federal projects that would be subject to the provisions of general
conformity.
V. Final Action
We are approving the moderate area plan, and the maintenance plan
for the Payson Area, and we are redesignating the area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 24-hour and annual PM10
NAAQS. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the State plan and redesignate the
area if relevant adverse comments are filed. This rule will be
effective August 26, 2002, without further notice unless relevant
adverse comments are received by July 26, 2002. If we receive such
comments, this action will be withdrawn before the effective date. All
public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final
rule based on the proposed action. We will not institute a second
comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this action will be effective August 26, 2002.
V. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
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 action
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this 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 approves pre-existing requirements under State law
and does not impose
[[Page 43019]]
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 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 approves 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 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 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.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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. EPA will submit a report containing this
rule 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.
section 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 (insert date 60 days after
date of publication). Filing a petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this
rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: June 6, 2002.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
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 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(104) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(104) The following plan was submitted on March 29, 2002, by the
Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
(1) Payson Moderate Area PM10 Maintenance Plan and
Request for Redesignation to Attainment, adopted on March 29, 2002.
PART 81--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
2. In Sec. 81.303 the PM10 table is amended by revising
the entry for the Gila County (Part) to read as follows:
Sec. 81.303 Arizona.
* * * * *
Arizona PM10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Gila County (part): August 26, 2002.............. Attainment..................
Payson: T01N, sections 1-3,
10-15, 22-27, and 34-36 of
R9E; T11N, sections 1-3,
10-15, 22-27, and 34-36 of
R9E; T10-11N, R10E; T10N,
sections 4-9, 16-21, and
28-33 of R11E; T11N,
sections 4-9, 16-21, and
28-33 of R11E.
[[Page 43020]]
* * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-16104 Filed 6-25-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P