[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55966-55968]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25567]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0468; FRL-9971-20-Region 9]


Approval of Arizona Air Plan Revisions, Arizona Department of 
Environmental Quality

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 
(ADEQ) portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 
revision concerns emissions of lead-bearing fugitive dust from roads, 
storage piles and other activities associated with the primary copper 
smelter located in Hayden, Arizona. We are proposing to approve a state 
rule and associated appendix to regulate these emissions under the 
Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal 
and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by December 27, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2017-0468 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Christine 
Vineyard, Rulemaking Office at [email protected]. For comments 
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for 
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or 
edited from Regulations.gov. For either manner

[[Page 55967]]

of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public 
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary 
submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public 
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and 
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, 
(415) 947-4125, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and 
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule and appendix did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule and appendix?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule and appendix?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule and appendix?
    B. Do the rule and appendix meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule and Appendix
    D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule and appendix did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule and appendix addressed by this proposal with 
the dates that they were submitted by ADEQ.

                        Table 1--Submitted Rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Local agency            Rule No.            Rule title     Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADEQ.............  R18-2-B1301.01.........  Limits on Lead-     04/06/17
                                             Bearing
                                             Fugitive Dust
                                             from the
                                             Hayden Smelter.
ADEQ.............  Appendix 15............  Test Methods        04/06/17
                                             for
                                             Determining
                                             Opacity and
                                             Stabilization
                                             of Unpaved
                                             Roads.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 17, 2017 the EPA determined that the submittal for ADEQ 
Rule R18-2-B1301.01 and Appendix 15 met 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 and appendix?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 18-2-B1301.01 and Appendix 
15 in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule and appendix?

    On November 12, 2008 the EPA published a final rule revising the 
lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The revisions to 
the primary and secondary lead NAAQS were to provide increased 
protection for children and other at-risk populations against an array 
of health effects including neurological effects. Section 110(a) of the 
CAA requires States to submit regulations that control lead emissions. 
ADEQ Rule R18-2-B1302.01 and Appendix 15 establish control requirements 
and test methods for lead-bearing fugitive dust sources at the Hayden 
primary copper smelter. The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has 
more information about this rule and appendix.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule and appendix?

    SIP rules must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not 
interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment and 
reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA section 
110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control requirements in 
nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or greater emissions 
reductions (see CAA section 193). On September 3, 2014 the EPA issued a 
final rule redesignating the Hayden, Arizona area to nonattainment for 
the 2008 lead NAAQS (79 FR 52205). Under CAA section 172(c)(1), the 
Arizona SIP must provide for implementation of all reasonably available 
control measures (RACM), including reasonably available control 
technology (RACT) for lead, and must provide for attainment of the 
NAAQS in the Hayden nonattainment area. The EPA will address the 
overall RACM/RACT requirement for the Hayden lead nonattainment area 
separately, in the context of our action on the ``SIP Revision: Hayden 
Lead Nonattainment Area'' submitted by ADEQ to the EPA on March 3, 
2017. Therefore, our stringency evaluation considers whether Rule 18-2-
B1301.01 implements reasonable controls for leaded fugitive dust at the 
Hayden primary copper smelter.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements 
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:

1. ``Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of 
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (58 FR 67748, 
December 22, 1993).
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11, 
1990).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. ``Implementation of the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards Guide to Developing Reasonable Available Control Measures 
(RACM) for Controlling Lead Emissions,'' EPA-457/R-12-001, March 
2012.

B. Do the rule and appendix meet the evaluation criteria?

    We have determined that the rule and appendix are consistent with 
CAA requirements and relevant guidance regarding enforceability and SIP 
revisions. R18-2-B1301.01 establishes controls for lead-bearing 
fugitive dust emissions surrounding the Hayden copper smelter that 
include a facility-wide 20% opacity limit, wind fences for storage 
piles and chemical dust-suppression application for unpaved roads. 
Appendix 15 describes appropriate test methods to help ensure 
enforceability. We also have determined that R18-2-B1301.01 generally 
implements reasonably available controls for lead-bearing fugitive dust 
at the Hayden smelter. The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

[[Page 55968]]

C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Rule and Appendix

    The TSD describes additional revisions that we recommend for the 
next time ADEQ modifies the rule and appendix.

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
fully approve the submitted rule and appendix because they fulfill all 
relevant requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this 
proposal until December 27, 2017. If we take final action to approve 
the submitted rule and appendix, our final action will incorporate them 
into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference the ADEQ rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA 
has made, and will continue to make, these materials available through 
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the 
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority 
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical, appropriate, 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: November 16, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-25567 Filed 11-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P