[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 88 (Monday, May 10, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24829-24835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09215]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0078; FRL-10022-86-Region 9]
Finding of Failure To Attain the 2008 Lead and 2010 Sulfur
Dioxide Standards; Arizona; Hayden and Miami Nonattainment Areas
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
determine that the Hayden lead (Pb) nonattainment area (NAA) failed to
attain the 2008 Pb primary and secondary national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or ``standards'') by the applicable attainment date of
October 3, 2019. This proposed determination is based upon monitored
air quality data from November 2015-December 2018 for the 2008 Pb
NAAQS. The EPA is also proposing to determine that the Hayden and Miami
sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAs failed to attain the 2010 1-hour
SO2 primary NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of
October 4, 2018, based upon monitored air quality data from January
2015-December 2017. If the EPA finalizes these determinations as
proposed, the State of Arizona will be required to submit revisions to
the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP) that, among other elements,
provide for expeditious attainment of the 2008 Pb and 2010
SO2 standards.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by June 9, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2021-0078 at http://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Leers, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4279, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The 2008 Pb and 2010 SO2 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards
B. Designations, Classifications, and Attainment Dates for the
2008 Pb and 2010 SO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
II. Proposed Determinations and Consequences
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
C. Data Considerations and Proposed Determination
D. Consequences for Pb and SO2 Nonattainment Areas
Failing To Attain Standards by Attainment Dates
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. The 2008 Pb and 2010 SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''), the EPA
has established primary and secondary NAAQS for certain pervasive air
pollutants (referred to as ``criteria pollutants'') and conducts
periodic reviews of the NAAQS to determine whether they should be
revised or whether new NAAQS should be established. The primary NAAQS
represent ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance
of which the EPA has determined, including a margin of safety, are
requisite to protect the public health.
[[Page 24830]]
The secondary NAAQS represent ambient air quality standards the
attainment and maintenance of which the EPA has determined are
requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated
adverse effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in
the ambient air.
1. The 2008 Pb Standard
Under the CAA, the EPA must establish NAAQS for criteria
pollutants, including Pb. Pb is generally emitted in the form of
particles that are deposited in water, soil, and dust. People may be
exposed to Pb by inhaling it or by ingesting Pb-contaminated food,
water, soil, or dust. Once in the body, Pb is quickly absorbed into the
bloodstream and can result in a broad range of adverse health effects
including damage to the central nervous system, cardiovascular
function, kidneys, immune system, and red blood cells. Children are
particularly vulnerable to Pb exposure, in part because they are more
likely to ingest Pb and in part because their still-developing bodies
are more sensitive to the effects of Pb. The harmful effects to
children's developing nervous systems (including their brains) arising
from Pb exposure may include intelligence quotient (IQ) \1\ loss, poor
academic achievement, long-term learning disabilities, and an increased
risk of delinquent behavior.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ IQ is a score created by dividing a person's mental age
score, obtained by administering an intelligence test, by the
person's chronological age, both expressed in terms of years and
months. ``Glossary of Important Assessment and Measurement Terms,''
Philadelphia, PA: National Council on Measurement in Education.
2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA first established primary and secondary Pb standards in
1978 at 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) as a quarterly
average.\2\ Based on new health and scientific data, on October 15,
2008, the EPA revised the federal Pb standards to 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\
and revised the averaging time for the standards.\3\ Since the primary
and secondary Pb standards are the same, we refer to them hereafter in
this document using the singular Pb standard or NAAQS. A violation of
the 2008 Pb NAAQS occurs if any arithmetic 3-month mean concentration
is greater than 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 43 FR 46246 (October 5, 1978).
\3\ 73 FR 66964 (November 12, 2008).
\4\ 40 CFR 50.16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The 2010 SO2 Standard
Under the CAA, the EPA must also establish a NAAQS for
SO2. SO2 is primarily released to the atmosphere
through the burning of fossil fuels by power plants and other
industrial facilities. SO2 is also emitted from industrial
processes including metal extraction from ore and heavy equipment that
burn fuel with a high sulfur content. Short-term exposure to
SO2 can damage the human respiratory system and increase
breathing difficulties. Small children and people with respiratory
conditions, such as asthma, are more sensitive to the effects of
SO2. Sulfur oxides at high concentrations can also react
with compounds to form small particulates that can penetrate deeply
into the lungs and cause health problems.
The EPA first established primary SO2 standards in 1971
at 0.14 parts per million (ppm) over a 24-hour averaging period and 0.3
ppm over an annual averaging period.\5\ In June 2010, the EPA revised
the NAAQS for SO2 to provide increased protection of public
health, providing for revocation of the 1971 primary annual and 24-hour
SO2 standards for most areas of the country following area
designations under the new NAAQS.\6\ The 2010 NAAQS is 75 parts per
billion (ppb) (equivalent to 0.075 ppm) over a 1-hour averaging
period.\7\ A violation of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS occurs
when the annual 99th percentile of ambient daily maximum 1-hour average
SO2 concentrations, averaged over a 3-year period, exceeds
75 ppb.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
\6\ 40 CFR 50.4(e).
\7\ 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
\8\ 40 CFR 50.17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Designations, Classifications, and Attainment Dates for the 2008 Pb
and 2010 SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Following promulgation of any new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS.
1. Hayden 2008 Pb Nonattainment Area
The initial designations for the 2008 Pb NAAQS were established in
two rounds and were completed on November 22, 2010, and November 22,
2011.\9\ The EPA initially designated the Hayden, Arizona area as
unclassifiable due to insufficient monitoring data.\10\ In June 2013,
the EPA determined that quality assured, certified monitoring data
collected in 2012 at the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ or ``State'') Globe Highway monitor showed that the area was
violating the Pb NAAQS. Accordingly, on May 2, 2014, the EPA proposed
to redesignate the Hayden area to nonattainment for the 2008 Pb NAAQS,
and on September 3, 2014, finalized the nonattainment designation,
effective October 3, 2014.\11\ Under CAA sections 172(a)(2) and 192(a),
the attainment date for a Pb nonattainment area is the date by which
attainment can be achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than five years after the area is designated nonattainment.
Therefore, the maximum attainment date for the Hayden Pb NAA is October
3, 2019.\12\ The Hayden nonattainment area for the 2008 Pb NAAQS
includes parts of Gila and Pinal counties.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 75 FR 71033 (November 22, 2010); 76 FR 72097 (November
22, 2011).
\10\ Arizona Department of Environmental Quality's Globe Highway
monitor registered four violations of the Pb NAAQS in 2011; however,
at the time of designation the data had not been quality assured and
certified. Consequently, the EPA could not rely on those violations
as a basis for a nonattainment designation.
\11\ 79 FR 52205 (September 3, 2014).
\12\ ADEQ's ``SIP Revision: Hayden Lead Nonattainment
Area''(adopted on March 3, 2017), 18, describes ``October 2019'' as
the attainment date for the area. Accordingly, in approving this SIP
revision, 83 FR 56734 (November 14, 2018), the EPA established
October 3, 2019 as the applicable attainment date for this area.
\13\ For an exact description of the Hayden Pb NAA, refer to 40
CFR 81.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Hayden and Miami 2010 SO2 Nonattainment Areas
On August 5, 2013, the EPA finalized its first round of
designations for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS.\14\ In the 2013
action, the EPA designated 29 areas in 16 states as nonattainment for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, including the Hayden and Miami areas in
Arizona. The Hayden SO2 NAA includes parts of Gila and Pinal
counties and excludes the parts of Indian country located in the area.
The Miami SO2 NAA includes parts of Gila County and excludes
parts of Indian country within the area.\15\ The EPA's initial round of
designations for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS including the Hayden and
Miami SO2 NAAs became effective on October 4, 2013. Pursuant
to CAA sections 172(a)(2) and 192(a), the maximum attainment date for
the Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs is October 4, 2018, five years
after the effective date of the final action designating each area as
nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013).
\15\ For exact descriptions of the Hayden and Miami
SO2 NAAs, refer to 40 CFR 81.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Proposed Determination and Consequences
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
Section 179(c)(1) of the CAA requires the EPA to determine whether
a nonattainment area attained an applicable standard by the applicable
[[Page 24831]]
attainment date based on the area's air quality as of the attainment
date.
A determination of whether an area's air quality meets applicable
standards is generally based upon the most recent three years of
complete, quality-assured data gathered at established state and local
air monitoring stations (SLAMS) in a nonattainment area and entered
into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.\16\ Data from ambient
air monitors operated by state and local agencies in compliance with
the EPA monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS.\17\
Monitoring agencies annually certify that these data are accurate to
the best of their knowledge.\18\ All data are reviewed to determine the
area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R
(for Pb) and Appendix T (for SO2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ AQS is the EPA's repository of ambient air quality data.
\17\ 40 CFR 58.16.
\18\ 40 CFR 58.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We note that when determining the attainment status of
SO2 nonattainment areas, in addition to ambient monitoring
data, the EPA may also consider air quality dispersion modeling and/or
a demonstration that the control strategy in the SIP has been fully
implemented.\19\ With regard to the use of monitoring data for such
determinations, the EPA's 2014 SO2 Guidance specifically
notes that ``[i]f the EPA determines that the air quality monitors
located in the affected area are located in the area of maximum
concentration, the EPA may be able to use the data from these monitors
to make the determination of attainment without the use of air quality
modeling data.'' \20\ This language might be read to suggest that the
EPA must always assess whether the air quality monitors in the affected
area are located in the area of maximum concentration prior to using
monitoring data to determine an SO2 NAA's attainment status.
However, this language was intended to refer to a situation where the
EPA is considering making a determination that the area has attained
the NAAQS based on a finding that all of the monitoring sites within
the affected area had an attaining design value for the relevant
period. As described in section II.C of this notice, in this instance,
the monitoring sites in the Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs did
not have attaining design values for the relevant period. Consequently,
even if the monitoring sites are not located in the area of maximum
concentration, any monitors that would be located in the area of
maximum concentration could not record concentrations lower than those
recorded at the existing monitors at the Hayden and Miami sites.
Accordingly, since the Hayden and Miami monitors are violating the
NAAQS, it is not necessary to consider whether the monitors are located
in the area of maximum concentration in order to determine that the
Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs did not attain the 2010
SO2 NAAQS by the October 4, 2018 attainment date. However,
in any future assessment of whether these areas have attained the
NAAQS, the EPA may assess whether the monitors are located in the area
of maximum concentration and may also consider modeling and/or control
implementation information, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ EPA, Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area
SIP Submissions (April 2014) (``2014 SO2 Guidance''), 49.
\20\ Id., 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Interpretation of the 2008 Pb Standard
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.16 and in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50 Appendix R, the 2008 Pb standard is met when the design value
is less than or equal to 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\ at each eligible monitoring
site within the area. The Pb design value at each eligible monitoring
site is the maximum valid 3-month arithmetic mean Pb concentration
calculated over three years. The 3-month mean Pb concentrations are
rounded to the nearest hundredth [micro]g/m\3\ for comparison to the
NAAQS. Data completeness requirements for a given 3-month period are
met if the average of the data capture rate of the three constituent
monthly means is greater than or equal to 75 percent.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R sections (1)c, 4(c), and
5(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Interpretation of the 2010 SO2 Standard
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.17 and in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50 Appendix T, the 2010 1-hour annual SO2 standard is
met when the design value is less than or equal to 75 ppb. Design
values are calculated by computing the three-year average of the annual
99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations.\22\ When
calculating 1-hour primary standard design values, the calculated
design values are rounded to the nearest whole number or 1 ppb by
convention. An SO2 1-hour primary standard design value is
valid if it encompasses three consecutive calendar years of complete
data. A year is considered complete when all four quarters are
complete, and a quarter is complete when at least 75 percent of the
sampling days are complete. A sampling day is considered complete if 75
percent of the hourly concentration values are reported; this includes
data affected by exceptional events that have been approved for
exclusion by the Administrator.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ As defined in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T section 1(c),
daily maximum 1-hour values refer to the maximum 1-hour
SO2 concentration values measured from midnight to
midnight that are used in the NAAQS computations.
\23\ See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T sections 1(c), 3(b), 4(c),
and 5(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
Section 110(a)(2)(B)(i) of the CAA requires states to establish and
operate air monitoring networks to compile data on ambient air quality
for all criteria pollutants. The EPA's monitoring requirements are
specified by regulation in 40 CFR part 58. These requirements are
applicable to state, and where delegated, local air monitoring agencies
that operate criteria pollutant monitors. The regulations in 40 CFR
part 58 establish specific requirements for operating air quality
surveillance networks to measure ambient concentrations of Pb,
including requirements for measurement methods, network design, quality
assurance procedures, and in the case of large urban areas, the minimum
number of monitoring sites designated as SLAMS.
In sections 4.4 and 4.5 of Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58, the EPA
specifies minimum monitoring requirements for Pb and SO2,
respectively, to operate at SLAMS. SLAMS produce data that are eligible
for comparison with the NAAQS, and therefore, the monitor must be an
approved federal reference method (FRM), federal equivalent method
(FEM), or approved regional method (ARM) monitor.
The minimum number of required Pb SLAMS is described in section 4.5
of Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58. There must be at least one source-
oriented SLAMS site located to measure the maximum Pb concentration in
ambient air resulting from each non-airport Pb source that emits 0.50
or more tons per year (tpy) and from each airport that emits 1.0 tpy or
more based on either the most recent National Emission Inventory (NEI)
or other scientifically justifiable methods and data. According to the
2017 NEI, two non-airport sources in Gila County, Arizona exceeded the
0.50 tpy threshold and therefore required source-oriented Pb
monitoring: The Asarco LLC Hayden Smelter and the Freeport-McMoRan
Miami Smelter.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Arizona facility-level Pb emissions data from the 2017 NEI
may be accessed on the EPA NEI website at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data and
are included in our docket via an Excel spreadsheet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 24832]]
The minimum number of required SO2 SLAMS is described in
sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 of Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58. According to
section 4.4.2, the minimum number of required SO2 monitoring
sites is determined by the population weighted emissions index for each
state's core based statistical area. Section 4.4.3 describes additional
monitors that may be required by an EPA regional administrator.
Under 40 CFR 58.10, states are required to submit annual network
plans (ANP) for ambient air monitoring networks for approval by the
EPA. Within the Hayden Pb, Hayden SO2, and Miami
SO2 NAAs, ADEQ is responsible for assuring that each area
meets air quality monitoring requirements. ADEQ submits annual
monitoring network plans to the EPA that describe the various
monitoring sites operated by ADEQ.\25\ Each ANP discusses the status of
the air monitoring network as required under 40 CFR 58.10 and addresses
the operation and maintenance of the air monitoring network in the
previous year. The EPA regularly reviews these ANPs for compliance with
the applicable reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 58.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See, e.g., ``State of Arizona Air Monitoring Network Plan
for the Year 2019.'' Copies of Arizona's ANPs for 2016-2019 are
included in the docket.
\26\ See, e.g., letter dated November 8, 2019, from Gwen
Yoshimura, Manager, EPA Region IX, Air Quality Analysis Office, to
Daniel Czecholinksi, Acting Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ.
Copies of EPA letters responding to Arizona's ANPs for 2016-2019 are
included in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also conducts regular ``technical systems audits'' (TSAs)
during which we review and inspect ambient air monitoring programs to
assess compliance with applicable regulations concerning the
collection, analysis, validation, and reporting of ambient air quality
data.\27\ In our 2018 TSA of ADEQ, we concluded that ADEQ's ambient air
monitoring network meets or exceeds the requirements for the minimum
number of SLAMS for all criteria pollutants, including for Pb in the
Hayden NAA and for SO2 in the Hayden and Miami NAAs.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See 40 CFR part 58, appendix A, section 2.5.
\28\ See letter dated April 25, 2019, from Elizabeth Adams,
Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Timothy Franquist,
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Hayden Pb Monitoring Network
ADEQ operated two Pb SLAMS during the November 2015-December 2018
data period within the Hayden Pb NAA: Globe Highway (AQS ID 04-007-
1002) and Hillcrest (AQS ID 04-025-8104). The Globe Highway site is
located along State Route 77 in Winkelman. The Hillcrest site, which
began monitoring on January 1, 2016, is located at 123 S. Hillcrest
Avenue in Hayden.\29\ The primary and secondary monitors at each Pb
monitoring site are FEM monitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Refer to Appendices C and D of the ``State of Arizona Air
Monitoring Network Plan For the Year 2019'' (July 2019) for detailed
descriptions and locations of each Pb monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of ADEQ's ANPs for the years 2016-2019 \30\ and
the 2018 TSA of ADEQ's monitoring program, we propose to find that the
monitoring network in the Hayden Pb NAA is adequate for the purpose of
collecting ambient Pb concentration data for use in determining whether
the Hayden Pb NAA attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS by the October 3, 2019
attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ ADEQ's ANPs for 2016-2019 address the operation and
maintenance of their air monitoring network for 2015-2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Hayden SO2 and Miami SO2 Monitoring Networks
During the 2015-2017 data period, ADEQ operated one SO2
SLAMS in the Hayden SO2 NAA: Hayden Old Jail (AQS ID 04-007-
1001); and three SO2 SLAMS in the Miami SO2 NAA:
Miami Ridgeline (AQS ID 04-007-0009); Miami Jones Ranch (AQS ID 04-007-
0011); and Miami Townsite (AQS ID 04-007-0012). The Hayden Old Jail
site is located on Canyon Drive and Kennecott Avenue in Hayden. The
three SO2 SLAMS in the Miami SO2 NAA are located
in Miami. The Miami Ridgeline site is located on 4030 Linden Street;
\31\ the Miami Jones Ranch site is located on Cherry Flats Road; and
the Miami Townsite site is located on Sullivan Street and Davis Canyon
Road. The primary monitors at each of these sites are FEM monitors.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The Miami Ridgeline site was closed on September 6, 2017,
with EPA approval. Letter dated September 19, 2017, from Elizabeth
Adams, Acting Director, Air Division, EPA Region IX, to Timothy S.
Franquist, Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of ADEQ's ANPs for the years 2016-2018 \32\ and
the 2018 TSA of ADEQ's monitoring program, we propose to find that the
monitoring networks in the Hayden SO2 and Miami
SO2 NAAs are adequate for the purpose of collecting ambient
SO2 concentration data for use in determining whether each
nonattainment area attained the 2010 SO2 NAAQS by the
October 4, 2018 attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ ADEQ's ANPs for 2016-2018 address the operation and
maintenance of their air monitoring network for 2015-2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Data Considerations and Proposed Determination
Under 40 CFR 58.15, monitoring agencies must certify, on an annual
basis, data collected at all SLAMS and at all FRM, FEM, and ARM special
purpose monitor stations that meet EPA quality assurance requirements.
In doing so, monitoring agencies must certify that the previous year of
ambient concentration and quality assurance data are completely
submitted to AQS and that the ambient concentration data are accurate
to the best of their knowledge. ADEQ annually certifies that the data
it submits to AQS are quality assured, including data collected by ADEQ
at monitoring sites in the Hayden Pb NAA, Hayden SO2 NAA,
and Miami SO2 NAA.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See, e.g., letter from Timothy S. Franquist, Director, Air
Quality Division ADEQ, to Gwen Yoshimura, Manager, Air Quality
Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, certifying calendar year 2018
ambient air quality data and quality assurance data, dated May 1,
2019. Copies of annual certification letters from 2016-2019 are
included in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Pb Data Considerations
As noted in Section II.A of this notice, CAA section 179(c)(1)
requires the EPA to determine whether a nonattainment area attained an
applicable standard by the applicable attainment date, based on the
area's air quality ``as of the attainment date.'' For the Hayden Pb
NAA, for reasons discussed in Section I.B.1 of this notice, the
applicable attainment date is October 3, 2019, with respect to the 2008
Pb NAAQS. In accordance with Appendix R to 40 CFR part 50, compliance
with the Pb NAAQS is determined based on data from 36 consecutive valid
3-month periods (i.e., 38 months, or a 3-year calendar period and the
preceding November and December). Considering the applicable attainment
date of October 3, 2019, for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, we must review the data
collected in the Hayden Pb NAA from November 1, 2015-December 31, 2018.
The Pb data collected in the Hayden Pb NAA from November 1, 2015-
December 31, 2018 have been certified by ADEQ.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have also evaluated the completeness of these data in accordance
with the requirements of 40 CFR part 50 Appendix R. As detailed in 40
CFR part 50 Appendix R section 4(c)(i), a 3-month mean Pb value is
determined to be valid (i.e., meets data completeness requirements) if
the average of the data capture rate of the three constituent monthly
means is greater than or equal to 75 percent. The data collected by
ADEQ at the Globe Highway monitoring site meet this
[[Page 24833]]
completeness criterion for each 3-month period from November 2015-
December 2018. The Hillcrest monitoring site began collecting data on
January 1, 2016. Three full months of data are therefore not available
for the 3-month periods from November 2015-January 2016 and December
2015-February 2016. The data collected by ADEQ at the Hillcrest
monitoring site meet the Pb completeness criterion for each of the 34
available 3-month periods from January 2016-December 2018.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See footnote a to Table 1 of this document for a discussion
of how we considered the data in these periods after initiation of
the Hillcrest monitoring site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Pb Data
The Pb design values at both SLAMS within the Hayden Pb NAA for the
relevant 36 consecutive 3-month periods beginning November 2015 through
December 2018 are presented in Table 1 of this notice. Table 1
demonstrates that the Pb design values for the November 2015-December
2018 data period are greater than 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\ at the Globe
Highway and Hillcrest monitoring sites.
Table 1--2016-2018 Pb Design Values for the Hayden Pb Nonattainment Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highest 3-month rolling average Pb design
------------------------------------------------ value
Site (AQS ID) ([micro]g/
2016 2017 2018 m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Globe Highway (04-007-1002)..................... 0.14 0.21 0.15 0.21
Hillcrest (04-007-1003)......................... \a\ 0.31 0.28 0.23 0.31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Three full months of data are not available for the first two 3-month periods (i.e., November 2015-January
2016 and December 2015-February 2016) at the Hillcrest Monitoring site. However, based on the ``above NAAQS
level'' test described in 40 CFR part 58, Appendix R, Section 4(c)(ii)(A), the February 2016 3-month rolling
average of 0.31 ug/m\3\ is considered valid.
Source: EPA, Design Value Report, November 3, 2020.
The 2018 annual design value site (i.e., the site with the highest
design value based on November 2015-December 2018 data) is the
Hillcrest site with a Pb design value of 0.31 [micro]g/m\3\. Because
the Hillcrest monitoring site began operation on January 1, 2016, three
full months of monitoring data are not available for the 3-month
periods from November 2015-January 2016 and December 2015-February
2016. The EPA applied the ``above NAAQS level'' test described in 40
CFR 50 Appendix R, Section 4(c)(ii)(A) to determine if the 3-month
rolling average ending February 2016 could be considered valid. The 3-
month period passed the diagnostic test described therein. Therefore,
the February 2016 3-month rolling average of 0.31 [micro]g/m\3\ is
considered valid.
For the area to attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS by October 3, 2019, the Pb
design value reflecting data from November 2015-December 2018 at each
eligible monitoring site must be equal to or less than 0.15 [micro]g/
m\3\. As shown in Table 1, the 2018 design values at both sites in the
Hayden Pb NAA are greater than 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\. Therefore, based on
quality-assured and certified data for November 2015-December 2018, we
are proposing to determine that the Hayden Pb NAA failed to attain the
2008 Pb standard by the October 3, 2019 attainment date.
3. SO2 Data Considerations
For the Miami and Hayden SO2 NAAs, for reasons discussed
in section I.B.2 of this notice, the applicable attainment date is
October 4, 2018. In accordance with Appendix T to 40 CFR part 50,
determinations of SO2 NAAQS compliance are based on three
consecutive calendar years of data. To determine the air quality as of
the attainment date in each nonattainment area, we must review the data
collected during the three calendar years immediately preceding the
attainment date for the Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs, or
January 1, 2015-December 31, 2017.
The SO2 data for the Hayden and Miami SO2
NAAs from January 1, 2015-December 31, 2017, have been certified by
ADEQ. We have also evaluated the completeness of these data in
accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T. The
data collected by ADEQ meet the quarterly completeness criterion for
all 12 quarters in the three calendar years preceding the attainment
date at the Hayden Old Jail and Miami Jones Ranch SO2
monitoring sites. The data collected by ADEQ in the three calendar
years preceding the attainment date meet the quarterly completeness
criteria for only 11 out of 12 quarters at the Miami Townsite
SO2 monitor and 10 out of 12 quarters at the Miami Ridgeline
SO2 monitor. The Miami Townsite SO2 monitor
collected only three quarters of complete data in 2016 because a
portion of the data collected in the 1st quarter of 2016 (January 2016-
March 2016) was invalidated for not meeting quality assurance
requirements. In 2017, the Miami Ridgeline monitor did not meet
completeness criteria for the 2nd quarter (April 2017-June 2017)
because a portion of data was not collected due to a collection error
and machine malfunction, nor for the 4th quarter (October 2017-December
2017) because the site shut down on September 26, 2017.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See the March 22, 2021 AQS Raw Data Report for
SO2 monitors in the Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs
showing hourly data from the Miami Townsite and Miami Ridgeline
monitors throughout 2016 and 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. SO2 Data
The 1-hour SO2 design values at each monitoring site
within the Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs for the 2015-2017
period are presented in Table 2. Table 2 demonstrates that the 1-hour
SO2 design values for the 2015-2017 period are greater than
75 ppb at each eligible monitoring site.
[[Page 24834]]
Table 2--2015-2017 1-Hour Design Values for the Hayden and Miami SO2 Nonattainment Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour
average 1-hour design Design value
Site (AQS ID) ------------------------------------------------ value (ppb) valid?
2015 2016 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hayden Old Jail (04-007-1001).... 246 359 280 295 Yes.
Miami Ridgeline (04-007-0009).... 171 120 \a\ 99 130 No.
Miami Townsite (04-007-0012)..... 231 \b\ 110 135 159 Yes.
Miami Jones Ranch (04-007-0011).. 242 150 270 221 Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ The Miami Ridgeline monitor failed to meet completeness criteria for the 2nd quarter of 2017 (April 2017-
June 2017) and for the 4th quarter of 2017 (October 2017-December 2017).
\b\ The Miami Townsite monitor had only three quarters of complete data in 2016 because a portion of the data
collected in the 1st quarter of 2016 was invalidated for not meeting quality assurance requirements.
Source: EPA, Design Value Report, November 30, 2020.
The data in Table 2 demonstrate that one site in the Hayden
SO2 NAA and two sites in the Miami SO2 NAA failed
to attain the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date of October 4, 2018, while a third site in the Miami
NAA, the Ridgeline monitor, did not have a valid design value for this
period. Though the annual 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour average
at the Miami Townsite monitor did not meet applicable completeness
criteria for all three years in the 2015-2017 data period, the 3-year
design value for Miami Townsite was deemed valid due to meeting the
criteria in 40 CFR part 50 Appendix T, section 3(c)(i), which requires
that ``at least 75 percent of the days in each quarter of each of three
consecutive years have at least one reported hourly value, and the
design value calculated according to the procedures specified in
section 5 is above the level of the primary 1-hour standard.'' The 3-
year design value for Miami Ridgeline is not considered valid because
the site did not meet the conditions in 40 CFR part 50 Appendix T,
section 3(c)(i), (ii), or (iii) to allow for incomplete design values
to be considered valid.
The annual design value site in each NAA is the site with the
highest design value based on 2015-2017 data. In the Hayden
SO2 NAA, the annual design value site is the Hayden Old Jail
site with a 1-hour SO2 design value of 295 ppb. In the Miami
SO2 NAA, the annual design value site is the Miami Jones
Ranch site with a 1-hour SO2 design value of 221 ppb.
For an area to attain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS by the October
4, 2018 attainment date, the design value based upon monitored air
quality data from 2015-2017 at each eligible monitoring site must be
equal to or less than 75 ppb for the 1-hour standard. Table 2 shows
that the design values at each monitoring site in the Hayden and Miami
SO2 NAAs exceed 75 ppb. Therefore, based on quality-assured
and certified data for the 2015-2017 data period, we are proposing to
determine that both the Hayden SO2 NAA and Miami
SO2 NAA failed to attain the 2010 1-hour SO2
standard by the October 4, 2018 attainment date.
D. Consequences for Pb and SO2 Nonattainment Areas Failing To Attain
Standards by Attainment Dates
The consequences for Pb and SO2 nonattainment areas for
failing to attain the standards by the applicable attainment date are
set forth in CAA section 179(d). Under section 179(d), a state must
submit a SIP revision for the area meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 110 and 172, the latter of which requires, among other
elements, a demonstration of attainment and reasonable further progress
and contingency measures. In addition, under CAA section 179(d)(2), the
SIP revision must include such additional measures as the EPA may
reasonably prescribe, including all measures that can be feasibly
implemented in the area in light of technological achievability, costs,
and any non-air quality and other air quality-related health and
environmental impacts. In this case, the dominant source of Pb and
SO2 emissions in the Hayden Pb and SO2 NAAs is
the Asarco Hayden Smelter, and the dominant source of SO2
emissions in the Miami SO2 NAA is the Freeport-McMoRan Miami
Smelter. Due to the unique nature of these two facilities, which are
the only two batch-process primary copper smelters in the country, we
do not have adequate information to propose specific additional
controls at this time. However, we are seeking comment on what
additional measures could be feasibly implemented at these facilities
in light of technological achievability, costs, and any non-air quality
and other air quality-related health and environmental impacts. We also
expect that information concerning such potential additional control
measures would be collected by ADEQ as part of its development of SIP
revisions to address the requirements that would be triggered by a
final finding of failure to attain for these areas.
The state is required to submit the SIP revision within one year
after the EPA publishes a final action in the Federal Register
determining that the nonattainment area failed to attain the applicable
Pb or SO2 standard. We note that on November 10, 2020, the
EPA published an action partially disapproving the 2010 SO2
attainment plan for the Hayden nonattainment area.\37\ Although a final
finding of failure to attain will not eliminate the state's obligation
to address the disapproved elements of its prior plan submittal, the
EPA anticipates that Arizona's submission of a new, approvable
attainment plan in response to this finding would also satisfy these
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 85 FR 71547.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to triggering requirements for a new SIP submittal, a
final determination that a nonattainment area failed to attain the
NAAQS by the attainment date would trigger the implementation of
contingency measures adopted under 172(c)(9).
Under CAA sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2), the new attainment date
for each nonattainment area is the date by which attainment can be
achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years
after the EPA publishes a final action in the Federal Register
determining that the nonattainment area failed to attain the applicable
Pb or SO2 standard.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Pursuant to CAA sections 172(a)(2)(D) and 192(a), the
attainment date extension provision under section 172(a)(2)(A) does
not apply to the Pb or SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 24835]]
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
Under CAA section 179(c)(1), the EPA proposes to determine that the
Hayden Pb NAA failed to attain the 2008 Pb standard by the applicable
attainment date of October 3, 2019. Under CAA section 179(c)(1), the
EPA also proposes to determine that the Hayden SO2 NAA and
the Miami SO2 NAA failed to attain the 2010 1-hour
SO2 standard by the applicable attainment date of October 4,
2018. If finalized as proposed, the State of Arizona would be required
under CAA section 179(d) to submit revisions to the SIP for the Hayden
Pb NAA, Hayden SO2 NAA, and Miami SO2 NAA. The
required SIP revision for each area must, among other elements,
demonstrate expeditious attainment of the standards within the time
period prescribed by CAA section 179(d). If finalized as proposed, the
SIP revisions required under CAA section 179(d) would be due for
submittal to the EPA no later than one year after the publication date
of the final action.
The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this notice. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
for the next 30 days. We will consider these comments before taking
final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and therefore
was not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA because it does not contain any information
collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This
proposed action, if finalized, would require the state to adopt and
submit SIP revisions to satisfy CAA requirements and would not itself
directly regulate any small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action itself
imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments,
or the private sector. This action proposes to determine that the
Hayden Pb NAA and the Hayden and Miami SO2 NAAs failed to
attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment dates. If finalized, this
determination would trigger existing statutory timeframes for the State
to submit SIP revisions. Such a determination in and of itself does not
impose any federal intergovernmental mandate.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will 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.
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. The proposed finding of failure to attain the Pb
and SO2 NAAQS does not apply to tribal areas, and the
proposed rule would not impose a burden on Indian reservation lands or
other areas where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction within the Hayden Pb, Hayden SO2 and
Miami SO2 nonattainment areas. Thus, this proposed 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. Nonetheless, the EPA has notified the San Carlos
Apache Tribe of the San Carlos Reservation, which borders the eastern
boundary of the Hayden Pb and Hayden SO2 NAAs, of the
proposed action.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This proposed action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because the effect of this proposed
action, if finalized, would be to trigger additional planning
requirements under the CAA. This proposed action does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because
it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
effect of this proposed action, if finalized, would be to trigger
additional planning requirements under the CAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Pollution, Sulfur
dioxide.
Dated: April 23, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-09215 Filed 5-7-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P