[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 8, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7069-7071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02462]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0107; FRL-9426-01-R9]


Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Maricopa County; Power Plants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department's 
(MCAQD or County) portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan 
(SIP). This revision concerns emissions of oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) and particulate matter (PM) from power plants. We are 
proposing to approve a local rule to regulate these emission sources 
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on 
this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. Elsewhere in this 
Federal Register, we are making an interim final determination to defer 
CAA sanctions associated with our previous disapproval action 
concerning the County's revision of this local rule.

DATES:  must be received on or before March 10, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0107 at https://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: Kevin Gong, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 972-3073 or by 
email at [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 did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of Rule 322?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does Rule 322 meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted 
MCAQD Rule 322 ``Power Plant Operations'' as amended on June 23, 2021, 
and submitted to the EPA on June 24, 2021. On September 25, 2021, the 
EPA determined that the submittal for MCAQD Rule 322 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?

    We approved a previous version of Rule 322 (locally revised on 
October 17, 2007) into the Arizona SIP on October 14, 2009 (74 FR 
52693). The County adopted revisions to the SIP-approved version on 
November 2, 2016, and ADEQ submitted them to us on June 22, 2017. The 
EPA disapproved that revision in a final rule published on July 20, 
2020 (85 FR 43692). If we take final action to approve the June 23, 
2021 version of Rule 322, this version will replace the previously 
approved version of this rule in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of Rule 322?

    Emissions of NOX contribute to the production of ground-
level ozone, smog and PM, which harm human health and the environment. 
Emissions of PM, including PM equal to or less than 2.5 microns in 
diameter (PM2.5) and PM equal to or less than 10 microns in 
diameter (PM10), contribute to effects that are harmful to 
human health and the environment, including premature mortality, 
aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 
function, visibility impairment, and damage to vegetation and 
ecosystems. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit 
regulations that control NOX and PM emissions. Rule 322 
regulates equipment at power plants that emit these and other 
pollutants. The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more 
information about this rule.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    Rules in the SIP 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).
    Generally, SIP rules must require reasonably available control 
technology (RACT) for each major source of NOX in ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see CAA sections 
182(b)(2) and 182(f)). The MCAQD regulates a portion of the Phoenix-
Mesa ozone nonattainment area which is classified as Moderate for the 
2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (40 CFR 
81.303). Maricopa County's ``Analysis of Reasonably Available Control 
Technology For The 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard (NAAQS) State Implementation Plan (RACT SIP),'' adopted 
December 5, 2016, submitted June 22, 2017 (the ``2016 RACT SIP''), 
found that there were major sources of NOX within the 
Maricopa County portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area 
subject to Rule 322. Accordingly, this rule must establish RACT levels 
of control for applicable major sources of NOX.
    The EPA's previous rulemaking on the 2017 version of Rule 322 found 
several deficiencies that did not allow for approval of that revision 
into the Arizona SIP. These deficiencies

[[Page 7070]]

(described further in our 2019 TSD for that rule) include the 
following:
    a. Air Pollution Control Officer discretion to approve alternative 
control strategies as RACT without further approval from the EPA.
    b. NOX emission limits for steam generating units used 
for electricity generation that were less stringent than RACT.
    c. Overly broad exemptions from certain requirements during 
emergency fuel use operations.
    d. Air Pollution Control Officer discretion to extend compliance 
deadlines for applicable units.
    e. Absence of a compliance determination requirement, such as a 
regular stack testing requirement.
    As a result of these deficiencies, the EPA finalized disapproval of 
the 2017 revision to Rule 322, which initiated offset sanctions to 
commence 18 months after the effective date of that rulemaking (August 
19, 2020), highway sanctions to commence 24 months after the effective 
date, and a requirement to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan 
(FIP) to commence 24 months after the effective date, under CAA 
sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a). If MCAQD revises Rule 322 to resolve the 
identified deficiencies and EPA approves the revision into the Arizona 
SIP, these sanctions and FIP clocks will be stopped.
    Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate 
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements 
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:

    1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 
11, 1990).
    2. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    3. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX 
Emissions from Stationary Gas Turbines,'' EPA 453/R-93-007, January 
1993.
    4. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX 
Emissions from Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers,'' EPA 
453/R-94-022, March 1994.
    5. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document--NOX 
Emissions from Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion 
Engines,'' EPA 453/R-93-032, July 1993.
    6. ``De Minimis Values for NOX RACT,'' Memorandum 
from G.T. Helms, Group Leader, Ozone Policy and Strategies Group, 
U.S. EPA, January 1, 1995.
    7. ``Cost-Effective Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT),'' Memorandum from D. Ken Berry, 
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, US. EPA, March 16, 
1994.

B. Does Rule 322 meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe that this revision to Rule 322 meets CAA requirements, 
and addresses the deficiencies we identified in our 2020 rulemaking. 
The MCAQD corrected the first deficiency (discretion for alternative 
control strategies without EPA approval) by amending the provisions 
allowing for this deviation from the RACT requirements to include the 
EPA's approval of any such alternatives into the SIP. The County also 
clarified that the only equipment currently seeking to use an 
alternative control strategy were doing so under a low use requirement 
restricting annual operations to 10 percent of their annual capacity, 
expressed as fuel input limits. We have evaluated the analysis 
supporting this approach and agree that units operating under the low 
use threshold would not find RACT to be cost effective (see our TSD for 
further discussion). Therefore, we find that this revision resolves 
this deficiency.
    The MCAQD corrected the second deficiency by including in the rule 
new NOX emission limits of 30 parts per million by volume 
(ppmv) NOX for gaseous fuel fired operations and 40 ppmv 
NOX for liquid fuel fired operations at new units. Existing 
steam generating boilers must limit NOX emissions to 0.1 
pounds per million British thermal units per hour. We believe these 
emission limits to constitute RACT for this source category, and we 
find that these revisions resolve the deficiency.
    The deficiency for emergency fuel operations (unbounded length, and 
ambiguity for testing operations) was corrected by the MCAQD through 
two revisions. The first is an annual limit of 168 hours for emergency 
fuel fired operations. The second is a clarification of the exemption 
for emergency fuel testing operations to be limited only to the period 
needed for testing. We find that these revisions resolve the deficiency 
for emergency fuel operations in Rule 322.
    The fourth deficiency (unbounded discretion for extending 
compliance deadlines) was resolved by removing the discretion of the 
Control Officer to extend the increments of progress, and therefore the 
compliance schedule. Operators of applicable non-compliant equipment 
must now submit a permit revision to the MCAQD within 18 months of 
becoming subject to the rule, and be fully compliant within 36 months 
of issuance of the final permit. We find that this revision resolves 
the deficiency for compliance deadlines in Rule 322.
    The fifth deficiency, lack of compliance determination requirements 
for NOX emissions, was resolved by specifying that 
performance tests must be conducted annually. Units that are equipped 
with continuous emission monitoring systems are not required to conduct 
performance tests, but must maintain and and test the CEMS in 
accordance with the applicable EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 60 and 40 
CFR part 75. We find that this revision resolves the deficiency for 
compliance determination requirements in Rule 322.
    The revision is otherwise consistent with relevant guidance 
regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP revisions. The TSD has more 
information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to 
fully approve the submitted Rule 322 because it fulfills all relevant 
requirements. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal 
until March 10, 2022. If we take final action to approve the submitted 
rule, our final action will incorporate this local rule into the 
federally enforceable SIP and stop the sanctions and FIP clocks that 
are associated with our previous disapproval of Rule 322.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this proposed 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 MCAQD Rule 322, ``Power Plant Operations'' as 
amended on June 23, 2021. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, 
these materials available through https://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

[[Page 7071]]

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);
     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 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 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 
nitrogen, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

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

    Dated: February 1, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2022-02462 Filed 2-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P