82 FR 13084 - Approval of Arizona Air Plan Revisions, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Maricopa County Air Quality Department
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 45 (March 9, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 45 (March 9, 2017)
| Page Range | 13084-13086 | |
| FR Document | 2017-04683 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 45 (Thursday, March 9, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 13084-13086] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-04683] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0041; FRL-9958-92-Region 9] Approval of Arizona Air Plan Revisions, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Maricopa County Air Quality Department AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and Maricopa County Air Quality District (MCAQD) portions of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions were submitted by ADEQ in response to EPA's May 22, 2015, finding of substantial inadequacy and SIP call for certain provisions in the SIP related to affirmative defenses applicable to excess emissions during startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) events. EPA is proposing approval of the SIP revisions because the Agency has determined that they are in accordance with the requirements for SIP provisions under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). DATES: Any comments must arrive by April 10, 2017. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09- OAR-2017-0041 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief 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 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 [[Page 13085]] 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. What action is the EPA proposing today? II. What is the background for the EPA's proposed action? III. Why is the EPA proposing this action? IV. Proposed Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What action is EPA proposing today? The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Arizona SIP. The revisions will remove from the ADEQ and MCAQD portions of the Arizona SIP provisions related to affirmative defenses that sources could assert in the event of enforcement actions for violations of SIP requirements during SSM events. Removal of the affirmative defense provisions from the SIP will make the ADEQ and MCAQD portions of the SIP consistent with CAA requirements with respect to this issue. ADEQ and MCAQD are retaining the affirmative defenses solely for state law purposes, outside of the SIP. Removal of the affirmative defenses from the SIP is also consistent with the EPA policy for exclusion of ``state law only'' provisions from SIPs, and will serve to minimize any potential confusion about the inapplicability of the affirmative defense provisions in federal court enforcement actions. Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates on which each rule was rescinded by the ADEQ or MCAQD and submitted by the ADEQ in response to EPA's final action entitled ``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction,'' 80 FR 33839 (June 12, 2015), hereafter referred to as the ``SSM SIP Action.'' Table 1--Submitted Rules ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Local agency Rule No. Rule title Rescinded Submitted ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADEQ............................... R18-2-310 Affirmative Defense for 09/07/16 11/17/16 Excess Emissions Due to Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown. MCAQD.............................. 140 Excess Emissions........... 08/17/16 11/18/16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On December 15, 2016 and December 21, 2016, respectively, the EPA determined that the submittals with respect to ADEQ R18-2-310 and MCAQD Rule 140 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review of the submittals for approvability in accordance with applicable CAA requirements. II. What is the background for the EPA's proposed action? On June 12, 2015, pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5), the EPA published the final SSM SIP Action finding that certain SIP provisions in thirty-six states were substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements and called on those states to submit SIP revisions to address those inadequacies. 80 FR 33839. As required by the CAA, the EPA established a reasonable deadline (not to exceed 18 months) by which the affected states must submit such SIP revisions. In accordance with the SSM SIP Action, states were required to submit corrective revisions to their SIPs by November 22, 2016. The EPA's reasoning, legal authority, and responsibility under the CAA for issuing the SIP call to Arizona can be found in the SSM SIP Action. In the SSM SIP Action, the EPA determined that two provisions in ADEQ Rule R18-2-310, which provide affirmative defenses for excess emissions during malfunctions (AAC Sec. R18-2-310(B)) and for excess emissions during startup or shutdown (AAC Sec. R18-2-310(C)) were substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements. Specifically, AAC Sec. R18-2-310(B) and AAC Sec. R18-2-310(C) contain affirmative defense provisions that operate to alter or affect the jurisdiction of federal courts in the event of an enforcement action, contrary to the enforcement structure of the CAA in section 113 and section 304. 80 FR 33971 (June 12, 2015). In the SSM SIP Action, the EPA also determined that comparable provisions in the MCAQD portion of the SIP were substantially inadequate. MCAQD Regulations provided affirmative defenses for excess emissions during malfunctions (MCAQD Regulation 3, Rule 140, Sec. 401) and for excess emissions during startup or shutdown (MCAQD Regulation 3, Rule 140, Sec. 402). These provisions in MCAQD Rule 140 are similar to the affirmative defense provisions in ADEQ R18-2-310. The EPA concluded that these MCAQD provisions operate to alter or affect the jurisdiction of federal courts in the event of an enforcement action, contrary to the enforcement structure of the CAA in section 113 and section 304. See 80 FR 33972 (June 12, 2015). On November 17 and 18, 2016, ADEQ made timely submittals in response to the SSM SIP Action. As noted above, the EPA found these submittals complete on December 15 and 16, 2016. In the submittals, ADEQ is requesting that EPA revise the Arizona SIP by removal of AAC R18-2-310 and MCAQD Rule 140 in their entirety, thereby removing the affirmative defense provisions from the Arizona SIP. This approach is consistent with the EPA's interpretation of CAA requirements for SIP provisions. III. Why is the EPA proposing this action? In the SSM SIP Action, the EPA made a finding of substantial inadequacy and issued a SIP call with respect to ADEQ AAC Sec. Sec. R18-2-310(B) and R18-2-310(C) and MCAQD Rule 140 Sec. Sec. 401 and 402, and issued a SIP call with respect to these provisions pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5). In response, ADEQ made SIP submittals requesting the EPA to remove AAC R18-2-310 and MCAQD Rule 140 from the Arizona SIP in their entirety. Affirmative defense provisions like these are inconsistent with CAA requirements and removal of these provisions would strengthen the SIP. Today's action, if finalized, would remove the affirmative defense provisions from the ADEQ and MCAQD portions of the EPA-approved SIP for Arizona. The EPA is proposing to find that these revisions are consistent with CAA requirements and that they adequately address the specific SIP deficiencies that the EPA identified in the SSM SIP Action with respect to the ADEQ and MCAQD portions of the Arizona SIP. [[Page 13086]] IV. Proposed Action The EPA is proposing to approve the Arizona SIP revisions removing ADEQ R18-2-310 and MCAQD Rule 140 from the ADEQ and MCAQD portions of the Arizona SIP. The EPA is proposing approval of the SIP revisions because the Agency has determined that they are in accordance with the requirements for SIP provisions under the CAA. The EPA is not reopening the SSM SIP Action in this action and is only taking comment on whether this SIP revision is consistent with CAA requirements and whether it addresses the identified substantial inadequacy in the specific Arizona SIP provisions identified in the SSM SIP Action. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve SIP submissions that comply 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 Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state requests 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); 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 Clean Air Act; 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, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: January 18, 2017. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 2017-04683 Filed 3-8-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![13084 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 45 / Thursday, March 9, 2017 / Proposed Rules
33 CFR Part 165 Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;
33 CFR 1.05–1; 6.04–1, 6.04–6,and 160.5;
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation ■ 2. Revise paragraph (c) to read as Department of Homeland Security Delegation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping follows: No. 0170.1.
requirements, Security measures,
* * * * *
Waterways. ■ 4. Add new section 8.4 and 8.5 to the
For the reasons discussed in the (c) Effective date. This section is in
Table at § 165.173.
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to effect biennially on a date and times
amend 33 CFR parts 100 and 165 as published in the Local Notice To § 165.173 Safety Zones for annually
follows: Mariners. recurring marine events held in Coast
Guard Southeastern New England Captain
PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION of the Port Zone.
NAVIGABLE WATERS AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS * * * * *
■ 1. The authority citation for Part 100 ■ 3. The authority citation for Part 165
continues to read as follows: continues to read as follows:
8.4 Fall River Grand Prix ............. • Event Type: Offshore powerboat race.
• Date: One weekend (Friday, Saturday, & Sunday) in August as announced in the Local Notice to Mari-
ners.
• Time: Approximately 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily
• Location: Taunton River, Massachusetts, in the vicinity Fall River and Somerset, MA.
• Safety Zone Dimension: Mt Hope Bay and the Taunton River navigation channel from approximately Mt
Hope Bay buoy R10 southwest of Brayton Point channel, and extending approximately two miles to the
northeast up to and including Mt Hope Bay buoy C17 north of the Braga Bridge. The safety zone is encom-
passed by the following coordinates (NAD 83):
Corner Latitude Longitude
SW. 41°41.40′ N. 71°11.15′ W.
NW. 41°41.48′ N. 71°11.15′ W.
SE. 41°42.33′ N. 71°09.40′ W.
NE. 41°42.42′ N. 71°09.47′ W.
8.5 Cape Cod Bay Challenge ..... • Event Type: Paddleboard excursion.
• Date: One weekend day (Saturday or Sunday) in August.
• Time: Approximately 4:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
• Location: Departing from Scusset Beach, Sandwich, MA, and transiting to Wellfleet Harbor, Wellfleet,
MA.
• Position: A line drawn from Scusset Beach at approximate position 41°47′ N., 70°30′ W., to Wellfleet
Harbor at approximate position 41°53′ N., 70°02′ W. (NAD 83).
• Safety Zone Dimension: Approximately 500 yards extending in each direction from the line described
above.
* * * * * revisions to the Arizona Department of comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
Dated: February 22, 2017. Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and follow the online instructions for
Richard J. Schultz, Maricopa County Air Quality District submitting comments. Once submitted,
(MCAQD) portions of the Arizona State comments cannot be removed or edited
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Southeastern New England. Implementation Plan (SIP). These from Regulations.gov. For either manner
revisions were submitted by ADEQ in of submission, the EPA may publish any
[FR Doc. 2017–04563 Filed 3–8–17; 8:45 am]
response to EPA’s May 22, 2015, finding comment received to its public docket.
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
of substantial inadequacy and SIP call Do not submit electronically any
for certain provisions in the SIP related information you consider to be
to affirmative defenses applicable to Confidential Business Information (CBI)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION excess emissions during startup, or other information whose disclosure is
AGENCY shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) restricted by statute. Multimedia
events. EPA is proposing approval of the submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
40 CFR Part 52
SIP revisions because the Agency has accompanied by a written comment.
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0041; FRL–9958–92– determined that they are in accordance The written comment is considered the
Region 9] with the requirements for SIP provisions official comment and should include
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the discussion of all points you wish to
Approval of Arizona Air Plan make. The EPA will generally not
Act).
Revisions, Arizona Department of consider comments or comment
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Environmental Quality and Maricopa DATES: Any comments must arrive by contents located outside of the primary
County Air Quality Department April 10, 2017. submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
AGENCY: Environmental Protection ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, other file sharing system). For
Agency (EPA). identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– additional submission methods, please
ACTION: Proposed rule. OAR–2017–0041 at http:// contact the person identified in the FOR
www.regulations.gov, or via email to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office For the full EPA public comment policy,
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve Chief at Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For information about CBI or multimedia
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:52 Mar 08, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM 09MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_13129/page/1.svg)
![13086 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 45 / Thursday, March 9, 2017 / Proposed Rules
IV. Proposed Action Technology Transfer and Advancement DATES: Any comments must arrive by
The EPA is proposing to approve the Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because April 10, 2017.
Arizona SIP revisions removing ADEQ application of those requirements would ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
R18–2–310 and MCAQD Rule 140 from be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
the ADEQ and MCAQD portions of the and OAR–2017–0028 at http://
Arizona SIP. The EPA is proposing • Does not provide the EPA with the www.regulations.gov, or via email to
approval of the SIP revisions because discretionary authority to address kelly.thomasp@epa.gov. For comments
the Agency has determined that they are disproportionate human health or submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
in accordance with the requirements for environmental effects with practical, online instructions for submitting
SIP provisions under the CAA. The EPA appropriate, and legally permissible comments. Once submitted, comments
is not reopening the SSM SIP Action in methods under Executive Order 12898 cannot be removed or edited from
this action and is only taking comment (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Regulations.gov. For either manner of
on whether this SIP revision is In addition, the SIP is not approved to submission, the EPA may publish any
consistent with CAA requirements and apply on any Indian reservation land or comment received to its public docket.
whether it addresses the identified in any other area where the EPA or an Do not submit electronically any
substantial inadequacy in the specific Indian tribe has demonstrated that a information you consider to be
Arizona SIP provisions identified in the tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Confidential Business Information (CBI)
SSM SIP Action. Indian country, the rule does not have or other information whose disclosure is
tribal implications and will not impose restricted by statute. Multimedia
V. Statutory and Executive Order submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
substantial direct costs on tribal
Reviews accompanied by a written comment.
governments or preempt tribal law as
Under the Clean Air Act, the specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 The written comment is considered the
Administrator is required to approve FR 67249, November 9, 2000). official comment and should include
SIP submissions that comply with the discussion of all points you wish to
provisions of the Act and applicable List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 make. The EPA will generally not
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); Environmental protection, Air consider comments or comment
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP pollution control, Carbon monoxide, contents located outside of the primary
submissions, the EPA’s role is to Incorporation by reference, submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
approve state choices, provided that Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen other file sharing system). For
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, additional submission methods, please
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action Reporting and recordkeeping contact the person identified in the FOR
merely proposes to approve state requirements, Volatile organic FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
requests as meeting federal compounds. For the full EPA public comment policy,
requirements and does not impose Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
information about CBI or multimedia
additional requirements beyond those submissions, and general guidance on
imposed by state law. For that reason, Dated: January 18, 2017. making effective comments, please visit
this proposed action: Alexis Strauss, http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. commenting-epa-dockets.
action’’ subject to review by the Office [FR Doc. 2017–04683 Filed 3–8–17; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
of Management and Budget under BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Kelly, EPA Region IX, by phone at (415)
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 972–3856 or by email at kelly.thomasp@
October 4, 1993); epa.gov.
• Does not impose an information ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
collection burden under the provisions AGENCY Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 40 CFR Part 52
• Is certified as not having a Table of Contents
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0028; FRL–9958–81–
significant economic impact on a Region 9] I. Background
substantial number of small entities II. The State’s SIP Submittal
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Approval of California Air Plan A. Documents Comprising the SIP
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Revisions, Western Mojave Desert, Submittal
• Does not contain any unfunded Rate of Progress Demonstration B. CAA Procedural and Administrative
mandate or significantly or uniquely Requirements for SIP Submittals
affect small governments, as described AGENCY: Environmental Protection III. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Agency (EPA). A. Requirements for the ROP
Demonstration
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); ACTION: Proposed rule.
B. The ROP Demonstration in the 2014 SIP
• Does not have Federalism Update
implications as specified in Executive SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection C. The EPA’s Evaluation of the ROP
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a Demonstration and Proposed Action
1999); state implementation plan revision IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
• Is not an economically significant submitted by the State of California to
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
meet Clean Air Act requirements I. Background
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order applicable to the Western Mojave Desert Following promulgation of a new or
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); (WMD) ozone nonattainment area. The revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by
• Is not a significant regulatory action EPA is proposing to approve the initial the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) to
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR six-year 15 percent rate of progress designate areas throughout the nation as
28355, May 22, 2001); demonstration to address requirements attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. In
• Is not subject to requirements of for the 1997 8-hour ozone national the ‘‘Final Rule To Implement the 8-
section 12(d) of the National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:52 Mar 08, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM 09MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_13129/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2017-03-09 04:59:13
Document Modified: 2017-03-09 04:59:13
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Any comments must arrive by April 10, 2017. | |
| Contact | Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4125, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 13084 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Carbon Monoxide; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR