Proposed Rule2024-18458
Air Plan Revisions; Arizona; Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
August 19, 2024
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD or "County") portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from storage, transfer, or loading of organic liquids and gasoline. We are proposing to approve local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or "Act"). We are also proposing to approve the MCAQD's reasonably available control technology (RACT) demonstration associated with these rules for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 160 (Monday, August 19, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67014-67018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-18458]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2023-0603; FRL-11596-01-R9]
Air Plan Revisions; Arizona; 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 Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD
or ``County'') portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP).
These revisions concern emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC)
from storage, transfer, or loading of organic liquids and gasoline. We
are proposing to approve local rules to regulate these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''). We are also proposing to
approve the MCAQD's reasonably available control technology (RACT)
demonstration associated with these rules for the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa
ozone nonattainment area. We are taking comments on this proposal and
plan to follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 18, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2023-0603 at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. For comments submitted at
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>, follow the online instructions for submitting
[[Page 67015]]
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. 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 <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with a disability
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: Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
St., San Francisco, CA 94105; phone: (415) 947-4137; email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fc8b9d929bd2919d99bc998c9dd29b938a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c8bfa9a6afe6a5a9ad88adb8a9e6afa7be">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rules did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rules addressed by this proposal with the dates
that they were adopted by the MCAQD and submitted to the EPA by the
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ or ``State'').
Table 1--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local agency Rule # Rule title Revised Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQD.......................... 350 Storage and Transfer of Organic 11/18/2020 12/03/2020
Liquids (Non-Gasoline) at an
Organic Liquid Distribution
(OLD) Facility.
MCAQD.......................... 351 Storage and Loading of Gasoline 11/18/2020 12/03/2020
at Bulk Gasoline Plants and at
Bulk Gasoline Terminals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 3, 2021, the SIP submittal containing the documents listed
in Table 1 was deemed complete by operation of law.
B. Are there other versions of these rules?
We conditionally approved earlier versions of Rule 350 and Rule 351
into the SIP on February 26, 2020 (85 FR 10986). In order to fulfill
the commitment the MCAQD made as part of our prior conditional
approval, the MCAQD adopted revisions to the SIP-approved versions on
November 18, 2020, and ADEQ submitted them to the EPA on December 3,
2020. The February 26, 2020 conditional approval, and an explanation of
how the SIP submittal proposed for approval here addresses the
deficiencies identified in the conditional approval, are discussed in
more detail below. If we finalize this proposal to approve the November
18, 2020 versions of these rules, then these versions will replace the
previously approved versions of these rules in the SIP.
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions?
Emissions of VOC contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone,
which harms human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires States to submit plans that provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. In addition, CAA section
182(b)(2) requires that SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified
as ``Moderate'' or higher implement RACT for sources covered by a
control techniques guidelines (CTG) document. The MCAQD regulates a
portion of the Phoenix-Mesa area designated as nonattainment for ozone
and classified as Moderate nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\1\
Therefore, the MCAQD is required to submit SIP revisions that implement
RACT-level controls for all sources covered by a CTG. The MCAQD
submitted Rule 350 and Rule 351 to establish RACT-level controls for
VOC emissions from sources covered by the petroleum liquid and gasoline
storage and transfer CTGs. Rule 350 limits VOC emissions from organic
liquid storage tanks and VOC emissions during transfer operations at
organic liquid distribution facilities. Rule 351 limits VOC emissions
from storage and loading of gasoline at bulk gasoline plants and bulk
gasoline terminals. The associated CTGs are shown in Table 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On November 12, 2019 (84 FR 60920), the EPA issued a
determination that the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the Moderate area attainment date
of July 20, 2018. That determination did not constitute a
redesignation of the area to attainment for the 2008 ozone standard.
The designation status of the Phoenix-Mesa area will remain Moderate
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS until such time as the EPA
determines that the area meets Clean Air Act requirements for
redesignation to attainment.
Table 2--Rules and Associated CTGs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQMD rule Associated CTGs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 350................. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof
Tanks (EPA-450/2-77-036).
Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Petroleum Liquid Storage in External
Floating Roof Tanks (EPA-450/2-78-047).
Rule 351................. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof
Tanks (EPA-450/2-77-036).
Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Petroleum Liquid Storage in External
Floating Roof Tanks (EPA-450/2-78-047).
Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck
Gasoline Loading Terminals (EPA-450/2-77-
026).
[[Page 67016]]
Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Bulk Gasoline Plants (EPA-450/2-77-035).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section III.D of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015) discusses RACT
requirements. It states in part that RACT SIPs must contain adopted
RACT regulations, certifications where appropriate that existing
provisions are RACT, and/or negative declarations that there are no
sources in the nonattainment areas subject to a specific CTG. The
County's RACT SIP provides MCAQD's analysis of its compliance with the
CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On
February 26, 2020, the EPA conditionally approved MCAQD Rule 350, Rule
351, and the County's RACT demonstration for the CTGs associated with
these rules, into the Arizona SIP. The rules contained deficiencies
that precluded full SIP approval and were conditionally approved based
on a commitment by the MCAQD and the ADEQ to provide, within one year,
a SIP submission that would address those deficiencies. The MCAQD
subsequently revised these rules to address the identified deficiencies
and the ADEQ submitted the revised rules on December 3, 2020. The EPA's
technical support document (TSD) has more information about these
rules.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the rules?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2))
and must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements
(see CAA section 110(l)). In addition, because this rule was submitted
to satisfy the RACT requirement for sources covered by the CTGs listed
in table 2, these rules must establish RACT level controls for such
sources.
Guidance and policy documents that the EPA used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation, and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
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. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of
Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-77-036, December
1977.
5. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-78-047, December
1978.
6. ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk Gasoline
Plants,'' EPA-450/2-77-035, December 1977.
7. ``Control of Hydrocarbons from Tank Truck Gasoline Loading
Terminals,'' EPA-450/2-77-026, October 1977.
B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
As summarized below, the EPA is proposing to conclude that these
revised rules have corrected the deficiencies previously identified in
the earlier versions of the rules that were conditionally approved into
the SIP. Our February 26, 2020 conditional approval action found that
these rules met all relevant CAA requirements except for the identified
deficiencies. Because those deficiencies have been corrected, we are
proposing to find that the revised rules are consistent with relevant
requirements regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP revisions. The
submitted rules satisfy the CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area
with regard to the CTGs listed in table 2 of this document. The TSD has
more information on our evaluation, including descriptions of the
individual deficiencies and the way that each was addressed in the
current submitted version of the rules.
1. Deficiencies Previously Identified in MCAQD Rule 350
Section 103 of Rule 350 exempted fuel consumed or dispensed at the
facility directly to users, hazardous waste, and wastewater and ballast
water from organic liquid storage and transfer requirements. These
exemptions were not previously in the SIP and were a potential CAA
section 110(l) relaxation as the County had not demonstrated the
exemptions were necessary or that the exemptions would not interfere
with attainment, reasonable further progress, or other requirements of
the Act. The County corrected this deficiency by removing the
exemptions.
Similarly, Rule 350 was missing an emissions limit that was
previously in the SIP for organic liquid distribution facilities
transferring over 600,000 gallons per month of organic liquid. The
County addressed this potential CAA section 110(l) relaxation by adding
the prior SIP limit to Rule 350, section 305.4.
Section 103.2(g)(2) of Rule 350 allowed the Control Officer to
approve alternate procedures or requirements for opening vapor
containment equipment while performing operations without clearly
specifying what criteria the Control Officer would use to approve such
alternate procedures. The County addressed this potentially
inappropriate use of director's discretion by deleting the language
referring to Control Officer approval.
Sections 301.1, 301.2. 301.3, and 301.4 of Rule 350 did not state a
particular prohibition and the phrasing made the requirements unclear.
The County restructured and rephrased the rule language to clarify the
requirements for organic liquid storage tanks. The new language appears
in Rule 350, section 303.
Section 103.2(e) of Rule 350 seemed to contain a limited exemption
for floating roofs whenever the tank is being filled, instead of only
during filling after the tank has been emptied completely. The County
revised the language so the exemption applies only when the tank is
drained completely and subsequently refilled.
Section 302.1(b) of Rule 350 was not clear regarding which external
floating roof tanks are exempt from the rule's requirements and seemed
to provide tanks with shoe-mounted secondary seals a broad exemption
from all the rule's requirements. The County corrected this deficiency
by removing the exemption.
Section 302.2(c)(1) of Rule 350 did not clearly specify vapor
control requirements for internal floating roof tanks. The County
revised the language to provide compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart
Kb as one compliance option.
[[Page 67017]]
Section 103.2(g)(1) of Rule 350 contained an overly broad provision
that is inconsistent with the CTG for bulk plants and could result in
an open hatch during an entire loading event, leading to VOC emissions
release. The County revised the rule language to clarify that the
conditions under which a hatch, vent valve, or vapor sealing device may
be open during transfer are limited to those necessary to avoid unsafe
operating conditions.
2. Deficiencies Previously Identified in MCAQD Rule 351
Section 103.5(e)(2) of Rule 351 allowed the Control Officer to
approve alternate procedures or requirements for opening vapor
containment equipment while performing operations without clearly
specifying what criteria the Control Officer would use to approve such
alternate procedures. The County addressed this potentially
inappropriate use of director's discretion by deleting the language
referring to Control Officer approval.
Sections 302.2, 302.3. and 304.4 of Rule 351 did not state a
particular prohibition and the phrasing made the requirements unclear.
The County restructured and rephrased the rule language to clarify the
requirements for gasoline storage tanks. The new language appears in
Rule 351, section 303.
Section 103.4(b) of Rule 351 seemed to contain a limited exemption
for floating roofs whenever the tank is being filled, instead of only
during filling after the tank has been emptied completely. The County
revised the language so the exemption applies only when the tank is
drained completely and subsequently refilled.
Section 303.1(b) of Rule 351 was not clear regarding which external
floating roof tanks are exempt from the rule's requirements and seemed
to provide tanks with shoe-mounted secondary seals a broad exemption
from all the rule's requirements. The County corrected this deficiency
by removing the exemption.
Section 103.5(e)(1) of Rule 351 contained an overly broad provision
that is inconsistent with the CTG for bulk plants and could result in
an open hatch during an entire loading event, leading to VOC emissions
release. The County revised the rule language to clarify that the
conditions under which a hatch, vent valve, or vapor sealing device may
be open during transfer are limited to those necessary to avoid unsafe
operating conditions.
The ``vapor loss control system'' included as a compliance option
in Rule 351, section 303.4, was not as stringent as the vapor
collection/processing system (VCPS) control option included in the SIP-
approved rule. The County added the term ``vapor collection/processing
system'' back into Rule 351 and included an emission reduction
efficiency requirement as stringent as the requirement in the previous
SIP-approved rule in the term's definition and in section 304.3.
Rule 351 lacked an emissions limit or vapor recovery efficiency
requirement that had been demonstrated to meet RACT stringency
requirements for gasoline bulk plant transfers. The County added a
requirement in Rule 351, section 304.2 to require an emission limit of
0.6 lbs VOC/1000 gallons or a vapor recovery efficiency of at least
90%, comparable to other current local rules.
Section 103.1 of Rule 351 exempted the loading of aviation gasoline
at airports from the rule's gasoline transfer requirements. The County
had not demonstrated the exemption was necessary or that the exemption
would not interfere with reasonable further progress, or other
requirements of the Act. The County corrected this deficiency by
removing the exemption.
C. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Rules
The TSD includes recommendations for the next time the MCAQD
modifies these rules.
D. Public Comment and Proposed Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
approve the submitted rules because they fulfill all relevant
requirements. We are also proposing to approve the MCAQD's RACT
demonstration for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS with regard to the
sources covered by the CTGs associated with these rules (as listed in
table 2). This approval, if finalized, would mean that the State has
fulfilled its commitment under the terms of the conditional approval to
submit a revised approvable SIP submission, and the finalized approval
would replace our February 26, 2020 conditional approval with respect
to these rules and associated CTG RACT categories. If we finalize this
approval, we would also remove the text associated with the conditional
approval from 40 CFR 52.119(c)(1). We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal until September 18, 2024. If we take final
action to approve the submitted rules, our final action will
incorporate these rules 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 MCAQD Rule 350, ``Storage and Transfer of Organic Liquids
(Non-Gasoline) at an Organic Liquid Distribution (OLD) Facility,''
revised on November 18, 2020, which regulates VOC emissions from
organic liquid storage and transfer operations at organic liquid
distribution facilities. The EPA is also proposing to incorporate by
reference MCAQD Rule 351, ``Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Bulk
Gasoline Plants and at Bulk Gasoline Terminals,'' revised on November
18, 2020, which regulates VOC emissions from gasoline storage and
loading activities at bulk gasoline plants and terminals. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> 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 Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act.
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:
<bullet> 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 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> 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.);
<bullet> 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);
[[Page 67018]]
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a State program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<bullet> 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.
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).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The State did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. Consideration of EJ is
not required as part of this action, and there is no information in the
record inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving EJ
for people of color, low-income populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 13, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-18458 Filed 8-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on August 19, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.