[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 184 (Monday, September 23, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49699-49704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20425]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2019-0493; FRL-9999-98-Region 9]


Air Plan Conditional Approval; Arizona; Maricopa County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
conditionally approve revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality 
Department (MCAQD or the County) portion of the Arizona State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern emissions of 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from organic liquid and gasoline 
storage and transfer operations. We are proposing to conditionally 
approve local rules to regulate these emission sources under the Clean 
Air Act (CAA or the Act) and conditionally approve the County's 
demonstration regarding Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) 
requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area, with 
respect to petroleum liquid storage and gasoline transfer and 
transport. We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow 
with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by October 23, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2019-0493 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at 
Regulations.gov, follow the

[[Page 49700]]

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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Newhouse, EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972-3004, 
newhouse.rebecca@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What did the State submit?
    B. Are there earlier versions of the submitted documents in the 
SIP?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
    B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What are the deficiencies?
    D. What are the commitments to remedy the deficiencies?
    E. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Submitted 
Rules
    F. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the documents addressed by this proposal with the 
dates that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by 
the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ or the State).

                      Table 1--Submitted Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Local agency           Document            Revised        Submitted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAQD............  Analysis of            \1\ 06/16/2017      06/22/2017
                    Reasonably Available
                    Control Technology
                    for the 2008 8-Hour
                    Ozone National
                    Ambient Air Quality
                    Standard (NAAQS)
                    State Implementation
                    Plan (RACT SIP).
MCAQD............  Rule 350: Storage and      11/02/2016      06/22/2017
                    Transfer of Organic
                    Liquids (Non-
                    Gasoline) at an
                    Organic Liquid
                    Distribution
                    Facility.
MCAQD............  Rule 351: Storage and      11/02/2016      06/22/2017
                    Loading of Gasoline
                    at Bulk Gasoline
                    Plants and Bulk
                    Gasoline Terminals.
MCAQD............  Rule 352: Gasoline         11/02/2016      06/22/2017
                    Cargo Tank Testing
                    and Use.
MCAQD............  Rule 353: Storage and      11/02/2016      06/22/2017
                    Loading of Gasoline
                    at Gasoline
                    Dispensing
                    Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 22, 2017, the submittal containing the documents listed 
in Table 1 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness 
criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal 
EPA review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This document is dated December 5, 2016. It was adopted by 
the County on June 16, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to these SIP submittals, the County and the ADEQ 
transmitted letters to the EPA 2 3 committing to adopt and 
submit specific enforceable measures within a year of our final action 
that would remedy the deficiencies identified in this notice and 
further described in the associated technical support documents (TSDs) 
for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Letter dated January 28, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely, 
Director, MCAQD, to Misael Cabrera, Director, ADEQ.
    \3\ Letter dated February 25, 2019, from Misael Cabrera, 
Director, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Regional Administrator, EPA, 
Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The County's submittal states that Rules 350, 351, 352 and 353 were 
submitted to regulate sources associated with the Control Techniques 
Guidelines (CTGs) shown in Table 2:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See RACT SIP, Appendix C: CTG RACT Spreadsheet.

                 Table 2--Rules and Associated CTGs \4\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            County 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).
                                    Control of Volatile Organic
                                     Emissions from Bulk Gasoline Plants
                                     (EPA-450/2-77-035).
Rule 352..........................  Control of Volatile Organic Compound
                                     Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and
                                     Vapor Collection Systems (EPA-450/2-
                                     78-051).
Rule 353..........................  Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor
                                     Control Systems--Gasoline Service
                                     Stations (EPA-450/R-75-102).
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 49701]]

B. Are there earlier versions of the submitted documents in the SIP?

    We approved earlier versions of the rules listed in Table 1 into 
the SIP on September 5, 1995 (Rules 350 and 352) (60 FR 46024), 
February 9, 1998 (Rule 351) (63 FR 6489), and on February 1, 1996 (Rule 
353) (61 FR 3578). There is no previously approved version of the RACT 
SIP for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in the MCAQD portion of the 
Arizona SIP. The ADEQ previously submitted the documents in Table 1 in 
a SIP revision on December 19, 2016, along with the County's RACT SIP. 
However, this submittal did not include documentation that showed the 
entirety of the County's SIP revision had met the public notice 
requirements required for completeness under 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V. 
The County's June 22, 2017 submittal was provided in response to this 
feedback, and the State withdrew the December 19, 2016 submittal on May 
17, 2019.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Letter dated May 17, 2019, from Timothy S. Franquist, 
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Regional 
Administrator, Region IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?

    Emissions of VOCs contribute to the production of ground-level 
ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the 
environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit 
regulations that control VOC emissions. Section 182(b)(2) requires that 
SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above 
implement RACT for any source covered by a CTG document and for any 
major sources of VOCs. The MCAQD is subject to this requirement as it 
regulates a portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area, which 
is classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hr ozone NAAQS (40 CFR 
81.303).
    Section III.D of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement 
the 2008 ozone 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 covered by a specific CTG 
category. The County's RACT SIP provides MCAQD's analyses of its 
compliance with the CAA section 182 RACT requirements for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. As a result of this analysis, the County revised and 
submitted the rules listed in Table 1 to establish RACT-level controls 
for VOC emissions from the petroleum liquid storage and gasoline 
transfer and transport CTG source categories shown in Table 2.
    The EPA's TSDs have more information about the submitted rules and 
RACT SIP.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?

    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 RACT for each category of sources 
covered by a CTG document as well as each major source of VOCs in ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see CAA section 
182(b)(2)). The MCAQD regulates a portion of the Phoenix-Mesa ozone 
nonattainment area, which is classified as Moderate for the 2008 8-hr 
ozone NAAQS 40 CFR 81.303. Therefore, these rules must implement RACT.
    The County's RACT SIP explains that Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 
were revised and submitted in order to meet the RACT requirement for 
the source categories listed in Table 2. Accordingly, our evaluation of 
whether these rules establish RACT levels of control also constitutes 
our evaluation of the approvability of the MCAQD RACT SIP, with respect 
to those CTG source categories.
    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. ``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.
    8. ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank 
Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems,'' EPA-450/2-78-051, December 1978.
    9. ``Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor Control Systems-Gasoline 
Service Stations,'' EPA-450/R-75-102, November 1975.
    10. ``Alternative Control Techniques Document: Volatile Organic 
Liquid Storage in Floating and Fixed Roof Tanks,'' EPA-453/R-94-001, 
January 1994.

B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?

    Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 apply to sources of VOC emissions from 
organic liquid storage and gasoline transfer and storage operations in 
the Phoenix-Mesa area. The four rules are generally more stringent than 
the applicable CTGs, have requirements for organic liquid and gasoline 
storage and transfer that are generally consistent with other local air 
district rules for these source categories, and are largely consistent 
with the applicable CAA requirements. However, as identified below, the 
rules contain deficiencies that preclude full approval. In a letter 
dated January 28, 2019 (the ``commitment letter''), the County 
identified certain rule deficiencies and committed to revise those 
provisions in accordance with EPA guidance, and submit the revised 
rules within eleven months of a conditional approval.\6\ On February 
25, 2019, the ADEQ provided its own commitment to submit the County's 
revised rules to the EPA within one month after the County's action and 
request for SIP revision.\7\ Because the commitments by the County and 
ADEQ would remedy the identified rule deficiencies, we propose to 
conditionally approve Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353, and the RACT SIP 
with respect to the VOC source categories covered by Rules 350, 351, 
352, 353 (as provided in Table 2). Summaries of the specific rule 
deficiencies and the County's commitments to address those

[[Page 49702]]

deficiencies are included in the following sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Letter dated January 28, 2019, from Philip A. McNeely, 
Director, MCAQD, to Misael Cabrera, Director, ADEQ.
    \7\ Letter dated February 25, 2019, from Misael Cabrera, 
Director, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Region Administrator, EPA, Region 
IX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our TSDs for Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 provide further details 
on our evaluation for these proposed conditional approvals.

C. What are the deficiencies?

    The following provisions of Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 do not 
fully satisfy the requirements of section 110 and part D of title I of 
the Act and prevent full approval of the SIP revision.
    1. Rule 350 Deficiencies \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Rule deficiencies throughout this section marked with an 
asterisk (*) also apply to Rule 351; those marked with a dagger 
([dagger]) also apply to Rule 352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Rule 350 includes exemptions from rule requirements for fuel 
consumed or dispensed at the facility directly to users, hazardous 
waste, which is undefined, and wastewater and ballast water, none of 
which are exempted from the applicable CTGs.
    (b) The rule lacks an emissions limit for bulk terminals 
transferring organic liquid. The SIP-approved version requires an 
emissions limit of 0.08 lbs VOCs/1000 gallons transferred.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The 0.08 lbs VOC/1000 gallons limit is included in SIP-
approved Rule 351, which contains transfer requirements for organic 
liquid and gasoline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) The rule contains inappropriate use of director's discretion 
with respect to the opening of hatches or seals on cargo tanks.* 
[dagger]
    (d) Several sections do not clearly state rule prohibitions, and 
instead require owners and operators with particular types of tanks to 
put some amount of liquid into tanks that meet certain requirements. 
Section 301.3, in particular, appears to be missing the word ``not'' in 
a way that impacts the effectiveness of the requirement.*
    (e) The rule exempts roofs from the requirement that they always be 
floating on liquid when the tank is being filled, instead of only while 
filling after the tank has been emptied completely.*
    (f) The rule is not clear regarding which external floating roof 
tanks are exempt from the rule's requirements.*
    (g) The rule does not clearly specify vapor control requirements 
for internal floating roof tanks.
    (h) The rule contains an overly broad provision, allowing the 
opening of hatches, vent valves, or vapor sealing devices for vacuum 
relief when organic liquid is transferred from the cargo tank or 
railcar into a storage tank.*
    2. Rule 351 Deficiencies \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For additional Rule 351 deficiencies, please see Rule 350 
deficiencies (c)-(f) and (h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) The rule allows the use of a less stringent compliance option 
than the SIP-approved rule for controlling VOC vapors from gasoline 
storage.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The vapor loss control requirement is included in SIP-
approved Rule 350, which contains storage requirements for organic 
liquid and gasoline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Rule 351 requirements for gasoline transfers at bulk plants are 
not as strict as requirements that have been demonstrated to be 
reasonably available in other air districts, as there is no emissions 
limit or vapor recovery efficiency requirement when vapor balance 
systems are used.
    (c) The rule exempts the loading of aviation gasoline at airports 
from the rule's gasoline transfer requirements, which is not exempted 
from applicable CTGs or other analogous SIP-approved district 
rules.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This deficiency also applies to Rule 352 and Rule 353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Rule 352 Deficiencies \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For additional Rule 352 deficiencies, please see Rule 350 
deficiency (c), and Rule 351 deficiency (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) The rule exempts cargo tanks with gasoline loads that 
originated outside of Arizona, and gasoline loads delivered outside 
Maricopa County, from the rule's gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness 
requirements. Exemptions from vapor tightness requirements based on 
where the cargo tank is initially filled or where it ultimately 
delivers gasoline are not provided for in the applicable CTG.
    (b) The rule provides inappropriate discretion to unspecified 
agencies to certify cargo tanks vapor tight.
    (c) The rule allows gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness tests to 
remain valid for up to two years, whereas the CTG and rules from other 
air districts require more frequent testing.
    (d) The rule allows inappropriate discretion for the opening of 
cargo tank hatches during loading.
    (e) No test method is specified for determining compliance with the 
provision requiring a 90% reduction in VOC emissions by weight when 
purging cargo tank vapors.
    (f) The rule does not clearly prohibit purging of gasoline vapors 
from cargo tanks, including during switch loading, and may relax 
purging provisions as compared to the SIP-approved rule.
    4. Rule 353 Deficiencies \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For an additional Rule 353 deficiency, please see Rule 351 
deficiency (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) The rule exempts an owner or operator from certain rule 
requirements if the gasoline dispensing facility (GDF) is unattended or 
there is only one owner or operator present. As there may be one 
attendant at a GDF in many instances for a variety of reasons, this 
exemption is overly broad and presents enforceability challenges.

D. What are the commitments to remedy the deficiencies?

    The County's commitment letter includes specific and enforceable 
commitments, outlined below, to address the above deficiencies for 
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353.
    1. Rule 350 Commitments \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Rule commitments throughout this section marked with an 
asterisk (*) also apply to Rule 351; those marked with a dagger 
([dagger]) also apply to Rule 352.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Removing the exemptions for fuel consumed or dispensed at the 
facility directly to users, hazardous waste, wastewater, and ballast 
water, to address section II.C.1.a, above.
    (b) Adding an emissions limit for organic liquid distribution 
facilities transferring over 600,000 gallons per 30-day period of 
organic liquid, based on a RACT analysis, to address II.C.1.b, above.
    (c) Deleting the provision that allows Control Officer discretion 
for approval of hatch or seal opening, to address II.C.1.c, above.* 
[dagger]
    (d) Rephrasing and restructuring the requirements for organic 
liquid storage tanks to clarify the specified requirements without 
weakening any substantive requirements, to address II.C.1.d, above.*
    (e) Clarifying that the floating roof exemption will only apply 
when the tank is filled initially, after it is drained completely and 
subsequently refilled, or when undergoing maintenance requiring the 
roof be rested on its leg supports, to address II.C.1.e, above.*
    (f) Removing the specified exemption for external floating roof 
tanks, to address II.C.1.f, above.*
    (g) Deleting the specified section, and adding requirements for 
internal floating roof organic liquid storage tanks that match SIP-
approved requirements, to address II.C.1.g, above.
    (h) Limiting the conditions under which a hatch, vent valve, or 
vapor sealing device may be open during the organic liquid transfer 
from the cargo tank to the storage tank to those necessary to avoid 
unsafe operating conditions, to address II.C.1.h, above.*
    2. Commitments for Rule 351 \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For additional Rule 351 commitments, please see Rule 350 
commitments (c)-(f) and (h), above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Adding vapor loss control requirements that will be at least as 
stringent as the SIP-approved version, to address II.C.2.a above.
    (b) Revising Rule 351 to include an emissions limit or vapor 
recovery efficiency for loading at a bulk gasoline plant, based on a 
RACT analysis, to address II.C.2.b, above.

[[Page 49703]]

    (c) Removing the exemption for aviation gasoline loading at 
airports, to address II.C.2.c, above.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ This commitment also applies to Rule 352 and Rule 353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Commitments for Rule 352 \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ For additional Rule 352 commitments, please see Rule 350 
commitment (c), and Rule 351 commitment (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Removing the vapor tightness test exemption for cargo tanks 
with gasoline loads that originated outside of Arizona and gasoline 
loads delivered outside Maricopa County, to address II.C.3.a, above.
    (b) Requiring that a gasoline cargo tank tested outside Maricopa 
County be tested and verified vapor tight using methods at least as 
stringent as those found in the County's rule, and that testing 
documentation be submitted to the MCAQD, to address II.C.3.b.
    (c) Revising vapor tightness certification expiration requirements 
to shorten the maximum testing interval, to address II.C.3.c.
    (d) Revising to clarify and limit the conditions under which a 
hatch, vent valve, or vapor sealing device may be open during the 
transfer of gasoline from the cargo tank, to address II.C.3.d.
    (e) Including appropriate EPA-approved test methods to determine 
compliance with at least a 90% reduction in VOC emissions by weight, to 
address II.C.3.e.
    (f) Revising the purging requirements to include a prohibition on 
purging that is at least as stringent as the SIP-approved version, to 
address II.C.3.f.
    4. Commitments for Rule 353 \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ For an additional Rule 353 commitment, please see Rule 351 
commitment (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Deleting the exemption for unattended GDFs, or GDFs where there 
is only one owner or operator present, to address II.C.4.a.

E. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the Submitted Rules

    The TSDs for Rule 350, 351, 352, and 353 describe additional rule 
revisions that we recommend for the next time the County modifies the 
rules.

F. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 largely fulfill the relevant CAA Sec.  
110 and part D requirements, but the deficiencies, as discussed in 
section C, preclude full SIP approval pursuant to 110(k)(3) of the Act. 
Section 110(k)(4) authorizes the EPA to conditionally approve SIP 
revisions based on a commitment by the state to adopt specific 
enforceable measures by a date certain but not later than one year 
after the date of the plan approval.\20\ Because the MCAQD and the ADEQ 
have committed to provide the EPA with a SIP submission within one year 
of this final action that will include specific rule revisions that 
would adequately address the identified deficiencies, we are proposing 
to conditionally approve Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353, pursuant to 
section 110(k)(4) of the Act. We are also proposing to conditionally 
approve MCAQD's RACT demonstrations for the 2008 8-hr ozone NAAQS with 
respect to the VOC source categories covered by Rules 350, 351, 352, 
and 353, as specified in Table 2. If the MCAQD and the ADEQ submit the 
required rule revisions by the specified deadline, and the EPA approves 
the submission, then the identified deficiencies will be cured. 
However, if these proposed conditional approvals are finalized, and 
MCAQD, through the ADEQ, fails to submit these revisions within the 
required timeframe, the conditional approval would be treated as a 
disapproval for those rules for which the revisions are not submitted 
(and the associated RACT SIP CTG source categories). We will accept 
comments from the public on this proposal until October 23, 2019. If we 
take final action to approve the submitted rules, our final action will 
incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule, 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference the MCAQD rules described in Table 1 of this preamble. 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

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at https://www.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 was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 
because actions such as SIP approvals are exempted under Executive 
Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA, because the proposed conditional approvals, if finalized, will 
not in-and-of themselves create any new information collection burdens, 
but will simply conditionally approve certain State requirements for 
inclusion in the SIP.

D. 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. These 
proposed conditional approvals, if finalized, will not in-and-of 
themselves create any new requirements but will simply conditionally 
approve certain State requirements for inclusion in the SIP.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. This action proposes to conditionally approve pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

F. 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.

G. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175, because the SIP revisions that the EPA is 
proposing to conditionally approve would not 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, and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal

[[Page 49704]]

governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 
apply to this action.

H. 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 action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because the proposed conditional approvals, if 
finalized, will not in-and-of themselves create any new regulations, 
but will simply conditionally approve certain State requirements for 
inclusion in the SIP.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs the EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA 
believes that this action is not subject to the requirements of section 
12(d) of the NTTAA because application of those requirements would be 
inconsistent with the CAA.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    The EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this rulemaking.

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.

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

    Dated: September 6, 2019.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019-20425 Filed 9-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


