[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55131-55133]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21813]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-70299; File No. SR-MIAX-2013-40]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change by Miami International
Securities Exchange LLC To Amend MIAX Rule 1322, Options Communications

September 3, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 19, 2013, Miami International Securities Exchange LLC
(``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (the ``Commission'') a proposed rule change as described in
Items I, and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend MIAX Rule 1322, Options
Communications. The text of the proposed rule change is available from
the principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public
Reference Room and also on the Exchange's Internet Web site at http://www.miaxoptions.com/.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 1322, Options Communications,
to conform the rule to changes recently made by the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') to its corresponding rule.\3\
The proposed changes are designed to alert Members to their
requirements with respect to Options Communications while further
regulating all communications for compliance with Exchange Rules and
the Act. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule
change will help ensure that investors are protected from potentially
false or misleading communications with the public distributed by
Exchange Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68650 (January 14,
2013), 78 FR 4182 (January 18, 2013) (SR-FINRA-2013-001) (Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to Update
Cross-References and Make Other Non-Substantive Changes Within FINRA
Rules and By-Laws). See also Securities Exchange Act Release 69807
(June 20, 2013), 78 FR 38423 (June 26, 2013) (SR-CBOE-2013-043)
(Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change Relating to Exchange Rule
9.21) and Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70070 (July 30, 2013),
78 FR 47476 (August 5, 2013) (SR-BOX-2013-037) (Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend BOX Rule
4170 (Options Communications)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, the Exchange proposes to amend Exchange Rule 1322(a) by
reducing the number of defined categories of communication in current
Rule 1322(a) from six to three. The proposed three categories of
communications are: Retail communications, correspondence, and
institutional communications. The current definitions of ``sales
literature,'' ``advertisement,'' and ``independently prepared reprint''
would be combined into a single category of ``retail communications.''
The Exchange proposes to define ``retail communication'' as any written
(including electronic) communication that is distributed or made
available to more than 25 retail investors within any 30 calendar-day
period. The Exchange also proposes to amend the current definition of
``correspondence'' to mean any written (including electronic)
communication distributed or made available by a Member to 25 or fewer
retail customers within any 30 calendar-day period. Additionally, the
Exchange proposes to delete the current term, ``institutional sales
material'' and replace that definition with the term ``institutional
communication,'' which would include written (including electronic)
communications that are distributed or made available only to
institutional investors.
    Second, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 1322(b), Approval by
Registered Options Principal, by replacing the phrase ``advertisements,
sales literature, and independently prepared reprints'' in Rule
1322(b)(1) with the new proposed term, ``retail communications.''
    Under proposed Rule 1322(b)(2), correspondence would need not need
to be approved by a Registered Options Principal prior to use but would
be subject to the supervision and review requirements of Rule 1308. The
Exchange proposes to delete the provision requiring principal approval
of correspondence that is distributed to 25 or more existing retail
customers within a 30 calendar-day period that makes any financial or
investment recommendation or otherwise promotes the product or service
of a Member. Under proposed Rule 1322(b), such communications would be
considered ``retail communications'' and therefore remain subject to
the principal approval requirement under the proposed new definition.
As such, the proposed rule change would not substantively change the
scope of options communications that would require principal approval.
    Third, the Exchange proposes to establish the required approvals of
institutional communications, currently known as institutional sales
material. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to delete the current
requirements for institutional sales material and add that Members
shall establish written procedures that are appropriate to its
business, size, structure, and customers for review by a Registered
Options Principal of institutional communications used by the Member.
    Fourth, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 1322(c) by replacing
the phrase ``advertisements, sales literature, and independently
prepared reprints'' with the new proposed term, ``retail
communications.'' The Exchange also proposes to further exempt the
options disclosure document (``ODD'') and prospectuses from Exchange
review as other requirements apply to these documents under the
Securities Act of 1933.
    Fifth, the Exchange proposes to specify in Rule 1322(d) that no
Member or associated person may use any options communications that
``constitute a prospectus'' unless the communications meet the
requirements of the Securities Act, and further specifying that any
statement in any options communications referring to the potential
opportunities or advantages presented by options shall be balanced by a
statement of the corresponding risks. The risk statement shall reflect
the same degree of specificity as the statement of opportunities, and
broad generalities must be avoided. This language is identical to
language contained in current Rule 1322(d)(5), which is proposed to be
deleted.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\4\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\5\ in particular, in that it
is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices,
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market and a national market system and,
in

general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule changes will
provide greater clarity to Members and the public regarding the
Exchange's Rules. In addition, the Exchange believes that the proposed
rule change will help ensure that investors are protected from
potentially false or misleading communications with the public
distributed by Exchange Members.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. In this regard and as indicated
above, the Exchange notes that the rule change being proposed is
substantially similar to filings submitted by other options exchanges
and recently approved by the Commission.\6\ The Exchange believes this
proposed rule change is necessary to establish uniform rules regarding
Options Communications.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 3.
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the proposed rule change will bring clarity and
consistency to Exchange Rules. The Exchange does not believe the
proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket competition
as it applies to all Members. In addition, the Exchange does not
believe the proposed rule change will bring any unnecessary burden on
intermarket competition as it is consistent with the FINRA Options
Communications rule.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    MIAX has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \8\ of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\ Because
the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to provide the Commission with written notice
of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \11\ normally
does not become operative for 30 days after the date of filing.
However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \12\ the Commission may
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. MIAX has asked the
Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may
become operative immediately upon filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest, as
it will it will ensure fair competition among the exchanges by allowing
the Exchange to conform with changes recently made by FINRA. For these
reasons, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be
operative upon filing.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For purposes of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-MIAX-2013-40 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2013-40. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-MIAX-2013-40 and
should be submitted on or before September 30, 2013. For the
Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to
delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-21813 Filed 9-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


	PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 1 	Identification of the Information Collection

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Title and Number of the Information
Collection

	“New Source Performance Standards for Hospital/Medical/Infectious
Waste Incinerators (40 CFR part 60, subpart Ec).”  This is a revision
of an existing Information Collection Request (ICR), which is assigned
EPA tracking number 1730.05 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Control Number 2060-0363.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Short Characterization

	The new source performance standards (NSPS) for
hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators (HMIWI), 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Ec, were promulgated on September 15, 1997.  The standards apply
to owners or operators of HMIWI for which construction commenced after
June 20, 1996, or for which modification commenced after the effective
date of the NSPS (March 16, 1998).

	The NSPS require initial notifications, performance tests, and annual
and semiannual reporting.  Owners or operators are also required to
maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup,
shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or
any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative.  These
notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining
compliance and are required of all sources subject to the standard.

	Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part will
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
5 years following the date of such occurrences, measurements,
maintenance, corrective action, reports or records. All reports are sent
to the delegated State or local authority.  In the event that there is
no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regional office.

	Reporting and recordkeeping requirements differ for incinerators
burning hospital/medical/infectious waste; for combustors co-firing
hospital/medical/infectious waste with other fuels; and for incinerators
burning only pathological, low-level radioactive, and/or
chemotherapeutic waste.  No exemption claims are expected over the next
3 years for co-fired combustors or for incinerators burning only
pathological, low-level radioactive, and/or chemotherapeutic waste.  For
this reason, no burden or cost has been estimated for these types of
units.  This information is being collected to determine compliance with
40 CFR part 60, subpart Ec and 40 CFR part 60, subpart A – General
Provisions.

	The emission guidelines (EG) for HMIWI (40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce)
were promulgated on September 15, 1997.  These guidelines apply to
existing HMIWI for which construction commenced on or before June 20,
1996.  The reporting and recordkeeping requirements for existing HMIWI
regulated by 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce are covered in Information
Collection 1899 and assigned OMB Control Number 2060-0422.  HMIWI
constructed after June 20, 1996 or modified after March 16, 1998 are not
subject to the subpart Ce guidelines; they are considered new sources
and are subject to the NSPS.

	Based on an EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS)
facility and emissions inventory effort for HMIWI, we have determined
that there are 4 HMIWI considered new sources that are subject to NSPS
subpart Ec.  Due to the dramatic decline in HMIWI since promulgation of
the original NSPS and the high degree of public opposition to HMIWI, the
Agency does not project any new HMIWI to be constructed over the next 3
years.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 1 	Need for and Use of the Collection

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Need/Authority for the Collection

	The EPA is required under Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), as amended, to establish standards of performance for new
stationary sources that reflect the maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) for achieving continuous emission reductions. Section
129(a)(2) states:

	Standards applicable to solid waste incineration units promulgated
under Section 111 and this Section shall reflect the maximum degree of
reduction emissions of air pollutants listed under Section (a)(4) that
the Administrator, taking into consideration the cost of achieving such
emission reduction, and any non-air quality health and environmental
impacts and energy requirements, determines is achievable for new or
existing units in each category.

Section 111(e) further states:

	After the effective date of standards of performance promulgated under
this Section, it shall be unlawful for any owner or operator of any new
source to operate such source in violation of any standards of
performance applicable to such source.

	Certain records and reports are necessary to ensure that the standards
are being achieved on a continuous basis.  Consequently, Section 114(a)
states that that the Administrator may require any owner or operator
subject to any requirement of the CAA to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C)
install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit
procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with
such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during
such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe);
(E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables
or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is
impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with
Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the
Administrator may reasonably require.

	In the Administrator’s judgment, dioxin/furan, particulate matter
(PM), carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen chloride (HCl), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), and mercury (Hg)
emissions from HMIWI cause or contribute to air pollution that may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.
Therefore, NSPS were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part
60, subpart Ec.

	Section 129 of the CAA also requires EPA to review and, if appropriate,
revise the NSPS every 5 years.  Section 129(a)(5) states:

Not later than 5 years following the initial promulgation of any
performance standards and other requirements under this section and
section 111 applicable to a category of solid waste incineration units,
and a 5 year intervals thereafter, the Administrator shall review, and
in accordance with this section and section 111, revise such standards
and requirements.

Consequently, revised NSPS are currently being processed for proposal
for this source category.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	Emissions of dioxins/furans, PM, CO, HCl, SO2, NOX, Pb, Cd, and Hg
result from the operation of the facilities affected by the NSPS.  The
standards are achieved by the reduction of these emissions using good
combustion practices and appropriate filter and scrubber technology.
The control of these emissions from HMIWI requires not only the
installation of properly designed equipment, but also the operation and
maintenance of that equipment.

	The notifications required in the HMIWI regulation are used to inform
the Agency or delegated authority when new, modified, and reconstructed
sources become subject to the standards.  The reviewing authority may
then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated and the standards are being met.
Performance test reports are needed, as these are the Agency’s records
of a source’s initial capability to comply with the emission
standards, and serve as a record of the operating conditions under which
compliance was achieved.  Operating conditions monitored include the
highest maximum and lowest minimum operating parameters and exceedances
of emission rates or operating parameters.

	Semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on
source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.
Annual reports are also required, which include: (1) values for
site-specific operating parameters; (2) the highest maximum operating
parameter and the lowest minimum operating parameter; (3) exceedances of
emissions or operating parameters; (4) malfunctions; (5) periods when
data on emissions/operating parameters were not obtained; (6) results of
any performance test conducted during the year; (7) if no exceedances or
malfunctions, a report stating there were no exceedances; (8) any uses
of a bypass stack, the duration, reason for malfunction, and corrective
action taken; and (9) information recorded during the annual control
equipment inspection (included in proposed amendments to the NSPS).  The
information generated by the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements described in this ICR is used by the Agency to ensure that
facilities that are affected by the NSPS continue to operate the control
equipment in compliance with the regulation.  Adequate monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting are necessary to ensure compliance with the
applicable regulations, as required by the CAA.  The information
collected from recordkeeping and reporting requirements is also used for
targeting inspections and is of sufficient quality to be used as
evidence in court.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The information will also be
used by Agency enforcement personnel to ensure that new incinerators
burning hospital/medical/infectious waste undergo a siting analysis and
develop a waste management plan.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 1 	Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other
Collection Criteria

	The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Ec.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Nonduplication

	If the standards have not been delegated, the information is sent
directly to the appropriate EPA Regional office.  Otherwise, the
information is sent directly to the delegated State or local agency.  If
a State or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to
implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the
State or a local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the
report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication
exists.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR
Submission to OMB

	This section is not applicable because this is a rule-related ICR.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Consultations

	The HMIWI inventory and emissions data used as the basis for the
revised standards were developed with the help of States and
representatives from industry.  A 60-day public comment period will be
provided after proposal, during which the public will be given the
opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments.  Public hearings and
meetings with State and industry stakeholders will also be held, as
necessary, following proposal to discuss EPA’s assessment of new
information submitted with comments, to gather additional information,
and to solicit further comments.  All comments received will be
considered and may be reflected in the development of the final
standards.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of
assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.
Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are a useful
technique to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are
applied and emission limitations are met.  If the information required
by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of
detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and
noncompliance would decrease.  In addition, EPA’s authority to take
administrative action would be significantly reduced.  Section 113(d) of
the CAA limits the assessment of administrative penalties to violations
which occur no more than 12 months before initiation of the
administrative proceeding.  Since administrative proceedings are less
costly and require use of fewer resources than judicial proceedings,
both EPA and the regulated community benefit from preservation of
EPA’s administrative powers.  Also, the reporting frequency in the
standards is consistent with the requirements of the title V permit
program.  Consequently, less frequent reports would not result in a
reduced burden.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	General Guidelines

	None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standards
violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR 1320.5.  The
standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including
reports and notifications for at least 5 years.  This is consistent with
the General Provisions as applied to the standards.  EPA believes that
the 5-year records retention requirement is consistent the Part 70
permit program and the 5-year statute of limitations on which the permit
program is based.  The retention of records for 5 years allows EPA to
establish the compliance history of a source, any pattern of
non-compliance and to determine the appropriate level of enforcement
action.  EPA has found that the most flagrant violators have violations
extending beyond 5 years.  In addition, EPA would be prevented from
pursuing the violators due to the destruction or nonexistence of
essential records.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Confidentiality

	Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2,
Subpart B--Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2;
41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 39999,
September 28, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674,
March 23, 1979).

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Sensitive Questions

	None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standards
contain sensitive questions.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 1 	The Respondents and the Information Requested

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Respondents/NAICS Codes

	The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the
NSPS are owners or operators of HMIWI for which construction commenced
after March 20, 1996 or for which modification commenced after the
effective date of the NSPS.  Four new HMIWI are currently required to
comply with the requirements of the standards.  No new HMIWI are
projected during the first 3 years after proposal of the revised
standards.  The NAICS codes for the respondents affected by the
standards are listed below for source category description.

Standard (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Ec)	NAICS Codes

General Medical and Surgical Hospitals	622110

Specialty Hospitals	622310

Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing	325411

Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing	325412

Solid Waste Combustors and Incinerators	562213

Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools	611310

Research and Development in Physical, Chemical, and Life Sciences	541710

National Security	928110

Not all processes classified in these NAICS codes are regulated by the
standards.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Information Requested

	None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of
the regulations established by OMB at 50 CFR 1320.5.

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   Data items.  All data in this ICR that are
recorded and/or reported are required by the NSPS for HMIWI (40 CFR part
60, subpart Ec).  Respondents must make the following reports:

Requirement	Standard Citation by Section

Statement of intent to construct/modify	60.58c(a)(1)(i)

Notification and application of construction or modification	60.58c(a)
and 60.7(a)

Notification of anticipated startup	60.58c(a) and 60.7(a)

Notification of actual startup	60.7(a)

Notification of type(s) of waste to be combusted	60.58c(a)(2)(i)

Notification of HMIWI capacity	60.58c(a)(2)(ii)

Documentation produced as a result of the siting requirements
60.58c(a)(1)(iii) and 60.54c(c)

Waste management plan	60.58c(c)(3) and 60.55c

Notification of initial continuous monitoring system (CMS) demonstration
(including CO CEMS)	60.7(a)

Notification of initial performance test (PM, stack opacity, fugitive
ash emissions, dioxins/furans, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg)	60.8(d)

Notification of exemption claim for combustors burning pathological,
low-level radioactive, and/or chemotherapeutic waste	60.50c(b)(1)

Notification of exemption claim for co-fired combustors	60.50c(c)(1)

Analysis and supporting documentation demonstrating conformance with EPA
guidance and specifications for bag leak detection systems (included in
proposed amendments to NSPS for new NSPS sources)	60.58c(c)(4)

Report of initial performance tests (PM, stack opacity, fugitive ash
emissions, dioxins/furans, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg)	60.58c(d)(6) and 60.8(a)

Initial report of values for site-specific operating parameters
60.58c(c)(2) and 60.7(a)

Annual report of values for site-specific operating parameters
60.58c(d)(1)

Annual and semiannual reports of emissions or operating parameter
Exceedances, malfunctions, and periods for which data on
emissions/operating parameters were not obtained	60.58c(d), 60.58c(e),
and 60.7(c)

Annual report of no excess emissions	60.58c(d)(7) and 60.7(c)

Report of results of annual performance test	60.58c(d)(6)

Results of previous performance tests (included in proposed amendments
to NSPS for all NSPS sources)	60.58c(g)

Annual report of control equipment inspection (included in proposed
amendments to NSPS for all NSPS sources)	60.58c(d)

Respondents must keep the following records:

Requirement	Standard Citation by Section

Retention of records for 5 years	60.58c(b)

Records of startup, shutdown, or malfunction	60.7(b)

Documentation produced as a result of siting requirements	60.58c(b)(7)

Records of operators completing review of HMIWI operating manual
60.58c(b)(8)

Records of operators completing operator training course and
qualification requirements	60.58c(b)(9)-(10)

Records of initial and annual testing of fugitive ash emissions
(included in proposed amendments to NSPS for all NSPS sources)
60.58c(b)(2)(ii)

Records of process and control device operating parameters
60.58c(b)(2)(iii)-(xv)

Records of CMS operation and maintenance (including CO CEMS)	60.7(f)

Records of emissions or operating parameter exceedances, malfunctions,
and periods for which data on emissions/operating parameters were not
obtained	60.58c(b)(3)-(5)

Records of initial, annual, and any subsequent performance tests
60.58c(b)(6)

Records of calibration of monitoring devices (including CO CEMS)
60.58c(b)(11)

Records of annual control equipment inspections, required maintenance,
and repairs not completed during established timeframe (included in
proposed amendments to NSPS for all NSPS sources)	60.58c(b)(2)(xvi)

Records of bag leak detection system alarms and corrective action taken
(included in proposed amendments to NSPS for new NSPS sources)
60.58c(b)(2)(xvii)

Records of CO concentrations from CO CEMS (included in proposed
amendments to NSPS for new NSPS sources)	60.58c(b)(2)(xviii)

Records on quarterly basis of types and amounts of materials charged for
co-fired combustors and for incinerators burning only pathological,
low-level radioactive, and/or chemotherapeutical waste	60.50c(b) and (c)

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   Respondent activities.  The respondent
activities required by the standards in the first 3 years following the
effective date are provided below:

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Perform CMS demonstrations and repeat CMS demonstrations if necessary.

Perform performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Develop, update, and review operating information.

Perform control equipment inspections.

Prepare and submit the notifications and reports listed in the table
above.

Develop waste management plan.

Prepare and review reports of performance tests.

Prepare and review reports of CMS demonstrations.

Document siting requirements.

Complete operator training and qualification.

Maintain the records listed in the table above.

Train personnel.

	Currently, sources are using monitoring equipment that provides
automated parameter data, e.g., scrubber pressure drop.  Although
personnel at the affected facility still need to evaluate the data, this
type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden
associated with monitoring and recordkeeping.  In addition, some
regulatory agencies are setting up electronic reporting systems to allow
sources to report electronically which is reducing the reporting burden.
 However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used by the
regulatory agencies.  It is estimated that approximately 15 percent of
the respondents use electronic reporting.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 1 	The Information Collected--Agency Activities,
Collection Methodology, and Information Management

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Agency Activities

	The EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the
acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required
information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if
necessary.

Respond to litigation of the standards.

Observe enforcement activities (retesting) related to excess emissions.

Review notifications and reports (listed in the table above), including
performance test reports, excess emissions reports, study addressing
siting requirements, waste management, required to be submitted by
industry

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Collection Methodology and Management

	Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority may inspect
the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used by
the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with the
emission standard.  Data and records maintained by the respondents are
tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs.
The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check
on source operation and maintenance, and for

compliance determinations.

	Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS, which is
operated and maintained by EPA’s Office of Compliance.  The AFS is
EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of
compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and
government-owned facilities.  The EPA uses the AFS for tracking air
pollution compliance and enforcement by local and State regulatory
agencies, EPA Regional offices and EPA headquarters. The EPA and its
delegated authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

	The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner
or operator for

5 years.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Small Entity Flexibility

	None of the new HMIWI currently subject to the NSPS are owned by small
entities, based on the definition used by the Small Business
Administration (500, 750, or fewer employees; and $11.5 million, $31.5
million, or less in annual sales—depending on the company NAICS
codes).  However, the impact on small entities was taken into
consideration during the development of the regulation.  Due to
technical considerations involving the process operations and types of
control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements
are the same for both small and large entities.  The Agency considers
these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and,
therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities.  However, the
regulation includes various provisions that would reduce the burden on
HMIWI, including small entities.  For example, there are less
restrictive standards and reporting requirements for co-fired combustors
and for incinerators burning only pathological, low-level radioactive,
and/or chemotherapeutic waste.  There are also provisions allowing HMIWI
to skip annual tests and reports for 2-year periods if they have
demonstrated compliance for three annual tests in a row.  Also, the
current proposal would allow HMIWI to submit previous emission tests to
demonstrate compliance with the emission limits in the revised NSPS.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Collection Schedule

	Collection of data will begin after the effective date of the NSPS.
The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in Table 1.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 1 	Estimating the Burden and Cost of the
Collection

	This section presents estimates of the burden and cost associated with
the reporting and recordkeeping requirements in the revised NSPS.  Table
1 presents the average annual burden and cost estimates for respondents,
while Table 2 presents the average annual burden and cost estimates for
the Federal government.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Estimating Respondent Burden

	Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the four new
HMIWI currently subject to the standards.  The individual burdens are
expressed under standardized headings designed to be consistent with the
concept of burdens under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where
appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.
Responses to this information collection are mandatory.  The Agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
Control Number.

	The annual average burden to industry over the next 3 years from these
recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 2,004 hours.
 These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from
the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with
the NSPS program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments
received.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Estimating Respondent Costs

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   Estimating labor costs.  Table 1 presents
the costs of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to
the four new HMIWI currently subject to the standards.  The average
annual labor cost for industry during the 3 years of the ICR is
estimated to be $91,011.  The ICR uses the following labor rates to
estimate the labor cost:

	Technical	$45.29	($27.12 x 167%)

	Management	$73.10	($43.77 x 167%)

	Clerical	$32.90	($19.70 x 167%)

These labor rates are from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, June 2006, “Table 9. Private industry workers, by
occupational group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total
compensation.”  The rates were adjusted by an overhead and profit rate
of 167 percent.

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   Estimating capital/startup and operation
and maintenance costs.  The types of industry costs associated with the
information collection activities in the standards are labor costs
associated with recordkeeping and reporting, which are addressed
elsewhere in this ICR, and costs associated with continuous monitoring.
The capital/startup costs are the one-time costs incurred when a
facility becomes subject to the regulation, and typically include
equipment purchased for the purpose of satisfying EPA requirements
(e.g., monitoring equipment, in-house testing equipment, file cabinets).
 A one-time capital/startup cost can be estimated over multiple years by
annualizing the cost using an OMB-approved interest rate.  The annual
operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are the ongoing costs incurred to
maintain the capital equipment (e.g., labor, maintenance materials, and
overhead) and the costs associated with the paperwork requirements
incurred continuously over the life of the ICR (e.g., photocopying and
postage).  Tables 3 through 7 present the annualized capital/startup and
O&M costs associated with the standards.

	The four new HMIWI have already installed monitoring equipment to
comply with the original NSPS, and no additional monitoring equipment
are needed for the revised NSPS.  Consequently, annualized capital costs
and annual O&M costs for these equipment are already being incurred.
Under the revised NSPS, only one new HMIWI (medium unit) will need to
purchase equipment for in-house testing of fugitive ash emissions.  The
other three new HMIWI, all large units, are already required under the
original NSPS to conduct fugitive ash performance tests and are expected
to have already completely paid for the necessary equipment.

	The capital/startup costs associated with file cabinets for storing
collected data and reports include the purchase of one standard
four-drawer file cabinet for each facility (assume $235 per file
cabinet).  Photocopying costs per response are estimated at 0.5 hour of
clerical labor at a rate of $32.90/hr.  Postage costs are estimated at
$4.05 per response for mailing to regulatory agencies, based on the
Priority Mail shipping rate for the U.S. Postal Service.

	The total annualized capital/startup cost over the first 3 years after
the effective date is $13,046, while the total annual O&M cost is
$36,310.  Combining the annualized capital costs with the annual O&M
cost gives a total annualized cost of $49,356 for the 3 years after the
effective date.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	Because the information collection requirements were developed as an
incidental part of standards development, no costs can be attributed to
the development of the information collection requirements.  Because
reporting and recordkeeping requirements on the part of the respondents
are required under Section 111 of the CAA, no operational costs will be
incurred by the Federal government.  Publication and distribution of the
information are part of the AFS, with the result that no Federal costs
can be directly attributed to the ICR.  Examination of records to be
maintained by the respondents will occur incidentally as part of the
periodic inspection of sources that is part of EPA’s overall
compliance and enforcement program and, therefore, is not attributable
to the ICR.

	The only costs to the Federal government are those costs associated
with the analysis of the reported information, onsite observation of the
initial CMS demonstrations and initial performance tests and retests,
enforcement activities due to excess emissions, and litigation
activities.

	Table 2 presents the average annual burden and cost estimates for the
Federal government.  The average annual Agency burden and cost during
the 3 years of the ICR are estimated to be 253 hours and $10,518
(including travel expenses).  The cost is based on the following average
hourly labor rates:

	Technical	$42.45	(GS-12, Step 1, $26.53 x 160%)

	Management	$57.20	(GS-13, Step 5, $35.75 x 160%)

	Clerical	$22.96	(GS-6, Step 3, $14.35 x 160%)

	These labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
“2006 General Schedule,” which excludes locality rates of pay.  The
rates were multiplied by the standard government benefits factor of 1.6.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total
Burden and Costs

	Four new HMIWI are currently required to comply with the requirements
of the standards.  No new HMIWI are projected during the first 3 years
after proposal of the revised standards.  The total number of responses
per year is calculated using the following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity	(B)

Number of respondents	(C)

Number of responses	(D)

Number of respondents that keep records but do not submit reports	(E)

Total annual responses

E = (B x C) + D

Read instructions	1	1	N/A	1.3

Annual update of operating information	4	1	N/A	4.0

Review of operating information with each operator	4	2	N/A	8.0

Initial control equipment inspection	1	1	N/A	1.3

Notification of initial performance test (fugitive ash emissions)	0.3	1
N/A	0.3

Report of initial performance test (fugitive ash emissions)	0.3	1	N/A
0.3

Annual report

CMS emissions and operating parameters	4	1	N/A	4.0

Exceedances, malfunctions, and periods for which data not obtained	1	1
N/A	0.8

Results of performance tests conducted during the year	4	1	N/A	4.0

Report of no exceedances	3	1	N/A	3.2

Semiannual report of exceedances, malfunctions, and periods for which
data not obtaineda	1	1	N/A	0.8

 	 	 	Total	28

a Because the semiannual report coincides once each year with the annual
report and both reports include information on exceedances,
malfunctions, and periods for which data were not obtained, the
frequency of the semiannual report is shown in the table as only once
per year to avoid double-counting.

	The number of total annual responses is 28.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs/Master
Tables

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   Respondent tally.  The bottom line
respondent burden hours and costs, presented in Table 1, are calculated
by adding person-hours per year down each column for technical,
management, and clerical staff, and by adding down the cost column.  The
total hours requested are 2,004 hours.  The total annual labor cost is
$91,011.  The total annual capital/startup and O&M cost to the regulated
entities is $49,356.

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   The Agency tally.  The bottom line Agency
burden hours and costs, presented in Table 2, are calculated as in the
respondent table, by adding person-hours per year down each column for
technical, managerial, and clerical staff, and by adding down the cost
column.  In this case, travel expenses for performance tests and CMS
demonstrations attended are also added to this salary cost.  The annual
average burden for all Agency activities is 253 hours, and the total
annual cost is $10,518 (including travel expenses).

	 listnum "WP List 1" \l 3   Variations in the annual bottom line.  Each
year, the four new HMIWI currently operating incur the same recurring
burden and costs associated with the original NSPS (annual and
semiannual reports).  In the third year after promulgation, however, all
four new HMIWI also incur the additional burden and cost associated with
conducting initial control equipment inspections under the revised NSPS,
and one new HMIWI (medium unit) incurs the burden and cost associated
with preparing and submitting a notification and report of the initial
fugitive ash performance test required for all new HMIWI under the
revised NSPS.  (The other three new HMIWI, all large units, are already
required under the original NSPS to conduct initial and annual fugitive
ash performance tests.)  Because no new NSPS sources are projected over
the next 3 years, there is no burden or cost associated with the
requirements for those sources (e.g., CO CEMS, bag leak detection units,
annual control equipment inspections, and annual fugitive ash emission
testing) in the revised NSPS.

	Similar to the HMIWI, the Federal government each year incurs the same
recurring burden and costs associated with the original NSPS (reviewing
annual and semiannual reports, conducting enforcement activities related
to excess emissions), but also incurs the same burden and costs
associated with litigation related to the revised NSPS.  In the third
year after promulgation, however, the Federal government also incurs the
additional burden of reviewing the notification and report of the
initial fugitive ash performance test for the medium HMIWI (noted
previously).

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Reasons for Change in Burden

	The reduction in burden from the most recently approved ICR is
primarily due to a decrease in the number of sources and applicable
burden items and hours.  No new HMIWI are projected over the next 3
years, so the only burden would be incurred by the four HMIWI currently
subject to the NSPS.  None of these four HMIWI are expected to be
impacted under the revised NSPS and would not be required to conduct
initial performance tests, submit initial notifications, or submit
initial performance test reports—except for the fugitive ash emission
test. No exemption claims are expected for co-fired combustors or for
incinerators burning only pathological, low-level radioactive, and/or
chemotherapeutic waste.  The burden estimate associated with records of
CMS O&M has also been reduced based on average O&M estimates for new
sources.  These reductions in burden offset the increase in burden
associated with the new requirements in the revised NSPS (e.g., initial
fugitive ash emission test and initial and annual control equipment
inspections for all new HMIWI).  The industry labor rates associated
with the burden estimates have also been revised and updated.

 listnum "WP List 1" \l 2 	Burden Statement

	The annual burden for this collection of information is estimated to
average 71 hours per response.  Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.

	An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB
Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are
listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0534, which is available for online viewing at
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov , or in
person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the
public docket is available at www.regulations.gov.  This site can be
used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system,
select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.
Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW,
Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include
the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534 and OMB Control Number
2060-0363 in any correspondence.

	PART B OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

	Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators

  PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 202 (Friday, October 22, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58630-58635]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22662]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0638; FRL-9101-01-R9]

Clean Air Plans; Base Year Emissions Inventories for the 2015
Ozone Standards; Arizona; Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma Nonattainment Areas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve, under the Clean Air Act (CAA), revisions to the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the base year emissions inventory
requirements for the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area (``Phoenix-
Mesa'') and Yuma ozone nonattainment area (``Yuma'') for the 2015 ozone
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standard'').

DATES: Any comments must arrive by November 22, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2021-0638 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: Ben Leers, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

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

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Emissions Inventories
    B. State Submittals
    C. Public Notice and Hearing Requirements
II. Arizona's Emissions Inventories
    A. Baseline Emissions Inventory for the Phoenix-Mesa
Nonattainment Area
    B. Baseline Emissions Inventory for the Yuma Nonattainment Area
III. EPA's Evaluation
IV. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On October 26, 2015, the EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.070 parts per million (ppm).\1\ In accordance with section
107(d) of the CAA, the EPA must designate an area ``nonattainment'' if
it is violating the NAAQS or if it is contributing to a violation of
the NAAQS in a nearby area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA designated two areas in Arizona as nonattainment for the
2015 ozone NAAQS on June 4, 2018, effective August 3, 2018.\2\ The
Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area (including Gila, Maricopa, and Pinal
counties) and Yuma nonattainment area (including Yuma County) were
classified as ``Marginal'' ozone nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 83 FR 25776.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Emissions Inventories

    Sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the CAA require states to
develop and submit, as a SIP revision, ``base year'' emissions
inventories for all areas designated as nonattainment for an ozone
NAAQS. The EPA finalized the 2015 ozone NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule
(SRR) on December 6, 2018. The SRR established implementation
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, including requirements for base
year emissions inventories under CAA section 182(a)(1).\3\ The SRR for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS is codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart CC, and the
emissions inventory requirements are codified at 40 CFR 51.1315.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 83 FR 62998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An emissions inventory for ozone is an estimation of actual
emissions of air pollutants that contribute to the formation of ozone
in an area. Ozone is a gas that is formed by the reaction of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX),
referred to as ozone precursors, in the atmosphere in the presence of
sunlight. Therefore, an emissions inventory for ozone focuses on the
emissions of VOC and NOX. VOC is emitted by many types of
sources, including power plants, industrial sources, on-road and off-
road mobile sources, smaller stationary sources collectively referred
to as area sources, and biogenic sources. NOX is primarily
emitted by combustion sources, both stationary and mobile.
    Emissions inventories provide emissions data that inform a variety
of air quality planning tasks, including establishing baseline
emissions levels, calculating emissions reduction targets needed to
attain the NAAQS and to achieve reasonable further progress (RFP)
toward attainment of the ozone standard,\4\ determining emissions
inputs for ozone air quality modeling analyses, and tracking emissions
over time to determine progress toward achieving air quality and
emissions reduction goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The RFP requirements specified in CAA section 182(b)(1)
apply to all areas classified as ``Moderate'' or higher ozone
nonattainment. At the time of submittal of the Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma
base year emissions inventory SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the
Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma areas were designated Marginal nonattainment
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and were therefore not required to
demonstrate RFP toward attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the 2015 ozone NAAQS, states are required to submit ozone
season day emissions estimates for an inventory calendar year to be
consistent with the baseline year for RFP plans as required by 40 CFR
51.1310(b).\5\ Under 40 CFR 51.1310(b), for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the
RFP baseline year is the most recent calendar year for which a complete
triennial inventory is required to be submitted to the EPA under 40 CFR
51 subpart A.\6\ States may use an alternative baseline emissions
inventory provided that the year selected corresponds with the year of
the effective date of designation as nonattainment for that NAAQS.
Ozone season day emissions are defined in 40 CFR 51.1300(q) as the
average day's emissions for a typical ozone season work weekday. Under
the definition in 40 CFR 51.1300(q), states are required to select the
months in the ozone season and the days in the work week to be
represented. Per EPA's 2017 guidance on emissions inventory
development, the selected ozone season should be representative of the
conditions leading to nonattainment.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 40 CFR 51.1315(a).
    \6\ 83 FR 62998, 63034.
    \7\ EPA, ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of
Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' (May 2017), 75.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. State Submittals

    On July 8, 2020, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) submitted a revision to the Arizona SIP titled ``Maricopa
Association of Governments (MAG) 2020 Eight-Hour Ozone Plan'' (``2020
Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal''). The 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal
includes a 2017 baseline emissions inventory for Phoenix-Mesa developed
by the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and supporting
documentation regarding the development of the baseline emissions
inventory.
    On July 29, 2020, ADEQ submitted a revision to the Arizona SIP
titled ``Marginal Ozone Plan for the Yuma Nonattainment Area,''
including a 2017 baseline emissions inventory for Yuma and supporting
documentation regarding the development of the emissions inventory. The
July 29, 2020 submittal did not include final amendments to the
emissions statement rule in Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-327 and
did not adequately satisfy the public notice requirements under 40 CFR
51.102. On December 22, 2020, ADEQ withdrew the July 29, 2020 submittal
and submitted as a revision to the Arizona SIP another plan, also
titled ``Marginal Ozone Plan for the Yuma Nonattainment Area.'' On July
1, 2021, Arizona provided a technical supplement to the Marginal Ozone
Plan for the Yuma Nonattainment Area addressing comments and questions
raised by the EPA following receipt of ADEQ's prior submittals.\8\
Arizona's December 22, 2020 submittal and the July 1, 2021 supplement
are collectively referred to herein as the ``2020 Yuma SIP Submittal.''
Where specifically

referring to information provided in Arizona's supplement to the 2020
Yuma SIP Submittal, we refer to the July 1, 2021 supplement as the
``2021 Yuma SIP Supplement.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Letter dated June 30, 2021, from Joseph Martini, Manager,
Air Quality Improvement Planning Section, Air Quality Division,
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, to Ben Leers, Air
Planning Office, Air Division, EPA Region IX. Transmitted via email
dated July 1, 2021, from Farah Esmaeili, Environmental Senior
Engineer, Technical Analysis Unit, Air Quality Division, Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality to Ben Leers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this action, we are evaluating and proposing action on the 2020
Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal.

C. Public Notice and Hearing Requirements

    CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102 require states
to provide reasonable notice and an opportunity for a public hearing
prior to adoption of SIP revisions. Section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the
EPA to determine whether a SIP submittal is complete within 60 days of
receipt. Any plan that the EPA does not affirmatively determine to be
complete or incomplete will become complete six months after the day of
submittal by operation of law. A finding of completeness does not
approve the submittal as part of the SIP, nor does it indicate that the
submittal is approvable. It does start a 12-month clock for the EPA to
act on the SIP submittal (see CAA section 110(k)(2)).
    The 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal
each document the public review process followed prior to their
submittal to the EPA as revisions to the SIP.
    Appendix B of the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal includes
documentation of notices of opportunity for public hearing and comment
on the SIP submittal. The notices for opportunity for public hearing
and comment on the SIP submittal were posted in The Arizona Republic,
sent by email to interested parties, and posted on MAG's website. Also
included in Appendix B of the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal is a
responsiveness summary indicating that no comments or requests for
public hearing were received during the 30-day public review period.
    Appendix B of the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal includes documentation of
a notice of public comment period and hearing on the SIP submittal
posted in The Arizona Republic on October 9, 2020, and October 10,
2020. Appendix B of the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal also contains
documentation of the November 12, 2020 public hearing on the SIP
submittal including a sign-in sheet, transcript, signed certification
that the public hearing was held, and a compilation of comments
received and ADEQ's responses to comments.

II. Arizona's Emissions Inventories

    The 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal
each address the emissions inventory requirement in CAA section
182(a)(1). Each submittal provides documentation of a 2017 base year
inventory of emissions of NOX and VOC. The 2017 base year
emissions inventory was the most recent triennial emissions inventory
in the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) at the time the emissions
inventories were prepared for the Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma areas.
    Each emissions inventory submittal includes emissions estimates for
the following source categories: Point sources, nonpoint sources,
nonroad mobile sources, onroad mobile sources, and biogenic sources.
Point sources are generally large, stationary (i.e., non-mobile)
sources of air pollutants. MAG's and ADEQ's specific interpretations of
the point source definition are described in sections II.A and II.B of
this notice, respectively. Nonpoint sources, also referred to as
``area'' sources, are the sources of air pollutants that are typically
too small or too numerous to be categorized as point or mobile sources,
such as residential combustion or consumer products. Nonroad mobile
sources, also referred to as ``off-highway'' mobile sources, include
nonroad engines and nonroad vehicles. Onroad mobile sources, also
referred to as ``highway mobile sources,'' are motor vehicles traveling
on local highways and roads. Biogenic sources emit pollutants produced
by natural sources including vegetation and soils.
    ADEQ and MAG each used a combination of top-down estimation
techniques (i.e., allocation of regional emissions estimates to a
smaller, defined geographic area) and bottom-up estimation techniques
(i.e., development of source or source category emissions estimates
using emissions factors, models, etc.) to develop the emissions
inventories in their respective SIP submittals. Specific estimation
techniques for each source category are described in sections II.A and
II.B of this notice.

A. Baseline Emissions Inventory for the Phoenix-Mesa Nonattainment Area

    The emissions inventory included in the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP
Submittal was developed by MAG. The Phoenix-Mesa area includes Maricopa
County and portions of Gila and Pinal Counties.\9\ MAG selected the
months of June through August to estimate ozone season day emissions of
NOX and VOC from sources in the Phoenix-Mesa area.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 83 FR 25776, 25784-25785, for a detailed description of
the boundaries of the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
    \10\ A detailed justification for MAG's selection of months in
the ozone season is provided in Appendix F of the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa
SIP Submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal, MAG defines point sources
consistent with the point source definition put forth in EPA's air
emissions reporting requirements (AERR).\11\ MAG identified 19
stationary sources meeting the point source definition in the Phoenix-
Mesa area. As noted in the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal, while some
stationary sources in Maricopa County are permitted by ADEQ, no ADEQ-
permitted facilities meet the point source definition, and such sources
are instead categorized as area sources. All point sources in the
Phoenix-Mesa area are located in Maricopa County and are permitted by
the Maricopa County Air Quality District (MCAQD). MAG identified point
sources in the Phoenix-Mesa area via the MCAQD electronic permit system
database. MAG calculated emissions from point sources using annual
source emissions reports, MCAQD investigation reports, permit files and
logs, or telephone contacts with sources. Point source emissions
calculations in the Phoenix-Mesa area also considered ``rule
effectiveness,'' a factor that may be applied to emissions inventory
estimates to account for regulatory programs which may be less than 100
percent effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Under the AERR, a point source is a facility that is a
major source under 40 CFR part 70 for one or more of the pollutants
for which reporting is required by CAA section 51.15(a)(1), but not
with regard to emissions of hazardous air pollutants. 80 FR 8787
(February 19, 2015). For major source emissions thresholds by
pollutant, see 40 CFR 51.30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the point source category, MAG also accounted for actual and
potential voluntary emissions reductions at point sources in the
Phoenix-Mesa area. Major new sources and major modifications in the
Phoenix-Mesa area must offset the emissions of NOX and VOC
generated by the new source or modification as a condition for approval
of permit applications. These emissions offsets are generally obtained
from existing sources located in the vicinity of the proposed source or
modification in the form of emissions reduction credits (ERCs). The
rules governing the generation and use of ERCs in the Phoenix-Mesa area
area are outlined in MCAQD Rule 240. In the 2017 base year inventory,
MAG included certified ERCs available in the Arizona Emissions Bank in
the point source category totals. MAG also included potential (i.e.,
not yet certified) sources of ERCs for NOX and VOC in the

base year inventory in order to maintain the availability of these
emissions in the periodic inventory, provided that sufficient
documentation can be secured to confirm the emissions reductions in the
future.
    MAG estimated county-level emissions from nonpoint sources using a
variety of tools, techniques, and assumptions depending on each
nonpoint source subcategory. MAG's nonpoint source emissions estimates
were informed by EPA's 2017 nonpoint emissions methodology and operator
instructions, source-submitted annual emissions reports, and scaling up
via the use of per-employee emissions factors. For each nonpoint source
subcategory, county-level emissions estimates were allocated to the
Phoenix-Mesa area using one of five representative variables:
Employment, population, land use, general aviation operations, and
location data. Each nonpoint source emissions calculation and
allocation method is described in detail in the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP
Submittal.
    Nonroad mobile source subcategories in the Phoenix-Mesa emissions
inventory include agricultural equipment (e.g., tractors, combines, and
balers), recreational equipment (e.g., all-terrain vehicles and off-
road motorcycles), aircraft, and locomotives, among others. For most
nonroad mobile source subcategories, MAG estimated emissions using the
latest available version of EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
(MOVES2014b). Inputs to MOVES2014b included default model input files,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers
for Environmental Information (NCEI) local climatological data, 2017
fuel specifications and vapor recovery program effectiveness from the
Arizona Department of Agriculture Weights & Measures Services Division,
and local data from a 2003 survey performed for ADEQ by ENVIRON. For
aircraft and airport equipment, MAG estimated emissions using the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Aviation Environmental Design
Tool version 2d (AEDT 2d). Inputs to AEDT 2d included local aircraft
activity data from the FAA Operations Network, AirNav.com, and base
personnel at Luke Air Force Base. Additionally, MAG utilized aircraft
fleet mix profiles from the FAA Traffic Flow Management System Counts
database, verification of AirNav.com data using the FAA 5010 Airport
Master Records database, and general aviation airport survey data
conducted by MAG in 2017. Emissions from locomotives were estimated
using survey data from the three railroad companies operating in
Maricopa County (i.e., Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Union Pacific, and
Amtrak) and emissions factors published by ENVIRON and the EPA.
    Emissions from onroad mobile sources in the Phoenix-Mesa area were
calculated using MOVES2014b. For onroad mobile sources, MOVES2014b
requires local data inputs relating to vehicle inspection and
maintenance programs, meteorological data, vehicle populations, source
type age distributions, annual vehicle miles traveled, and alternative
vehicle and fuel technologies, among others. MAG cited numerous sources
and assumptions for local data inputs, including vehicle registration
data from the Arizona Department of Transportation, meteorological data
from the NOAA NCEI, and the MAG Transportation Modeling Group.
    Emissions from biogenic sources in the Phoenix-Mesa area were
calculated using the Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from
Nature (MEGAN) version 2.1. MEGAN requires inputs of land cover and
meteorological data. MAG utilized 1-kilometer eight-day average leaf
area index from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's
Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer satellite observations,
plant functional type (PFT) data from the National Land Cover Dataset,
and emission factors derived from PFT distributions. MAG processed
meteorological data from the Weather Research and Forecasting model
version 3.9 with the Meteorology-Chemistry Interface Processor (MCIP).
The model outputs from MCIP were further processed using the MEGAN
component program called MET2MGN for input to MEGAN.
    MAG employed quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures
throughout the development of the Phoenix-Mesa emissions inventory.
Point source emissions reports undergo automated QA/QC upon submission
to MCAQD's database as well as manual QA/QC performed by air quality
planning staff. Area source emissions calculations are peer-reviewed by
air quality planners to ensure calculations can be reproduced. Other
QA/QC procedures performed by MAG include review of files by personnel
not involved in the development of the inventory as well as comparison
of the 2017 inventory to 2014 and 2011 inventories. MAG's QA/QC
procedures are described in detail in the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP
submittal.
    Estimates of 2017 ozone season day emissions of NOX and
VOC in the Phoenix-Mesa area are summarized in Table 1 below.

                                                        Table 1--2017 Ozone Season Day Emissions
                                                          Phoenix-Mesa Ozone Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Ozone season day emissions (pounds per day)
                        Pollutant                        -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Point         Nonpoint     Nonroad mobile   Onroad mobile     Biogenic       Area total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.....................................................          24,277          32,880         112,100         140,154           5,896         315,307
VOC.....................................................           8,625         209,885          63,661         112,746       1,283,539       1,678,457
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal, Appendix A, 11.

B. Baseline Emissions Inventory for the Yuma Nonattainment Area

    The emissions inventory included in the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal was
developed by ADEQ. The Yuma area consists of approximately 52 square
miles within Yuma County in and around the city of Yuma, Arizona.\12\
ADEQ selected the months of April through October to estimate ozone
season day emissions of NOX and VOC from sources in the Yuma
area.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 83 FR 25776, 25785 for a detailed description of the
boundaries of the Yuma nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    \13\ ADEQ's selection of the months in the ozone season is
consistent with documentation provided by ADEQ along with its
initial nonattainment boundary recommendations for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. See the technical support document ``Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma
Nonattainment Areas; Intended Area Designations for the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' included in the docket for
EPA's initial designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under docket ID
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548.

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

    ADEQ obtained emissions estimates for point sources in the Yuma
area from the 2017 NEI and from source-submitted annual emissions
inventory reports required for all sources holding a minor permit in
Arizona. All point sources listed in the 2017 NEI and geographically
located in the Yuma ozone nonattainment area were included in the point
source category in the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal. ADEQ also included
minor point sources holding permits in the Yuma ozone nonattainment
area in the point source category.
    Emissions from Yuma area nonpoint sources (also referred to as
``area sources'' in the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal) were estimated
predominantly using data from the 2017 NEI. The 2017 NEI includes
emissions estimates for numerous area source subcategories on the
county level. For most nonpoint source subcategories, ADEQ allocated
county-level emissions estimates from the 2017 NEI to the Yuma area
based on population, industrial employment, land area, crop land area,
or railroad length. Emissions calculation methods used for the
remaining nonpoint source subcategories include per-person emissions
factors included in 2017 NEI documentation, information from permits,
and information from source-submitted annual reports.
    ADEQ estimated emissions from nonroad mobile sources in the Yuma
area by allocating emissions from 2017 NEI data using representative
factors including population, cropland area, and railroad length.
Nonroad mobile source categories addressed in the 2020 Yuma SIP
submittal include: Agricultural equipment; commercial equipment;
construction and mining equipment; industrial equipment; lawn and
garden equipment; logging equipment; recreational equipment; pleasure
craft; and locomotives. Of the eight private and public airports
identified by ADEQ in Yuma County, none are located within the Yuma
ozone nonattainment area. Therefore, ADEQ assumed zero nonroad mobile
source emissions from airports.
    Emissions from onroad mobile sources in the Yuma area were
calculated using MOVES2014b. In the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal, ADEQ
listed MOVES2014b inputs for source type, road type, fuel type, and
process type. ADEQ notes in the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal that the Yuma
area is located adjacent to a major trucking and travel corridor, and
freight haulers and tractor trailers are primary producers of VOC and
NOX emissions in the Yuma area.
    ADEQ estimated emissions from biogenic sources in the Yuma area
using biogenic emissions data from the 2017 NEI. County-level biogenic
emissions from the 2017 NEI were allocated to the Yuma area using the
ratio of land area in the Yuma ozone nonattainment area to the land
area within Yuma County. As described in the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal,
ozone season day biogenic emissions were estimated by summing the
biogenic emissions in the Yuma area for each month in the ozone season
(April through October) and dividing by the number of days in the ozone
season (213 days).
    ADEQ engaged numerous QA/QC procedures in the development of the
2020 Yuma SIP Submittal. ADEQ prepared an inventory preparation plan
(IPP) and incorporated feedback from the EPA on the IPP to identify and
follow suitable estimation methodologies. Procedures outlined in ADEQ's
EPA-reviewed quality assurance project plan were followed to conduct
QA/QC on emissions estimates submitted by sources.\14\ In general, ADEQ
conducted peer and management review of the technical support document
to the 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal and underlying calculations. A detailed
description of ADEQ's QA/QC procedures is included in the 2020 Yuma SIP
Submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ ADEQ's ``Annual Permitted Source Emissions Inventories
Quality Assurance Project Plan'' (October 2020) is included in the
docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2021 Yuma SIP Supplement provides clarification on emissions
inventory details including selection of ozone season months, handling
of seasonal emissions distribution, consideration of weekday emissions
schedules, and ADEQ's QA/QC process. Based on input from the EPA
regarding the consideration of weekday emissions schedules and of the
ozone season in the Yuma nonattainment area, ADEQ made corrections to
some of its ozone season day emissions estimates compared to the values
provided in the original 2020 Yuma SIP Suibmittal. All changes to
estimations of ozone season day emissions are described in detail in
the 2021 Yuma SIP Supplement.
    Estimates of 2017 ozone season day emissions of NOX and
VOC in the Yuma area are summarized in Table 2 below.

                                                        Table 2--2017 Ozone Season Day Emissions
                                                              Yuma Ozone Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Ozone season day emissions (pounds per day)
                        Pollutant                        -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Point         Nonpoint     Nonroad mobile   Onroad mobile     Biogenic       Area total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.....................................................           1,113           1,275           2,158          10,402              38          14,986
VOC.....................................................             138          15,007           2,737           5,527           2,849          26,259
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2021 Yuma SIP Supplement, 6.

III. EPA's Evaluation

    Based on the documentation included in Arizona's submittals, the
EPA finds that the submittals satisfy the procedural requirements of
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(l) of the Act requiring states to provide
reasonable notice and an opportunity for public hearing prior to
adoption of SIP revisions. The 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal became
complete by operation of law on January 8, 2021, and the 2020 Yuma SIP
Submittal became complete by operation of law on June 22, 2021,
pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(B).
    The EPA has reviewed Arizona's submittals for consistency with CAA
sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) and the requirements for emissions
inventories under the EPA's implementing regulations for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS at 40 CFR 51.1315. The 2017 baseline emissions inventories
represent the

most recent calendar year for which a consistent and comprehensive
statewide inventory was available. The selection of a 2017 baseline
year for the Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma emissions inventories is therefore
consistent with the requirement for selection of RFP baseline years
under 40 CFR 51.1310(b). We find that the Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma
emissions inventories appropriately estimated the average day's
emissions for a typical weekday in the ozone season, consistent with
the definition of ozone season day emissions under 40 CFR 51.1300(q).
    Arizona's submittals document the procedures used by MAG and ADEQ
to estimate ozone season day emissions for each of the major source
types. Documentation of emissions estimation procedures in the 2020
Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and 2020 Yuma SIP Submittal demonstrate that
MAG and ADEQ followed acceptable procedures to develop emissions
estimates. The 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and 2020 Yuma SIP
Submittal each also describe the specific QA/QC measures implemented to
ensure the accuracy and integrity of data throughout the development of
each respective emissions inventory.
    Based upon the documentation of emissions estimation techniques and
QA/QC procedures employed to develop the emissions inventories in each
submittal, we find that the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and 2020
Yuma SIP Submittal contain comprehensive, accurate, current inventories
of actual emissions from all sources in the Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma ozone
nonattainment areas, respectively. The EPA thereby proposes to approve
the baseline inventories of NOX and VOC emissions for the
Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma ozone nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS submitted by Arizona pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1315 and CAA sections
172(c)(3) and 182(b)(1) .

IV. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment

    We are proposing to approve the 2020 Phoenix-Mesa SIP Submittal and
2020 Yuma SIP Submittal as meeting the ozone-related baseline emissions
inventory requirement for the Phoenix-Mesa and Yuma ozone nonattainment
areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The emissions inventories we are
proposing to approve into the SIP are summarized in tables 1 and 2 of
this notice. We are proposing to approve the emissions inventories
because they contain comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories
of actual emissions for all relevant sources in accordance with CAA
sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a). The EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this proposed rule. We will accept comments
from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days.

V. 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
plans 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 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 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. The Fort McDowell
Yavapai Nation, the Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River
Indian Reservation, the Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona, and the Salt
River Pima Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation have
areas of Indian country located within the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment
area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The Cocopah Tribe of Arizona and the
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation have areas of Indian
country located within the Yuma nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 9, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-22662 Filed 10-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P