[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 104 (Thursday, June 1, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25213-25221]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10946]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2017-0255; FRL-9963-08-Region 9]

Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Stationary Sources; New Source Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing
approval of regulatory revisions to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) portion of the applicable state
implementation plan (SIP) for the State of Arizona. These revisions are
primarily intended to make corrections to ADEQ's SIP-approved rules for
the issuance of New Source Review (NSR) permits for stationary sources,
with a focus on preconstruction permit requirements under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) for major sources and major modifications. On November
2, 2015, we took final action on a SIP submittal from ADEQ that
significantly updated ADEQ's SIP-approved NSR permitting program.
However, that action identified several deficiencies in ADEQ's program
that needed to be corrected. This proposed action will correct a
substantial portion of the deficiencies we identified in that 2015
action. We are seeking comment on our proposed action and plan to
follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by July 3, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2017-0255, at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Beckham, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-
3811<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. Which rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there previous versions of the rules in the Arizona SIP?
    C. What is the purpose of the EPA's proposed rule?
II. The EPA's Evaluation
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the State's rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Review of Rules Requested To Be Removed From the SIP
    D. Remaining NSR Deficiencies
    E. Federal Implementation Plan for GHGs and ADEQ's PSD Program
    F. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the State's
Rules
    G. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria under Sections
110(l) and 193 of the Clean Air Act?

    H. Conclusion
III. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Definitions

    For this document, we are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
    (i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (ii) The initials ADEQ mean or refer to the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
    (iii) The initials A.R.S. mean or refer to the Arizona Revised
Statutes.
    (iv) The initials BACT mean or refer to Best Available Control
Technology.
    (v) The initials CFR mean or refer to Code of Federal Regulations.
    (vi) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
    (vii) The initials FIP mean or refer to Federal Implementation
Plan.
    (viii) The initials GHG mean or refer to greenhouse gas.
    (ix) The initials IBR mean or refer to incorporation by reference.
    (x) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.
    (xi) The initials NA-NSR mean or refer to Nonattainment New Source
Review.
    (xii) The initials NSR mean or refer to New Source Review.
    (xiii) The initials PAL mean or refer to Plantwide Applicability
Limits.
    (xiv) The initials PM10 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10 micrometers (coarse
particulate matter).
    (xv) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (fine
particulate matter).
    (xvi) The initials PSD mean or refer to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.
    (xvii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
    (xviii) The initials SMC mean or refer to significant monitoring
concentration.
    (xix) The words State or Arizona mean the State of Arizona, unless
the context indicates otherwise.
    (xx) The initials TSD mean or refer to the technical support
document for this action.
    (xxi) The initials VOC mean or refer to volatile organic compound.

I. The State's Submittals

A. Which rules did the State submit?

    On April 28, 2017, ADEQ submitted regulatory revisions for the ADEQ
portion of the Arizona SIP to the EPA. This SIP revision submittal,
which is the subject of this action and is referred to herein as the
``April 2017 NSR submittal,'' contains revisions to ADEQ's
preconstruction review and permitting program requirements. These
revisions are intended to correct deficiencies in ADEQ's SIP-approved
NSR program related to the requirements under both part C (prevention
of significant deterioration or PSD) and part D (nonattainment new
source review or NA-NSR) of title I of the Act, which apply to major
stationary sources and major modifications of such sources. The
preconstruction review and permitting programs are often collectively
referred to as ``New Source Review'' or NSR.
    Table 1 lists the rules in the April 2017 NSR submittal, all of
which we are proposing for SIP approval in this action, along with the
rules' effective dates under State law. The submitted rules are from
the Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18--Environmental Quality,
Chapter 2--Department of Environmental Quality--Air Pollution Control,
Articles 1 through 4.

                          Table 1--Submitted Rules Proposed for Approval in This Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Rule                                   Title                      State effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R18-2-101 (except 20).....................  Definitions.....................  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-201.................................  Particulate Matter: PM10 and      March 21, 2017.
                                             PM2.5.
R18-2-203.................................  Ozone...........................  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-217.................................  Designation and Classification    March 21, 2017.
                                             of Attainment Areas.
R18-2-218.................................  Limitation of Pollutants in       March 21, 2017.
                                             Classified Attainment Areas.
R18-2-330.................................  Public Participation............  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-332.................................  Stack Height Limitation.........  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-401.................................  Definitions.....................  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-402.................................  General.........................  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-403.................................  Permits for Sources Located in    March 21, 2017.
                                             Nonattainment Areas.
R18-2-404.................................  Offset Standards................  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-405.................................  Special Rule for Major Sources    March 21, 2017.
                                             of VOC or Nitrogen Oxides in
                                             Ozone Nonattainment Areas
                                             Classified as Serious or Severe.
R18-2-406.................................  Permit Requirements for Sources   March 21, 2017.
                                             Located in Attainment and
                                             Unclassifiable Areas.
R18-2-407.................................  Air Quality Impact Analysis and   March 21, 2017.
                                             Monitoring Requirements.
R18-2-408.................................  Innovative Control Technology...  March 21, 2017.
R18-2-410.................................  Visibility and Air Quality        March 21, 2017.
                                             Related Value Protection.
R18-2-411.................................  Permit Requirements for Sources   March 21, 2017.
                                             that Locate in Attainment or
                                             Unclassifiable Areas and Cause
                                             or Contribute to a Violation of
                                             Any National Ambient Air
                                             Quality Standard.
R18-2-412.................................  PALs............................  March 21, 2017.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On May 9, 2017, ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal was determined to meet
the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, which must be
met before formal EPA review.
    The proposed revisions will apply to all areas and sources of
Arizona where ADEQ has jurisdiction. Currently, ADEQ has permitting
jurisdiction for the following stationary source categories in all
areas of Arizona: smelting of metal ores, coal-fired electric
generating stations, petroleum refineries, Portland cement plants, and
portable sources. ADEQ also has permitting jurisdiction for major and
minor sources in the following counties: Apache, Cochise, Coconino,
Gila, Graham, Greenlee, La Paz, Mohave, Navajo, Santa Cruz, Yavapai,
and Yuma. Finally, ADEQ has permitting jurisdiction over major sources
in Pinal

County \1\ and the Rosemont Copper Mine in Pima County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ADEQ has delegated implementation of the major source
program to the Pinal County Air Quality Control District.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there previous versions of the rules in the Arizona SIP?

    Table 2 lists the existing rules in the Arizona SIP that would be
superseded or removed from the Arizona SIP as part of our proposed
action. If the EPA were to take final action as proposed herein, these
rules generally would be replaced in the SIP by the submitted set of
rules listed in Table 1.

                     Table 2--SIP Rules Proposed for Removal From Arizona SIP in This Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  EPA approval
                 Rule                            Title                date          Federal Register citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R9-3-301(I) and (K)...................  Installation Permits:        05/05/1982  47 FR 19326
                                         General.
R9-3-304(H)...........................  Installation Permits in      05/03/1983  48 FR 19878
                                         Attainment Areas.
R18-2-101.............................  Definitions............      11/23/2014  79 FR 56655
                                                                      11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
R18-2-201.............................  Particulate Matter:          09/23/2014  79 FR 56655
                                         PM10 and PM2.5.
R18-2-203.............................  Ozone: One-hour              09/23/2014  79 FR 56655
                                         Standard and Eight-
                                         hour Averaged Standard.
R18-2-217.............................  Designation and               11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
                                         Classification of
                                         Attainment Areas.
R18-2-218.............................  Limitation of                 11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
                                         Pollutants in
                                         Classified Attainment
                                         Areas.
R18-2-330.............................  Public Participation...       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
R18-2-332.............................  Stack Height Limitation       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
R18-2-401.............................  Definitions............       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
R18-2-402.............................  General................       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
R18-2-403.............................  Permits for Sources           11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
                                         Located in
                                         Nonattainment Areas.
R18-2-404.............................  Offset Standards.......       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
R18-2-405.............................  Special Rule for Major        11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
                                         Sources of VOC or
                                         Nitrogen Oxides in
                                         Ozone Nonattainment
                                         Areas Classified as
                                         Serious or Severe.
R18-2-406.............................  Permit Requirements for       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
                                         Sources Located in
                                         Attainment and
                                         Unclassifiable Areas.
R18-2-407.............................  Air Quality Impact            11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
                                         Analysis and
                                         Monitoring
                                         Requirements.
R18-2-412.............................  PALs...................       11/2/2015  80 FR 67319
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the purpose of the EPA's proposed rule?

    The purpose of this proposed rule is to propose to update the
Arizona SIP by approving the rule revisions submitted in ADEQ's 2017
NSR submittal, to discuss the basis for our proposed approval action,
and to provide notice of and seek public comment on our proposed
action. We present our evaluation of the rules submitted by ADEQ in its
April 2017 NSR submittal, which are identified in Table 1 above, as
compared with applicable requirements under the CAA and EPA
regulations, particularly with respect to the PSD and NA-NSR
requirements applicable to major sources and major modifications. We
provide our reasoning in general terms below, and include our more
detailed analysis in the Technical Support Document for this action
(TSD), which is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
This proposed rule also discusses our proposal to approve ADEQ's
request that we remove older, outdated rules from the Arizona SIP and
our rationale for doing so.

II. The EPA's Evaluation

A. How is the EPA evaluating the State's rules?

    The EPA has reviewed the provisions submitted for SIP approval by
ADEQ that are the subject of this action for compliance with the CAA's
general requirements for SIPs in CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA's
regulations for stationary source permitting programs in 40 CFR part
51, subpart I, and the CAA requirements for SIP revisions in CAA
section 110(l) and 193.
    With respect to procedures, CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) require
that revisions to a SIP be adopted by the state after reasonable notice
and public hearing. EPA has promulgated specific procedural
requirements for SIP revisions in 40 CFR part 51, subpart F. These
requirements include publication of notices, by prominent advertisement
in the relevant geographic area, a public comment period of at least 30
days, and an opportunity for a public hearing. Based on our review of
the public process documentation included in the April 2017 NSR
submittal, we find that ADEQ has provided sufficient evidence of public
notice and opportunity for comment and public hearing prior to adoption
and submittal of these rules to the EPA.
    With respect to substantive requirements, we have reviewed the ADEQ
provisions that are the subject of our current action in accordance
with the CAA and applicable regulatory requirements, focusing primarily
on those that apply to PSD permit programs under part C of title I of
the Act and Nonattainment NSR permit programs under part D of title I
of the Act. The submitted rules are intended to correct a substantial
portion of the deficiencies in ADEQ's NSR program that we identified in
our November 2, 2015 final action and a separate June 22, 2016 final
action issued by the EPA, discussed below.
    On November 2, 2015 (80 FR 67319), the EPA published a final
limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the ADEQ
portion of the Arizona SIP (referred to hereinafter as ``our 2015 NSR
action'').\2\ Our 2015 NSR action updated ADEQ's SIP-approved NSR
permitting program, but identified deficiencies that need to be
corrected for the EPA to grant full approval of ADEQ's NSR program.
Thus, our 2015 NSR action would trigger an obligation on the EPA to
promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the
deficiencies that were the basis for our limited disapproval action
unless the State of Arizona corrects the

deficiencies, and the EPA approves the related plan revisions, within
two years of that final action. In addition, to avoid sanctions under
section 179 of the Act, ADEQ has 18 months from December 2, 2015, the
effective date of our 2015 NSR action, to correct those deficiencies
related to part D of title I of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ We also finalized other actions, which included a partial
disapproval related to the fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) significant monitoring concentration, and limited
approvals, without corresponding limited disapprovals, related to
section 189(e) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 22, 2016 (81 FR 40525), the EPA also published a separate
but related final limited disapproval action for ADEQ's NA-NSR program,
as ADEQ's program did not fully address fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) precursors as required by section 189(e) of the Act
(referred to hereinafter as ``our 2016 PM2.5 precursor
action''). This action triggered an obligation on the EPA to promulgate
a FIP to address this deficiency unless the State of Arizona corrects
the deficiency, and the EPA approves the related plan revisions, within
two years of the final action. In addition, to avoid sanctions under
section 179 of the Act, ADEQ has 18 months from the July 22, 2016
effective date of our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action to correct
the deficiency as it relates to part D of title I of the Act.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    Please see our 2015 NSR action, including our proposed action on
March 18, 2015 (80 FR 14044), for a detailed discussion of the approval
criteria for the NSR program and how ADEQ's NSR rules reviewed in that
action generally meet the approval criteria despite certain
deficiencies that require correction for the EPA to fully approve
ADEQ's NSR program. In this action, we are focusing our review on the
revisions that ADEQ made to correct the deficiencies we identified in
our 2015 NSR action and our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action. We
also reviewed other revisions ADEQ made in the rules submitted in
ADEQ's April 2017 NSR action to ensure that the revised language was
consistent with applicable requirements of the Act and EPA regulations.
    We are proposing approval of ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal because it
would correct numerous deficiencies and is otherwise consistent with
the requirements for NSR programs and the Act. If approved, this action
would not correct all the deficiencies in ADEQ's NSR program previously
identified by the EPA, but it would correct those deficiencies that
would potentially lead to sanctions under section 179 of the Act
because of our 2015 NSR action. ADEQ expects to correct the remaining
deficiencies in a subsequent SIP submittal. Our detailed analysis of
ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal is provided in the TSD for this action. Here
we briefly discuss the previously identified deficiencies that this
action, if finalized, would correct.
1. Deficiencies Corrected Related to Public Availability of Information
    In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program did not
ensure, for all sources subject to NSR review, that certain
requirements related to public availability of information were met.
Specifically, ADEQ's program did not ensure that the information
submitted by the owner or operator and ADEQ's analysis of effects of
air quality would be available for public inspection in at least one
location in the affected area. See 40 CFR 51.161(b)(1). To address this
deficiency, ADEQ revised its public notice requirements to ensure that
the necessary documents will be available for public inspection in the
``area affected'' by the action, including the Director's analysis of
the effects on ambient air quality. See revised R18-2-330(D) and (F).
2. Deficiencies Corrected Related to Stack Height Provisions
    Regarding requirements for stack heights and good engineering
practice, in our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program did
not adequately address the following requirements. First, we found that
ADEQ's NSR program did not meet the public hearing requirements in 40
CFR 51.164 and 51.118(a) because the referenced procedures were not in
the SIP or submitted for SIP approval. ADEQ addressed this issue by
revising R18-2-332 to reference the SIP-approved public notice
requirements in R18-2-330. See revised R18-2-332(E). We found that
ADEQ's rules did not contain language that met the exception to the
stack height provisions provided in 40 CFR 51.118(b). In addition, R18-
2-332 incorrectly referenced July 1, 1975 instead of July 1, 1957.
ADEQ's current SIP submittal has corrected these deficiencies; see
revised R18-2-332(B)(1) and (B)(2). We also determined that ADEQ's NSR
program did not contain a requirement that owners or operators seeking
to rely on the equation in 40 CFR 51.100(ii)(2)(i) produce evidence
that the equation was relied on in establishing an emission limitation.
ADEQ's currently submitted rules have added this requirement; see
revised R18-2-332(C)(2)(a). Finally, ADEQ's NSR program previously
contained a provision at R18-2-332(D) which provided additional
provisions for sources ``seeking credit because of plume impaction
which results in concentrations in violation of national ambient air
quality standards or applicable maximum allowable increases.'' This
provision is not contained in the federal regulations and appeared to
allow for the use of stack heights beyond good engineering practice
(GEP) stack height, as defined in 40 CFR 51.100(ii), which we
identified as a deficiency in our 2015 NSR action. ADEQ has now
addressed this deficiency by removing this provision from R18-2-332.
3. Deficiencies Corrected Related to the CAA NA-NSR Program
    In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program often
referred to Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ's regulations where the
federal regulations refer to 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63; or, similarly,
sections 111 or 112 of the Act (see 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xiii)--lowest
achievable emission rate, and (a)(1)(xl)--best available control
technology).\3\ Articles 9 and 11 are where ADEQ incorporates by
reference the federal regulations in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 (which
the EPA implements under sections 111 and 112 of the Act). However,
these Articles were not in the SIP, had not been submitted for SIP
approval, and did not necessarily contain provisions equivalent to all
the subparts in parts 60, 61, and 63. In its current submittal, ADEQ
has revised its rules to remove the references to Article 9 and 11 and
instead reference the requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63;
sections 111 and 112; and/or the new source performance standard or
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants. See the
revised R18-2-101(21), R18-2-401(11) and R18-2-406(A)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Our 2015 NSR action also identified the definition for
``regulated NSR pollutant'' in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii) as being
part of this deficiency. However, upon further review, that
determination was in error as the federal definition does not
reference part 60, 61, 63 or sections 111 and 112 of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's SIP-approved
NSR rules governing nonattainment NSR contained several definitions
that were not at least as stringent as the corresponding federal
definition. In its April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ has revised its
definitions for consistency with the federal definitions in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1). Specifically, ADEQ corrected the definitions for
stationary source in revised R18-2-101(140), major stationary source in
revised R18-2-401(13), net emissions increase in revised R18-2-101(88),
significant in revised R18-2-101(131) and R18-2-405(B), allowable
emissions in revised R18-2-101(13), federally enforceable in

revised R18-2-101(53), regulated NSR pollutant in revised R18-2-
101(122), and projected actual emissions in revised R18-2-401(23).
    40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(G) requires that credit for emission
reductions can be claimed only to the extent that the reviewing
authority has not relied on it in issuing any permit under regulations
approved pursuant to 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, or the state has not
relied on it in demonstration of attainment or reasonable further
progress. In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR program
generally addresses this requirement at R18-2-404(H), but also needed
to include references to minor NSR requirements, which are to be
approved as part of ADEQ's NSR regulations under subpart I. In its
April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ added a reference to its minor NSR rule
R18-2-334, but not its registration program in R18-2-302.01. We
determined that this is acceptable as sources in the registration
program cannot use emission reductions to obtain a registration. That
is, as ADEQ explained in its April 2017 NSR submittal, R18-2-302.01
does not provide for the imposition of minor NSR emission limits;
rather, those limits would only be imposed on a source that was denied
registration and required to obtain a permit meeting the minor NSR
requirements (which are in R18-2-334). See revised R18-2-404(H).
    We determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's NSR program
contained an apparent typographical error in R18-2-402 by including an
incorrect cross reference that did not meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.165(a)(6) that ensures owners and operators document and maintain a
record of certain applicability-related information. In its current
submittal, ADEQ has corrected this error; see revised R18-2-
402(F)(1)(c). Additionally, we previously found that ADEQ's NSR program
did not require owners or operators to make information required under
40 CFR 51.165(a)(6) available for review upon request by the Director
or the public, as required by 40 CFR 51.165(a)(7). ADEQ's current
submittal has added this requirement; see revised R18-2-402(F)(7).
    40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i) requires that increases in emissions be
offset by reductions in emissions using a ratio of emission decreases
to emission increases of at least 1 to 1. ADEQ's rules contained this
requirement in R18-2-404, but we found in our 2015 NSR action that it
could have been interpreted as establishing the ratio as increases to
decreases, instead of decreases to increases. In addition, R18-2-404(A)
referred to additional offset requirements in R18-2-405, but did not
refer to the offset requirement in other parts of R18-2-404. ADEQ has
corrected these deficiencies in its current SIP submittal; see revised
R18-2-402(A).
    40 CFR 51.165(a)(11) requires emission offsets to be obtained for
the same regulated NSR pollutant, unless interprecursor offsetting is
permitted for a particular pollutant, as further specified in the rule.
We found in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules did not contain a
specific requirement that offsets must be for the same regulated
pollutant. In its April 2017 NSR submittal, ADEQ has clarified its
rules consistent with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11). See revised R18-2-404(A).
In addition, ADEQ added an option to R18-2-404(A) to use interprecursor
trading for ozone that is consistent with new revisions to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(11)(i).
    40 CFR 51.165(b) requires that SIPs have a preconstruction program
that satisfies the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act
for any new major stationary source or major modification that would
locate in an attainment area, but would cause or contribute to a
violation of a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in any
adjacent area. ADEQ's rules contained provisions for 40 CFR 51.165(b)
in R18-2-406 that generally met this requirement. However, we found in
our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's regulations referred to the State's
primary or secondary ambient air quality standards, and thus did not
fully meet the requirements in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(1) and (2) as ADEQ's
program did not ensure such standards would apply to areas outside of
Arizona. In this current SIP submittal, ADEQ has addressed this issue
by revising its program to instead refer to the NAAQS, which are
applicable in all areas. These program requirements were removed from
R18-2-406 and included in the new R18-2-411--Permit Requirements for
Sources that Locate in Attainment or Unclassifiable Areas and Cause or
Contribute to a Violation of any National Ambient Air Quality Standard.
See revised R18-2-101(85), R18-2-401(27), and newly adopted R18-2-411.
    In our 2015 NSR action, we found certain deficiencies in ADEQ's
rules regarding requirements for Plantwide Applicability Limits (or
Actuals PALs), which have been corrected in ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal.
First, ADEQ's provisions for PALs did not specify that modifications
under a PAL do not need approval through the nonattainment major NSR
program as required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1)(iii)(B), as only the PSD
program was mentioned. ADEQ's current submittal has added language to
include this provision, see revised R18-2-412(A)(2)(b). ADEQ's NA-NSR
program did not contain a definition for major emissions unit as is
required by 40 CFR 51.165(f)(2)(iv). ADEQ has now added this term at
R18-2-401(12). 40 CFR 51.165(f)(9)--ADEQ's PAL provisions at R18-2-
412(H) contained an incorrect reference, and R18-2-412(H)(5) used
``eliminated'' where the federal regulation uses ``established.'' ADEQ
has now corrected these deficiencies; see revised R18-2-412(H)(4) and
(H)(5). ADEQ's program also contained incorrect cross-references in
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165(f)(10), as follows: PAL
renewal provisions at R18-2-412(I)(1) needed to contain a reference to
subsection (D) of R18-2-412 instead of (F), and R18-2-(I)(4)(a) needed
to reference subsection (E) of R18-2-412. ADEQ's current SIP submittal
shows that it has made these corrections; see revised R18-2-412(I)(1)
and (I)(4)(a).
    Finally, section 173(a)(4) of the Act requires that NA-NSR permit
programs shall provide that permits to construct and operate may be
issued if ``the Administrator has not determined that the applicable
implementation plan is not being adequately implemented for the
nonattainment area in which the proposed source is to be constructed or
modified.'' We found in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's program did not
contain this provision. ADEQ's current SIP submittal has added this
requirement. See revised R18-2-403(A)(4).
4. Deficiencies Corrected Related to the CAA PSD Program
    In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's NSR rules often
referred to Articles 9 and/or 11 of ADEQ's regulations where the
federal regulations refer to 40 CFR parts 60, 61, or 63; or, similarly,
sections 111 or 112 of the Act (see 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(iii)(aa),
(b)(12), (b)(16)(i), (b)(17), (b)(47)(ii)(c), (b)(49)(ii),
(i)(1)(ii)(aa), and (j)). Articles 9 and 11 are where ADEQ incorporates
by reference the federal regulations in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63
(which EPA implements under sections 111 and 112 of the Act). However,
these Articles were not in the SIP, had not been submitted for SIP
approval, and do not necessarily contain provisions equivalent to all
the subparts in parts 60, 61, and 63. In its current SIP submittal,
ADEQ has revised its rules to remove the references to Article 9 and 11
and instead reference the requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 61, or

63; and/or sections 111 and 112. See revised R18-2-101(53)(a),
(124)(b); R18-2-401(11); R18-2-101(21); R18-2-402(G)(2); and R18-2-
406(A)(4).
    ADEQ adopted the PSD increments, or maximum allowable increases, in
R18-2-218--Limitation of Pollutants in Classified Attainment Areas.
However, we determined in our 2015 NSR action that in other rules ADEQ
used ``increment'' or ``incremental ambient standard'' where it
appeared the intent is to refer to the standards established in R18-2-
218 and identified in ADEQ's rules as the ``maximum allowable
increases.'' ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal addresses this issue by
generally revising these references to ``maximum allowable increases.''
See revised R18-2-406(E), R18-2-412(G)(2)(b), R18-2-101(51).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ADEQ also needs to correct this issue in R18-2-319(A)(3) and
R18-2-320(B)(6) per our 2015 NSR action. While ADEQ has recently
revised these rules to address this issue, they were not included in
the April 2017 NSR submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's program did not ensure
that sources subject to the PSD program would be reviewed for
compliance with the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS of 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\,
which was effective March 18, 2013 (see 78 FR 3086). See 40 CFR
51.166(b)(2)(iii)(i)(2), (b)(35), (d), (g)(3)(ii), (k), and (m)(1).
This new NAAQS is required to be implemented for PSD sources (unless
otherwise grandfathered under provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(10))
beginning with the effective date of the NAAQS. In its April 2017 NSR
submittal, ADEQ revised its program to more broadly reference the
NAAQS, ensuring that this requirement is met. See the revised R18-2-
218(F)(5)(b)(ii), R18-2-401(27), R18-2-406(A)(5) and R18-2-407(B).
    In our 2015 NSR action, we noted that ADEQ's PSD program, at R18-2-
406(A), contained a reference to rule R18-2-408, but R18-2-408 was not
in the SIP and had not been submitted for SIP approval. ADEQ included
R18-2-408 in the April 2017 NSR submittal, and we are proposing to
approve it into the SIP.
    In our 2015 NSR action, we determined that ADEQ's definitions
applicable to the PSD program did not fully meet 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1),
which requires each state plan to contain specific definitions for the
PSD program. We have reviewed the revised definitions included in the
current SIP submittal as compared with the federal PSD definitions in
40 CFR 51.166(b) and have found that ADEQ's submittal contains the
definitions necessary to implement a PSD program. ADEQ made revisions
that corrected the following definitions from 40 CFR 51.166(b): Major
stationary source--see revised R18-2-101(75) and R18-2-401(13), net
emissions increase--see revised R18-2-101(88), stationary source--see
revised R18-2-101(140), major source baseline date--see revised R18-2-
218(B)(2)(b), baseline area--see revised R18-2-218(D), allowable
emissions--see revised R18-2-101(13)(b), federally enforceable--see
revised R18-2-101(53), complete--see revised R18-2-401(4),
significant--see revised R18-2-101(131), projected actual emissions--
see revised R18-2-401(23), and regulated NSR pollutant--see revised
R18-2-101(124).
    Regarding restrictions on area classifications (as Class I, II or
III), we found in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules did not
completely meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(e) and section 162(a)
of the Act, which require certain areas in existence on August 7, 1977
to be designated as Class I areas. ADEQ's rules impermissibly limited
the consideration of boundary changes to such Class I areas to those
made prior to March 12, 1993. ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency;
see revised R18-2-217(B). ADEQ's rules also did not contain a provision
consistent with the federal regulatory requirement for Class I area
redesignations prior to August 7, 1977 at 40 CFR 51.166(e)(2). ADEQ has
now corrected this deficiency, see revised R18-2-217(C). In addition,
ADEQ's rules did not include a provision that is fully consistent with
the requirements related to designating areas as Class II areas in 40
CFR 51.166(e)(3). ADEQ corrected this deficiency, see the revised R18-
2-217(D).
    Regarding requirements for exclusions from increment consumption,
we determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules contained
provisions that allowed for certain temporary emissions to be excluded
from increment consumption that did not conform with the requirements
in 40 CFR 51.166(f)(1)(v) and (f)(4). ADEQ needed to remove the
Director's discretion to extend the time allowed for temporary
emissions, and to broaden the reference to the State ambient air
quality standards to apply to any air quality control region. In its
current SIP submittal, ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies; see
revised R18-2-218(F)(5).
    Regarding requirements for redesignating areas as Class I, II or
II, in our 2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's program incorrectly
applied the provisions in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(1) only to attainment and
unclassifiable areas. However, this portion of the PSD program applies
to all areas of the State, including nonattainment areas. This
deficiency has been corrected in the current SIP submittal; see revised
R18-2-217(A). ADEQ's rules also previously contained provisions for
allowing the State to redesignate certain areas under 40 CFR 51.166(g),
but they did not adequately meet the public participation requirements
in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(2)(i). ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18-2-217(F)(1). In addition, ADEQ's provisions for classifying
areas to Class III did not clearly identify which areas may be
designated as Class III as specified in 40 CFR 51.166(g)(3). ADEQ has
now corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-217(G). Concerning 40
CFR 51.166(g)(3)(ii), ADEQ's rules improperly allowed for redesignation
to be approved by the Governor's designee. This was inconsistent with
40 CFR 51.166(g)(3)(ii), which specifically requires the Governor's
approval. ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-
217(F) and (G). In meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.166(g)(3)(iii), ADEQ rules R18-2-217 also contained a reference to
``maximum allowable concentration'' which incorrectly referenced R18-2-
218, and referenced only the State's ambient air quality standards,
which do not generally apply in areas outside of Arizona. In the
current SIP submittal, ADEQ has corrected this deficiency; see revised
R18-2-217(G)(4). Also, ADEQ's rules did not meet all the public notice
requirements for redesignations under 40 CFR 51.166(g)(3)(iv). ADEQ's
current submittal has corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-
217(G).
    At the time of our 2015 NSR action, ADEQ's rules provided an
exemption for certain portable stationary sources with a prior permit
that contains requirements equivalent to the PSD requirements in 40 CFR
51.166 (j) through (r). While this requirement was generally consistent
with 40 CFR 51.166(i)(1)(iii), we found that ADEQ's rules impermissibly
expanded this exemption to portable sources that have been issued
nonattainment NSR permits and PAL permits. ADEQ has corrected this
deficiency. See revised R18-2-406(E).
    In our 2015 NSR action, we determined that ADEQ's rules did not
clearly meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(k)(1) because the
relevant rule provision contained an ``or'' that could be interpreted
as allowing a source to demonstrate it will not contribute to an
increase above the significance levels in an adjacent nonattainment
area in lieu of the demonstration required for the NAAQS and
increments. In addition, R18-2-406(A)(5)(a) requires that a

person applying for a PSD permit demonstrate that the project would not
cause a violation of any maximum allowable increase over the baseline
concentration in ``any attainment or unclassifiable area,'' but ADEQ's
definition for ``attainment area'' in the SIP limited attainment areas
to those ``in the state.'' ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies in its
current SIP submittal. See revised R18-2-406(A)(5) and R18-2-101(19).
    We determined in our 2015 NSR action that ADEQ's rules did not
specifically address the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(n)(1) and (3),
which require that (1) the owner or operator of a proposed source or
modification submit all information necessary to perform any analysis
or make any determination required under procedures established in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.166, and (2) upon request of the state, the
owner or operator also provide specified information concerning air
quality impacts and growth. ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies in
its current SIP submittal; see revised R18-2-406(L).
    Regarding requirements for sources impacting Class I areas, in our
2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's rules did not fully address the
requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(p)(1) that relate to notifications to
EPA, although existing SIP requirements in R9-3-304(H) partially
addressed the requirements. ADEQ now has corrected this issue by
submitting R18-2-410 for SIP approval, which contain these requirements
at R18-2-410(C)(1). In addition, we found in our 2015 NSR action that
while ADEQ's rules generally included the requirements of 40 CFR
51.166(p)(3) at R18-2-406, ADEQ's rule contained the phrase ``no
significant adverse impacts,'' which is inconsistent with the federal
regulation, which requires a demonstration of ``no adverse impacts.''
ADEQ has now corrected this deficiency; see revised R18-2-410(D).
ADEQ's program also contained outdated maximum allowable increases for
Class I areas that were not consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(p)(4). ADEQ
has corrected this deficiency in the current SIP submittal; see revised
R18-2-410(F).
    In our 2015 NSR action, we found that certain PSD public
participation requirements were not adequately addressed; these issues
have been corrected in ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal. First, ADEQ's
rules did not ensure that materials available during the public comment
period are available in each region in which the proposed source would
be constructed as required by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(ii). ADEQ has now
corrected this deficiency. See R18-2-330(D). ADEQ's rules also did not
require ADEQ to notify the public of (1) the degree of increment
consumption that is expected from the source or modification, or (2)
the Director's preliminary determination, as required by 40 CFR
51.166(q)(2)(iii). ADEQ has corrected this deficiency. See revised R18-
2-402(I). ADEQ's NSR program also did not require ADEQ to make public
comments and the written notification of its final determination
available in the same location as the preliminary documents as required
by 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(vi) and (viii). ADEQ has also corrected this
deficiency; see revised R18-2-402(I).
    Regarding information required to be provided by the source, in our
2015 NSR action, we found that ADEQ's rules contained a typographical
error, which did not ensure owners and operators would document and
maintain records of certain applicability-related information as
required by 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6). ADEQ corrected this deficiency; see
revised R18-2-402(F)(6)(b). In addition, we found that ADEQ's submittal
did not require owners or operators to make information required under
40 CFR 51.166(r)(6) available for review upon request by the Director
or the public as required by 40 CFR 51.166(r)(7). ADEQ has corrected
this deficiency in its current SIP submittal; see revised R18-2-
402(F)(7).
    In our 2015 NSR action, we identified a number of deficiencies in
ADEQ's rules specifying the requirements for plantwide applicability
limits (PALs), which have been corrected in its April 2015 NSR
submittal. The issues are similar to the issues discusses above for
PALs provisions for the NA-NSR program. First, ADEQ's program did not
include a definition for major emissions unit as required by 40 CFR
51.166(w)(2)(iv). ADEQ has added the definition at R18-2-401(12).
ADEQ's PAL provisions at R18-2-412(H) contained an incorrect reference,
and R18-2-412(H)(5) used ``eliminated'' where the federal regulation
uses ``established'', which prevented ADEQ's rules from meeting 40 CFR
51.166(w)(9). ADEQ has corrected these deficiencies; see revised R18-2-
412(H)(4) and (5). ADEQ's PAL renewal provisions also contained
incorrect references related to the requirements in 40 CFR
51.166(w)(10). ADEQ has now corrected those references; see revised
R18-2-412(I)(1) and (4).
5. Other Revisions and Changes to the EPA's NSR Program and/or ADEQ's
NSR Program
    Our review of ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal also considered
whether ADEQ's submittal was consistent with other changes made to
federal NSR program requirements following our 2015 action. These
changes include: The removal of vacated elements from the PSD program
related to GHGs (August 19, 2015 at 80 FR 50199); revisions to the
public noticing provisions for permitting (October 18, 2016 at 81 FR
71613); SIP requirements for PM2.5 nonattainment areas
(August 24, 2016 at 81 FR 58010); and the 2015 ozone standard (October
26, 2015 at 80 FR 65292). As discussed in further detail in our TSD, we
have determined that ADEQ's program, as updated by the current SIP
submittal, meets the required elements of these regulatory revisions
except for one disapproval issue that is already the subject of a
limited disapproval in our 2016 PM2.5 precursor action. ADEQ
intends to correct this deficiency in a separate SIP submittal. That
is, no new disapproval issues have been identified that are associated
with these changes to the federal NSR requirements.
    Additionally, in our 2015 NSR action we finalized a partial
disapproval of ADEQ's program related to the significant monitoring
concentration (SMC) for PM2.5 at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c).
Our disapproval action did not require ADEQ to revise its program, as
our action prevented this portion of ADEQ's program from becoming
approved into the SIP. However, in its current SIP submittal, ADEQ has
updated its program to be consistent with the PM2.5 SMC, and
our current action includes our proposed approval of that change.

C. Review of Rules Requested To Be Removed From the SIP

    In Table 2 of this preamble, we identified the ADEQ rules we are
proposing to remove from the SIP as part of this action. Except for R9-
2-301(I) and (K) and R9-3-304(H), the ADEQ rules we are proposing to
replace are older versions of the ADEQ rules in the April 2017 NSR
submittal. The older versions proposed for removal from the SIP contain
deficiencies that ADEQ needed to correct. R9-3-301(I) and (K) and R9-3-
304(H) are significantly older rules that were approved into the SIP in
1982 and 1983 that have since been repealed by ADEQ under State law,
and the corresponding updated provisions are included in the April 2017
NSR submittal.

D. Remaining NSR Deficiencies

    As discussed previously, this action does not address all the
outstanding limited disapproval issues related to ADEQ's NSR program
from our 2015 NSR action and our 2016 PM2.5 precursor
action. Our TSD provides a summary of the remaining limited disapproval
issues. Our 2015 NSR action triggered a CAA obligation for EPA to
promulgate a FIP unless Arizona submits, and we approve, plan revisions
that correct the deficiencies within two years of the effective date of
our final action. In addition, for deficiencies pertaining to
requirements under part D of title I of the CAA our action also
triggers sanctions unless ADEQ submits and we approve SIP revisions
that correct the deficiencies before 18 months from our final action.
The EPA has preliminarily determined that ADEQ's April 2017 NSR
submittal addresses the deficiencies under part D of title I of the CAA
identified as limited disapproval issues in our 2015 NSR action. ADEQ
intends to make an additional submittal in order to the meet the FIP
deadline of December 2, 2017 related to our 2015 action and the
sanctions deadline of January 22, 2018 for our 2016 PM2.5
precursor action.

E. Federal Implementation Plan for GHGs and ADEQ's PSD Program

    ADEQ is currently subject to a FIP under the PSD program for GHGs
because ADEQ has not adopted a PSD program for the regulation of GHGs.
See 40 CFR 52.37. ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal is not intended to
correct this program deficiency, as regulation of GHG emissions is
currently prohibited under State law. See A.R.S. section 49-191. In our
final action, we intend to move the codification of the FIP for GHGs
for areas under the jurisdiction of ADEQ and certain other areas in
Arizona from 40 CFR 52.37 to 40 CFR 52.144, where the State of
Arizona's PSD program approval is listed. Previously, there were
several other states subject to the FIP for GHGs, and EPA applied the
FIP to all such states, collectively, at 40 CFR 52.37. See 75 FR 82246
on Dec. 30, 2010. However, the State of Arizona is the only area that
remains subject to this GHG-specific FIP. Therefore, it is appropriate
to move the FIP provision to the regulatory section where Arizona's PSD
program is identified.
    In addition, if we finalize our action, we also intend to update 40
CFR 51.144 to clarify that ADEQ has an approved PSD program, except for
GHGs, under sections 160 through 165 of the Act.

F. The EPA's Recommendations To Further Improve the State's Rules

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend that
ADEQ make the next time ADEQ modifies the rules.

G. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria under Section 110(l) and
193 of the Clean Air Act?

    Section 110(l) states: ``Each revision to an implementation plan
submitted by a State under this chapter shall be adopted by such State
after reasonable notice and public hearing. The Administrator shall not
approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 7501 of this title), or any other
applicable requirement of this chapter.''
    With respect to the procedural requirements of CAA section 110(l),
based on our review of the public process documentation included in
ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal, we find that ADEQ has provided
sufficient evidence of public notice and opportunity for comment and
public hearings prior to adoption and submittal of these rules to the
EPA. With respect to the substantive requirements of section 110(l), we
have determined that our approval of the 2017 NSR submittal corrects
numerous deficiencies in ADEQ's program and does not relax any existing
requirements in the Arizona SIP.
    For the reasons set forth above, we can approve the ADEQ SIP
revision as proposed in this action under section 110(l) of the Act.
    Section 193 of the Act, which was added by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990, includes a savings clause that provides, in
pertinent part: ``No control requirement in effect, or required to be
adopted by an order, settlement agreement, or plan in effect before
November 15, 1990, in any area which is a nonattainment area for any
air pollutant may be modified after November 15, 1990, in any manner
unless the modification insures equivalent or greater emission
reductions of such air pollutant.'' We find that the provisions
included in ADEQ's 2017 NSR submittal would ensure equivalent or
greater emission reductions as compared to the current SIP-approved NSR
program in the nonattainment areas under ADEQ's jurisdiction. In
addition, this action does not modify any pre-1990 requirements.
Although we are proposing to remove two pre-1990 rules from the SIP--
R9-3-301(I) and (K)--Installation Permits: General and R9-3-304(H)--
Installation Permits in Attainment Areas--we are also proposing to
approve newer, updated requirements into the SIP that are at least as
stringent.
    For the reasons set forth above, we can approve the submitted NSR
program under section 193 of the Act.

H. Conclusion

    For the reasons stated above, and as explained further in our TSD,
we find that the rules in ADEQ's April 2017 NSR submittal satisfy the
applicable CAA and regulatory requirements for PSD, and nonattainment
NSR permit programs under CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and parts C and D of
title I of the Act, with the exception of one NA-NSR requirement
relating to PM2.5 precursors that has already been
identified as a disapproval issue in a previous action and which ADEQ
intends to address in a later SIP submittal. The submitted NSR rules
also adequately address certain deficiencies we identified in our 2015
NSR action concerning specific requirements in 40 CFR 51.161 and 51.164
that were evaluated as part of this action. Our proposed approval is
also consistent with section 110(l) and 193 of the Act. Accordingly, we
are proposing to approve all the rules in ADEQ's April 2017 NSR
submittal into the Arizona SIP. In addition, we are also proposing to
remove the existing SIP-approved rules listed in Table 2 from the SIP,
as these rules are outdated and mostly being superseded by our proposed
action.

III. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
fully approve the submitted rules into the Arizona SIP because we
believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. Specifically, we are
proposing approval of the new and amended ADEQ regulations listed in
Table 1, above, as a revision to the ADEQ portion of the Arizona SIP.
We are also proposing to remove from the Arizona SIP the existing rules
listed in Table 2, as these rules are outdated and mostly being
superseded by our proposed action.
    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until July
3, 2017. If we take final action to approve the submitted rules, our
final action will incorporate these rules into the federally
enforceable SIP.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the ADEQ rule listed in Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the EPA 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 Act. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this 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, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: May 16, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2017-10946 Filed 5-31-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36168-36169]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15378]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection; Protection of
Voluntarily Submitted Information

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)

approval to renew an information collection. One of the ways to have an
information program designated as protected under Section 40123 is for
an air carrier or other person to submit an application for an
individual program. The FAA evaluates the application and either
publishes a designation based on the application for public comment or
denies the application.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by August 22, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Scott on<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0646.
    Title: Protection of Voluntarily Submitted Information.
    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: To encourage people to voluntarily submit desired
information, Sec.  40123 was added to Title 49, United States Code, in
the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996. Section 40123 allows
the Administrator, through FAA regulations, to protect from disclosure
voluntarily provided information relating to safety and security
issues. This rule imposes a negligible paperwork burden for air
carriers that choose to participate in this program. The air carrier
submits a letter notifying the Administrator that they wish to
participate in a current program.
    Respondents: Approximately 5 applicants.
    Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 1 hour.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 5 hours.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Carla
Scott, Room 336, Federal Aviation Administration, AES-300, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC on June 15, 2011.
Carla Scott,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2011-15378 Filed 6-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12308-12309]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4776]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0797]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; State Enforcement
Notifications

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by March
30, 2012.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0275.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denver Presley, II, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

State Enforcement Notifications--21 CFR 100.2(d) (OMB Control Number
0910-0275)--Extension

    Section 310(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 337(b)) authorizes States to

enforce certain sections of the FD&C Act in their own names, but
provides that States must notify FDA before doing so. Section 100.2(d)
(21 CFR 100.2(d)) sets forth the information that a State must provide
to FDA in a letter of notification when it intends to take enforcement
action under the FD&C Act against a particular food located in the
State. The information required under Sec.  100.2(d) will enable FDA to
identify the food against which the State intends to take action and
advise the State whether Federal action has been taken against it. With
certain narrow exceptions, Federal enforcement action precludes State
action under the FD&C Act.
    In the Federal Register of November 9, 2011 (76 FR 69742), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
         21 CFR Section              Number of     responses per   Total annual   Average burden    Total hours
                                    respondents     respondent       responses     per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.2(d)........................               1               1               1              10              10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    The estimated reporting burden for Sec.  100.2(d) is minimal
because enforcement notifications are seldom used by States. During the
last 3 years, FDA has not received any new enforcement notifications;
therefore, the Agency estimates that one or fewer notifications will be
submitted annually. Although FDA has not received any new enforcement
notifications in the last 3 years, it believes these information
collection provisions should be extended to provide for the potential
future need of a State government to submit enforcement notifications
informing FDA when it intends to take enforcement action under the FD&C
Act against a particular food located in the State.

    Dated: February 23, 2012.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-4776 Filed 2-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: July 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 132)]
[Notices]
[Page 37805-37806]
[DOCID:fr11jy07-132]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56009; File No. SR-ISE-2007-51]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule
Change Relating to Fee Changes

July 3, 2007.
    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 June 22, 2007, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Exchange. ISE has designated this proposal as one establishing or
changing a due, fee, or other charge imposed by ISE under Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\4\
which renders the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    ISE proposes to amend its Schedule of Fees to establish fees for
transactions in options on one Premium Products.\5\ The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.ise.com.

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

    \5\ ``Premium Products'' is defined in the Schedule of Fees as
the products enumerated therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. ISE has substantially 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 its Schedule of Fees to establish
fees for transactions in options on the following Premium Product: The
ISE Electronic Trading Index (``DMA'').\6\ All of the applicable fees
covered by this filing are identical to fees charged by the Exchange
for all other Premium Products. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to
adopt an execution fee and a comparison fee for all transactions in
options on DMA.\7\ The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee
for products covered by this filing shall be $0.15 and $0.03 per
contract, respectively, for all Public Customer Orders \8\ and Firm
Proprietary orders. The amount of the execution fee and comparison fee
for all ISE Market Maker transactions shall be equal to the execution
fee and comparison fee currently charged by the Exchange for ISE Market
Maker transactions in equity options.\9\ Finally, the amount of the
execution fee and comparison fee for all non-ISE Market Maker
transactions shall be $0.37 and $0.03 per contract, respectively.
Further, since options on DMA are not multiply-listed, the Payment for
Order Flow fee shall not apply. The Exchange believes the proposed rule
change will further the Exchange's goal of introducing new products to
the marketplace that are competitively priced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange represents that DMA, a narrow-based index,
meets the standards of ISE Rule 2002(b), which allows the ISE to
begin trading this product by filing a Form 19b-4(e) at least five
business days after commencement of trading this new products
pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) of the Act. Accordingly, ISE filed Form
19b-4(e) with the Commission on June 22, 2007.
    \7\ These fees will be charged to Exchange members. Under a
pilot program that is set to expire on July 31, 2007, these fees
will also be charged to Linkage Orders (as defined in ISE Rule
1900). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54204 (July 25,
2006), 71 FR 43548 (August 1, 2006) (SR-ISE-2006-38).
    \8\ ``Public Customer Order'' is defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(39)
as an order for the account of a Public Customer. ``Public
Customer'' is defined in ISE Rule 100(a)(38) as a person that is not
a broker or dealer in securities.
    \9\ The execution fee is currently between $.21 and $.12 per
contract side, depending on the Exchange Average Daily Volume, and
the comparison fee is currently $.03 per contract side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act \10\ in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of
the Act \11\ in particular, because it is designed to provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among
its members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The foregoing proposed rule change has been designated as a fee
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \12\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(2) \13\ thereunder, because it establishes or changes a due,
fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange. Accordingly, the proposal
took effect upon filing with the Commission. At any time within 60 days
of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily
abrogate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-ISE-2007-51 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2007-51. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such 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-ISE-2007-51 and should be
submitted on or before August 1, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-13400 Filed 7-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 15644]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06796]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

In the Matter of ChitrChatr Communications Inc.; Order of
Suspension of Trading

March 20, 2015.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
ChitrChatr Communications Inc. because of questions regarding recent
volatile trading activity and questions regarding the adequacy and
accuracy of information in a company press release dated January 21,
2015 relating to the company's financing and the source of that
financing. ChitrChatr Communications Inc. is a British Columbia
corporation with its principal place of business located in Calgary,
Alberta. Its stock is quoted on OTC Link, operated by OTC Markets Group
Inc., under the ticker: CHICF.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on
March 20, 2015, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on April 2, 2015.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06796 Filed 3-20-15; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P