Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona State Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 059-0005a; FRL-5697-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Arizona State

Implementation Plan Revision, Maricopa County Environmental Services

Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on a revision to the Arizona

State Implementation Plan. The revision concerns a rule from the

following local agency: Maricopa County Environmental Services

Department (MCESD). This approval action will incorporate this rule

into the federally approved SIP. The intended effect of approving this

rule is to regulate emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in

accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in

1990 (CAA or the Act). The revised rule controls VOC emissions from

Commercial Bread Bakeries. Thus, EPA is finalizing the approval of this

rule into the Arizona SIP under provisions of the CAA regarding EPA

action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary

ambient air quality standards and plan requirements for nonattainment

areas.

DATES: This action is effective on May 16, 1997 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by April 16, 1997. If the effective date

is delayed, a timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule and EPA's evaluation report for the rule

are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office during

normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule are available for

inspection at the following locations:

Rulemaking Office (Air-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

[[Page 12545]]

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 3033 North Central Avenue,

Phoenix, AZ 85012.

Maricopa County Department of Environmental Services, 2406 South 24th

Street, Suite E-204, Phoenix, AZ 85034-6822.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Office

(Air-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-

1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

The rule being approved into the Arizona SIP is: MCESD Rule 343--

Commercial Bread Bakeries. This rule was submitted by the Arizona

Department of Environmental Quality to EPA on August 31, 1995.

Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment

areas under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended in l977

(1977 Act or pre-amended Act), that included the Maricopa County Area.

43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. On March 19, 1979, EPA changed the name and

modified the geographic boundaries of the ozone nonattainment area of

Maricopa County to the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Urban

Planning Area. 44 FR 16391, 40 CFR 81.303. On February 24, 1984, EPA

notified the Governor of Arizona, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of

the pre-amended Act, that MCESD's portion of the Arizona SIP was

inadequate to attain and maintain the ozone standard and requested that

deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's SIP-Call, 49 FR

18827, May 3, 1984). On May 26, 1988, EPA again notified the Governor

of Arizona, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 1977 Act, that the

above district's portions of the Arizona SIP were inadequate to attain

and maintain the ozone standard and requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA's second SIP-Call, 53 FR 34500,

September 7, 1988). On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42

U.S.C. 7401-7671q. In amended section 182(b)(2)(C) of the CAA, Congress

statutorily required nonattainment areas to submit RACT rules for all

major stationary sources of VOCs by November 15, 1992 (the RACT catch-

up requirement).

The MAG Urban Planning Area is classified as moderate; 1

therefore, this area was subject to the RACT catch-up requirement and

the November 15, 1992 deadline.2

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

\1\ The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Urban Planning

Area retained its designation of nonattainment and was classified by

operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the

date of enactment of the CAA. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).

\2\ Arizona did not make the required SIP submittal by November

15, 1992. On January 15, 1993, the EPA made a finding of

nonsubmittal pursuant to section 179(a)(1), which started an 18-

month sanction clock. The rule being acted upon in this action was

submitted in response to the EPA finding of failure to submit.

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

The State of Arizona submitted many revised RACT rules for

incorporation into its SIP on August 31, 1995, including the rule being

acted on in this notice. This notice addresses EPA's direct-final

approval action for MCESD Rule 343--Commercial Bread Bakeries. MCESD

adopted Rule 343 on February 15, 1995. This submitted rule was found to

be complete on October 25, 1995 pursuant to EPA's completeness criteria

that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V 3 and is being

finalized for approval into the SIP.

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

\3\ EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990

(55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA,

revised the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).

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

Rule 343 controls VOC emissions from bread ovens at commercial

bread bakeries. VOCs contribute to the production of ground level ozone

and smog. This rule was originally adopted as part of MCESD's effort to

achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and

in response to EPA's 1988 SIP-Call and the section 182(b)(2)(C) CAA

requirement. The following is EPA's evaluation and final action for

this rule.

EPA Evaluation and Action

In determining the approvability of a VOC rule, EPA must evaluate

the rule for consistency with the requirements of the CAA and EPA

regulations, as found in section 110 and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR

Part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). The EPA interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for today's action, appears in the various EPA

policy guidance documents.4 Among those provisions is the

requirement that a VOC rule must, at a minimum, provide for the

implementation of RACT for stationary sources of VOC emissions. This

requirement was carried forth from the pre-amended Act.

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

\4\ Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of

those portions of the proposed Post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide

policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987); ``Issues

Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,

Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register

Notice'' (Blue Book) (notice of availability was published in the

Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the existing control

technique guidelines (CTG's).

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

For the purpose of assisting state and local agencies in developing

RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of Control Technique Guideline (CTG)

documents. The CTGs are based on the underlying requirements of the Act

and specify the presumptive norms for what is RACT for specific source

categories. Under the CAA, Congress ratified EPA's use of these

documents, as well as other Agency policy, for requiring States to

``catch-up'' their RACT rules. See section 182(b)(2)(C). For some

source categories, such as bakeries, EPA did not publish a CTG. In such

cases, the District may determine what controls are required by

reviewing the operation of facilities subject to the regulation and

evaluating regulations for similar sources in other areas. Bakery

sources have been subject to a RACT regulation since 1989 in the Bay

Area Air Quality Management District. EPA did publish an Alternative

Control Technology Document (ACT) entitled, ``Alternative Control

Technology Document for Bakery Oven Emissions'', EPA 453/R-92-017,

December 1992 as guidance for this source category. Further

interpretations of EPA policy are found in the Blue Book, referred to

in footnote 4. In general, these guidance documents have been set forth

to ensure that VOC rules are fully enforceable and strengthen or

maintain the SIP. MCESD's Rule 343, Commercial Bread Bakeries, is a new

rule which was adopted to control VOC emissions from large commercial

bakeries by establishing emissions reduction standards, recordkeeping

requirements, and test methods for demonstration of compliance with the

rule. A detailed evaluation of Rule 343, Commercial Bread Bakeries, can

be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) dated July 30, 1996.

EPA has evaluated the submitted rule and has determined that it is

consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

MCESD, Rule 343, Commercial Bread Bakeries, is being approved under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting the requirements of section

110(a) and Part D.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future implementation

plan. Each request for

[[Page 12546]]

revision to the state implementation plan shall be considered

separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory

requirements.

EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective May 16, 1997, unless, by April 16, 1997, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn

before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should

do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective May 16, 1997.

Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises and

government entities with jurisdiction over a population of less than

50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301(a) and subchapter I, Part

D of the CAA do not create any new requirements, but simply approve

requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP-approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify

that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship

under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state

action.

The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.

Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform

Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,

1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed

or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector or to

State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.

Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan

revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have

elected to adopt the program provided for under Part D of the Clean Air

Act. These rules may bind State, local, and tribal governments to

perform certain actions and also require the private sector to perform

certain duties. The rule being approved by this action will impose no

new requirements because affected sources are already subject to these

regulations under State law. Therefore, no additional costs to State,

local, or tribal governments or to the private sector result from this

action. EPA has also determined that this final action does not include

a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to

State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private

sector.

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report

containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation

Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: February 19, 1997.

Nora L. McGee,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q

Subpart D--Arizona

2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(82) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.120 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(82) New and amended rules and regulations for the Maricopa County

Environmental Services Department--Air Pollution Control were submitted

on August 31, 1995, by the Governor's designee.

(i) Incorporated by reference.

(A) Rule 343, adopted on February 15, 1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97-5972 Filed 3-14-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P