Air Plan Revisions; Arizona; Maricopa County Air Quality Department

<RULE> ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY <CFR>40 CFR Part 52</CFR> <DEPDOC>[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0349; FRL-12130-02-R9]</DEPDOC> <SUBJECT>Air Plan Revisions; Arizona; Maricopa County Air Quality Department</SUBJECT> <HD SOURCE="HED">AGENCY:</HD> Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). <HD SOURCE="HED">ACTION:</HD> Final rule. <SUM> <HD SOURCE="HED">SUMMARY:</HD> The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD or “County”) portion of the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from loading of organic liquids and gasoline. Under the authority of the Clean Air Act (CAA or “Act”), this action simultaneously approves local rules that regulate these emission sources and directs Arizona to correct rule deficiencies. We are also finalizing a disapproval of MCAQD's reasonably available control technology (RACT) demonstration for the source categories associated with these rules for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area. </SUM> <EFFDATE> <HD SOURCE="HED">DATES:</HD> This rule is effective February 10, 2025. </EFFDATE> <HD SOURCE="HED">ADDRESSES:</HD> The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0349. All documents in the docket are listed on the <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov</E> website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, <E T="03">e.g.,</E> Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through <E T="03">https://www.regulations.gov,</E> or please contact the person identified in the <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E> section for additional availability information. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if you are a person with a disability who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the <E T="02">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT</E> section. <FURINF> <HD SOURCE="HED">FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:</HD> Donnique Sherman, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415) 947-4129; email at <E T="03">sherman.donnique@epa.gov.</E> </FURINF> <SUPLINF> <HD SOURCE="HED">SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:</HD> Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to the EPA. <HD SOURCE="HD1">Table of Contents</HD> <EXTRACT> <FP SOURCE="FP-2">I. Proposed Action</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-2">II. Public Comments and EPA Responses</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-2">III. EPA Action</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-2">IV. Incorporation by Reference</FP> <FP SOURCE="FP-2">V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews</FP> </EXTRACT> <HD SOURCE="HD1">I. Proposed Action</HD> On November 8, 2024 (89 FR 88690), the EPA proposed a limited approval and limited disapproval of the following rules that were submitted for incorporation into the Arizona SIP. <GPOTABLE COLS="5" OPTS="L2,nj,i1" CDEF="xs50,12,r100,12,12"> <TTITLE>Table 1—Submitted Rules</TTITLE> <CHED H="1">Local agency</CHED> <CHED H="1">Rule No.</CHED> <CHED H="1">Rule title</CHED> <CHED H="1">Revised</CHED> <CHED H="1">Submitted</CHED> <ROW> <ENT I="01">MCAQD</ENT> <ENT>352</ENT> <ENT>Gasoline Cargo Tank Testing and Use</ENT> <ENT>11/18/2020</ENT> <ENT>12/03/2020</ENT> </ROW> <ROW> <ENT I="01">MCAQD</ENT> <ENT>353</ENT> <ENT>Storage and Loading of Gasoline at a Gasoline Dispensing Facility (GDF)</ENT> <ENT>11/18/2020</ENT> <ENT>12/03/2020</ENT> </ROW> </GPOTABLE> We proposed a limited approval because we determined that these rules improve the SIP and are largely consistent with the relevant CAA requirements. We simultaneously proposed a limited disapproval because some rule provisions conflict with section 110 and part D of the Act. In addition, we proposed a disapproval of MCAQD's RACT demonstration for the source categories listed in Table 2 for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Phoenix-Mesa ozone nonattainment area. <GPOTABLE COLS="3" OPTS="L2,i1" CDEF="s72,r150,xs50"> <TTITLE>Table 2—Applicable Source Categories</TTITLE> <CHED H="1">CTG</CHED> <CHED H="1">Title/source category</CHED> <ENT>Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems</ENT> <ENT>Rule 352.</ENT> </ROW> <ROW> <ENT I="01">EPA-450/R-75-102</ENT> <ENT>Design Criteria for Stage I Vapor Control Systems—Gasoline Service Stations</ENT> <ENT>Rule 353.</ENT> </ROW> </GPOTABLE> The following provisions of Rule 352 preclude full approval of the rule: 1. In addition to the annual certification test required by Section 301.1, Sections 502 and 503 of Rule 352 outline ongoing monitoring tests to perform to detect potential leaks. However, the rule does not identify any enforceable requirements to monitor using these tests on a periodic basis or any recordkeeping and reporting associated with this requirement. 2. Section 103.3(a) requires that an “owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank provides documentation from the gasoline cargo tank testing company to the Control Officer that certifies that the gasoline cargo tank was tested and verified vapor tight using test methods at least as stringent as those in Section 501.1 (Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Test).” This provision allows the Control Officer authority to approve another test method, and without further specificity regarding how this authority will be exercised, it could functionally allow for a revision of the SIP without complying with the process for SIP revisions required by the CAA. The following provisions of Rule 353 preclude full approval of the rule: 1. Rule 353 requires that control equipment or spill containment equipment at a stationary GDF or on a gasoline cargo tank be leak free and vapor tight, requiring weekly inspections. Rule 353 generally requires a facility to determine if there is a “potential vapor leak” prior to being required to conduct a more stringent vapor tightness determination. Section 501 of Rule 353 allows for four different options to identify potential vapor leaks. Section 501.1 allows for the “use of sight, sound, or smell” as an acceptable method for identifying potential vapor leaks. Although using sight, sound, or smell can play a role in identifying potential vapor leaks, allowing for that to potentially be the only method used could functionally allow for potential leak identification to be left solely to the operator's discretion and sensory inputs. Therefore, without a provision to periodically utilize methods beyond sight, sound, or smell, this provision undermines the enforceability of the rule's requirement for vapor tight compliance. 2. Section 500 of Rule 353 contains ongoing monitoring and recordkeeping requirements but does not specifically contain any requirements to report compliance information. However, reporting requirements are contained within Section 301 of the rule because it incorporates the applicable requirements from the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Category: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities at 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC (“Subpart CCCCCC”), which includes reporting requirements. <FTREF/> <SU>1</SU> However, Subpart CCCCCC is not applicable to the loading of aviation gasoline into storage tanks at airports and the subsequent transfer of aviation gasoline within the airport. <SU>2</SU> <FTREF/> Rule 353 does apply to loading of aviation gasoline at airports, but it does not elsewhere require periodic reporting for these facilities. Given this framework, Rule 353 has a reporting gap, because there is no periodic compliance reporting required for loading of aviation gasoline at airports. Due to the lack of adequate reporting requirements (or some alternative means of ensuring enforceability) during loading of aviation gasoline into storage tanks, this provision undermines the enforceability of the rule's requirement for vapor tight compliance, constitutes a SIP deficiency, and is inconsistent with the requirements of CAA Section 110. <FTNT> <SU>1</SU>  See 40 CFR 63.11126 and Table 3 to Subpart CCCCCC. For example, Subpart CCCCCC requires annual reporting related to malfunctions (malfunction of process equipment and air pollution control equipment), requires all performance tests reports to be submitted, and requires advanced notification of performance tests. </FTNT> <FTNT> <SU>2</SU>  See 40 CFR part 63.11111(g). </FTNT> Our proposed action contains more information on the basis for this rulemaking and on our evaluation of the submittal. <HD SOURCE="HD1">II. Public Comments and EPA Responses</HD> The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. During this period, we received one anonymous comment in support of EPA's November 8, 2024 proposed action. We thank the commenter for the comment. <HD SOURCE="HD1">III. EPA Action</HD> No comments were submitted that change our assessment of the rules as described in our proposed action. Therefore, as authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the EPA is finalizing a limited approval of the submitted rules. This action incorporates the submitted rules into the Arizona SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. As authorized under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a), the EPA is simultaneously finalizing a limited disapproval of the rules. The EPA is also finalizing a disapproval of the RACT demonstrations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the sources covered by the CTGs listed in Table 2. As a result, the EPA must p ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Preview showing 10k of 26k characters. Full document text is stored and available for version comparison. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━