AQ 2017-010 NSR BOS REPORT.PDF

Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: December 11, 2019
Case Number/Title: AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR)
Agenda Item: (Pending)
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In
addition to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of
stakeholder input and staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to
any Board of Supervisors’ public hearing.”
Overview of the Report to the Board of Supervisors:
NSR is a long-standing Clean Air Act permitting program that requires businesses to get an air pollution
control permit before they start construction or make major modifications to their business. NSR must
ensure that air quality is not significantly degraded from the addition of new or modified businesses, while
also providing flexibility to businesses to improve or modernize their operations. Air quality permits must
include an air quality analysis to demonstrate that new emissions emitted from the business will not cause or
contribute to a violation of a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
The EPA identified the following eight deficiencies in the MCAQD’s NSR rules: (1) Rule 100, Definitions
of “PM2.5” and “PM10”; (2) Rule 200, Good engineering practice (GEP) stack height provisions; (3) Rule
200, Agricultural equipment exemption demonstration; (4) Rule 220, Sections 404.3(e) and (f) (Procedures
for Certain Changes that do not Require a Non-Title V Permit); (5) Rule 200, Section 403.2 (Permit Renewal
and Expiration); (6) Rules 100 and 200 Appendix G references; (7) Rules 100 and 200 Arizona Testing
Manual references and (8) Rule 100 Definitions to be removed from the Arizona State Implementation Plan
(SIP) justifications.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to remedy deficiencies identified by the EPA in the MCAQD’s NSR
rules. The following rules are included in this rulemaking: Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions),
Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Rule 210 (Title V Permit Provisions), Rule 220 (Non-Title V Permit
Provisions), Rule 230 (General Permits), Rule 240 (Federal Major New Source Review (NSR)) and Rule 241
(Minor New Source Review (NSR)).
In addition to remedying the EPA identified deficiencies, the MCAQD is proposing revisions to address
Stakeholder and Staff comments and the EPA’s recommended clarifications. Per the EPA’s Technical
Support Document (TSD) dated May 17, 2018 for the MCAQD’s NSR SIP submittal: “The following items
do not affect the EPA’s current action but are recommended clarifications or revisions for consideration the
next time the MCAQD undertakes updates to the submitted rules…As [the EPA] reviewed the NSR SIP
submittal, [the EPA] noted various minor typographical and editorial errors within the rule text. Because
none of these small errors create a deficiency within Maricopa’s NSR program, [the EPA is] not discussing
them in this TSD. Under separate cover [the EPA has] provided the MCAQD with a copy of our list of
these typographical errors.” The EPA’s recommended clarifications can be readily discerned in the
“strikeout and underline” version of the rules attached to this report and are described in all Stakeholder
Workshop notices and workshop slides/presentations that are posted on the Enhanced Regulatory
Outreach Program (EROP) website.
1

Overview of Stakeholder Input and Staff Responses:
During the rulemaking process, the MCAQD received written feedback from eight stakeholders. Six
stakeholders expressed support and two stakeholders expressed “other” to the proposed changes. Of the
eight stakeholders who provided feedback, five also provided written comments. The MCAQD evaluated
the comments and drafted responses.
Comment 1: The Hickman’s family farm operation is directly affecting our air quality. I want to see all
confined animal feed operations regulated for air quality.
Response 1: The purpose of this rulemaking is to remedy deficiencies identified by the EPA in the
MCAQD’s NSR rules. NSR is a long-standing Clean Air Act permitting program that
requires businesses to get an air pollution control permit before they start construction or
make major modifications to their business; NSR does not address concentrated animal
feeding operations (CAFOs). However, the Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality (ADEQ) enforces R18-2-609 through 613.01, which are general rules that require
all agricultural operations across the state to take reasonable precautions to minimize dust
emissions – to implement agricultural best management practices (Ag BMPs).
Comment 2: I’m in favor of the proposed changes and for recognizing ammonia as a pollutant.
Response 2: The MCAQD appreciates your support for the proposed changes.
Comment 3: I’m in support of adding ammonia as a precursor and keeping odors in the definitions.
Response 3: The MCAQD appreciates your support for the proposed changes.
Comment 4: My comment is regarding the change in the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” to include
"gaseous" emissions. Gaseous emissions include condensables that are not included in
many historic particulate matter (PM) emission factors that have been used to permit PM
emissions in the past and currently. Many of the PM emission factors that are currently
employed only include the "filterable" portion of PM, so when the PM definition is
expanded to include the condensables that are part of the gaseous emissions, if the source
is tested, it may no longer be able to comply since additional condensable PM was added
to the definition while they were not part of the obtained permit limit. For landfills, the
PM emission factor for combustion of landfill gas is from AP-42, Section 2.4., in which,
this emission factor is only based on "filterable" emissions. If additional PM is added to
the definition that was never considered or understood at the time of permitting, and then
if the site is required to test for all PM under the new definition, it then has a chance to fail
the test, even though the source continues to operate in compliance based on the
understanding of PM emissions at the time of permitting. Furthermore, the EPA has not
updated any PM emission factors to include the condensables for flares and still relies on
the emission factor for only the filterable portion. This scenario came to light at a facility
in NY that was required to test for all PM even though it was only permitted for the
filterable portion of the PM. The site was below its PM limit if just filterable emissions
were considered, however, since the site had to also test for the condensable portion of
PM, it tested above its permitted limit (that never included condenables in the first place).
Therefore, the concern is that if the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” are expanded to
include "gaseous" emissions, many of the previous permits may be based on only filterable
PM emissions, and sites should not be penalized for not changing any emissions when a
definition is expanded to beyond its original scope when permitted.
Response 4: The EPA proposed conditional approval of the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” in Rule
100 (General Provisions And Definitions), because the definitions do not include gaseous
2

emissions, which form particulates. However, in the EPA’s final conditional approval, the
EPA determined that their initial analysis was incorrect and are no longer finding the
definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” deficient. Gaseous emissions do not have to be
included in the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10”, because the definition of “Regulated
NSR Pollutant” includes the statement: “PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions include
gaseous emissions”. Although the EPA does not find the definitions of “PM2.5” and
“PM10” deficient, the EPA recommends that the MCAQD consider revising the definitions
of “PM2.5” and “PM10” to provide clarity to the regulated community. The MCAQD did
not revise the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” in Rule 100, because during the first
Stakeholder Workshop conducted on March 29, 2018, Stakeholders commented that the
definitions are clear as written and should not be revised.
Comment 5: Rule 100 (General Provisions And Definitions), Definition Of “Insignificant Activity-
Internal Combustion (IC) Equipment”: Delete the text “annual emissions do not exceed
4,000 pounds of NOx or CO”. The introductory paragraph to the definition of
“Insignificant Activity” provides thresholds that apply to all insignificant activities. There is
no need to repeat the language in this paragraph. The operating hour threshold should
apply to each unit. This change should also be included in Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305.7 (Exemptions).
Response 5: The MCAQD deleted the text “annual emissions do not exceed 4,000 pounds of NOx or
CO” from the definition of “Insignificant Activity-Internal Combustion (IC) Equipment”
and revised the introductory paragraph to the definition of “Insignificant Activity” to
provide thresholds that apply to all insignificant activities.
Comment 6: Rule 100 (General Provisions And Definitions), Definition Of “Minor NSR Modification”:
The purpose of Rule 241 is to provide a procedure for the review of minor new sources
and minor modifications for the protection of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). Allowing consideration of proposed emission decreases at the source does not
affect attainment or maintenance of NAAQS and encourages replacement of out-dated
equipment. For example, if an applicant proposes to install a new gas-fired turbine and
dismantle an old gas-fired boiler, the emissions decrease associated with the old boiler
should be considered in the ambient air quality impact of the overall project. Therefore,
the following sentence should be added to the definition of “Minor NSR Modification”:
“However, if an ambient air quality impact assessment under Rule 241, Section 308 is
required for the change, the assessment shall consider any proposed decreases in the
potential to emit of other emission units at the same stationary source, if the applicant
requests such consideration.”
Response 6: The MCAQD did not revise the definition of “Minor NSR Modification”, because Rule
241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)), Section 308.3 states: “The ambient air quality
impact assessment required by this rule shall take into account any limitations, controls, or
emissions decreases that are or will be enforceable in the permit or permit revision for the
source.”
Comment 7: Rule 100 (General Provisions And Definitions), Definition Of “Minor NSR Modification”:
There are a number of sources in Maricopa County that accepted permit limits to avoid
classification as a major source during a time that the major source threshold was below
the current values. The proposed change would allow those sources to increase their
operating rates and emission limits without being subject to BACT or an ambient air
quality assessment as long as the increase could have been accommodated prior to the
3

adoption of the thresholds in Rule 241. Therefore, the following sentence should be added
to the definition of “Minor NSR Modification”: “An increase in hours of operation, fuel
use, production rate or an emission limit that was accepted prior to February 3, 2016, to
avoid classification as a major source is not a physical change or a change in the method of
operation.”
Response 7: In Rule 100, Definition of “Minor NSR Modification”, the MCAQD deleted the text
“unless the change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit condition
established after December 12, 1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rules 210, 220, 240,
or 241 of these rules” and added the text “is not considered an operational change unless
such increase is prohibited under any permit condition that is legally and practically
enforceable by the MCAQD”. There was a discrepancy between the definitions of
“Modification” and “Minor NSR Modification”. This text only allows those sources
lacking an enforceable limit to increase hours of operation or production rates without the
change being considered a “Modification”.
Comment 8: Insignificant and trivial activities are associated with very low emission rates. The best
available control technology (BACT) and dispersion modeling requirements of Rule 241
are overly burdensome for activities with low emission rates. Therefore, the following
sentence should be added to Rule 241, Section 103 (Exemption): “The provisions of this
rule shall not apply to equipment and operations considered insignificant or trivial under
Rule 100, Definition of “Insignificant Activity”, even if the group of equipment and
operations is greater than applicable thresholds. For example, each piece of natural gas-
fired equipment rated at less than 300,000 Btu per hour is exempt from the provisions of
this rule even if the combined rated capacity of natural-gas fired equipment is over
2,000,000 Btu per hour.”
Response 8: The MCAQD did not revise the text in Rule 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)),
Section 103 (Exemptions). Any natural gas and/or liquefied petroleum gas-fired emission
unit rated less than 300,000 Btu per hour is exempt from a permit (Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305.2(e)) and insignificant activities are exempt from a permit
(Rule 200, Section 305.2(b)); however, the sum of emissions from multiple activities,
processes or emissions units in any one of the activities, processes or emissions units
identified in Rule 100, Definition of “Insignificant Activity” that exceeds a permitting
threshold shall not be considered an insignificant activity.
Comment 9: It is assumed that the Control Officer would not request dispersion modeling if the overall
source emissions will not increase. The following proposed language for Rule 241, Section
303 (Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessment Requirements) would provide clarification:
“The Control Officer shall not require an ambient air quality impact assessment if the
post-change site-wide potential to emit for the source will decrease or remain unchanged.”
Response 9: The MCAQD did not add the proposed language to Rule 241, Section 303. Per Rule 241
(Minor New Source Review (NSR)), Section 303 (Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessment
Requirements), the Control Officer would request dispersion modeling, if there is reason
to believe a new source or minor NSR modification could interfere with attainment or
maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). When determining
whether a new source or minor NSR modification could interfere with a NAAQS, the
Control Officer must take into consideration the source’s emission rates, whether
increasing, decreasing or remaining unchanged.
Comment 10: Natural gas combustion is associated with very low particulate matter emissions and
should be exempt from the ambient air quality impact assessment as emissions are unlikely
to interfere with attainment or maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard.
4

Similarly, emissions from insignificant and trivial activities are unlikely to interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. Therefore, the following sentence should be
added to Rule 241, Section 308.3 (Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessments): “The
assessment shall not take into account particulate matter emissions from natural-gas fired
equipment or emissions from equipment or operations considered insignificant or trivial
under Rule 100, Definition of “Insignificant Activity”, even if the group of equipment and
operations is greater than the applicable thresholds of Rule 100, Definition of
“Insignificant Activity”.”
Response 10: The MCAQD did not revise the text in Rule 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)),
Section 308.3 (Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessments) to exempt natural gas
combustion from the ambient air quality impact assessment. Natural gas combustion is an
insignificant activity (Rule 100, Definition of “Insignificant Activity”) and insignificant
activities are exempt from a permt (Rule 200, Section 305.2(b)); therefore, natural gas
combustion would not be included in an ambient air quality impact assessment.
5

Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health
Meeting Date: October 28, 2019
Board Hearing Date: December 11, 2019
Case Number/Title: AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR)
Agenda Item: (Pending)
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve revisions to Maricopa County’s New Source Review (NSR)
rules and approve submission of the revised rules as a revision to the
Arizona State Implementation Plan
NSR is a long-standing Clean Air Act permitting program that requires
businesses to get an air pollution control permit before they start
construction or make major modifications to their business. NSR must
ensure that air quality is not significantly degraded from the addition of
new or modified businesses, while also providing flexibility to businesses
to improve or modernize their operations. Air quality permits must
include an air quality analysis to demonstrate that new emissions emitted
from the business will not cause or contribute to a violation of a National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
The EPA identified the following eight deficiencies in the MCAQD’s
NSR rules: (1) Rule 100, Definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10”; (2) Rule 200,
Good engineering practice (GEP) stack height provisions; (3) Rule 200,
Agricultural equipment exemption demonstration; (4) Rule 220, Sections
404.3(e) and (f) (Procedures for Certain Changes that do not Require a
Non-Title V Permit); (5) Rule 200, Section 403.2 (Permit Renewal and
Expiration); (6) Rules 100 and 200 Appendix G references; (7) Rules 100
and 200 Arizona Testing Manual references and (8) Rule 100 Definitions
to be removed from the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP)
justifications.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to remedy deficiencies identified by the
EPA in the MCAQD’s NSR rules. The following rules are included in
this rulemaking: Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions), Rule 200
(Permit Requirements), Rule 210 (Title V Permit Provisions), Rule 220
(Non-Title V Permit Provisions), Rule 230 (General Permits), Rule 240
(Federal Major New Source Review (NSR)) and Rule 241 (Minor New
Source Review (NSR)).
6

In addition to remedying the EPA identified deficiencies, the MCAQD is
proposing revisions to address Stakeholder and Staff comments and the
EPA’s recommended clarifications. Per the EPA’s Technical Support
Document (TSD) dated May 17, 2018 for the MCAQD’s NSR SIP
submittal: “The following items do not affect the EPA’s current action
but are recommended clarifications or revisions for consideration the
next time the MCAQD undertakes updates to the submitted rules…As
[the EPA] reviewed the NSR SIP submittal, [the EPA] noted various
minor typographical and editorial errors within the rule text. Because
none of these small errors create a deficiency within Maricopa’s NSR
program, [the EPA is] not discussing them in this TSD. Under separate
cover [the EPA has] provided the MCAQD with a copy of our list of
these typographical errors.” The EPA’s recommended clarifications can
be readily discerned in the “strikeout and underline” version of the rules
attached to this report and are described in all Stakeholder Workshop
notices and workshop slides/presentations that are posted on the
Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) website.
Support/Opposition: During the rulemaking process, the MCAQD received written feedback
from eight stakeholders. Six stakeholders expressed support and two
stakeholders expressed “other” to the proposed changes. Of the eight
stakeholders who provided feedback, five also provided written
comments. The MCAQD evaluated the comments and drafted
responses.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve
Additional Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program Policy and workflow process. The County Manager briefed the
Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in December 2017.
Stakeholder Workshops were held on March 29, 2018, June 11, 2018,
December 12, 2018 and May 22, 2019.
The Board of Health approved the initiation of regulatory change for the
MCAQD’s NSR rules on July 23, 2018, with the exception of Rule 210
(Title V Permit Provisions). Rule 210 was not initiated at that time
because revisions to the rule were not anticipated. However, upon
further review of the EPA’s recommendations, the MCAQD requested
the Board of Health’s approval of the initiation of regulatory change in
order to revise Rule 210 to incorporate the EPA’s recommended
revisions and to include the revised Rule 210 in the MCAQD’s NSR
rules. The Board of Health approved the initiation of regulatory change
for Rule 210 on February 25, 2019.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was posted on the EROP website
on July 3, 2019. At the posting of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
the EROP website, a 30-day period began during which an oral
7

proceeding could have been requested. An oral proceeding was not
requested.
A newspaper notice of the Board of Supervisors public hearing will be
published in the Arizona Business Gazette on November 7, 2019 and
November 14, 2019. This regulatory change will take effect immediately
upon approval by the Board of Supervisors.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Planning and Analysis Division
Attachments: Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.07 (See
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 4 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 9 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Draft Rules
in Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Agricultural equipment exemption demonstration and definitions
justification
8

DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION I – GENERAL PROVISIONS AND REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
AQ-2017-010-NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR) Return to list of attachments
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) is proposing to amend the
MCAQD’s New Source Review (NSR) rules. The Control Officer is posting this Draft Notice of
Final Rulemaking on the Maricopa County Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP)
website as part of the Report to the Board of Supervisors, in accordance with the Maricopa
County EROP Policy. This notice includes the preamble, as prescribed in A.R.S. § 49-471.05,
and the full text of the rules, including the intended actions to make new sections or amend,
repeal, or renumber the sections of the rules. This notice also includes a list of all previous
notices posted on the Maricopa County EROP website addressing the proposed rules and the
concise explanatory statement prescribed in A.R.S. § 49-471.07, Subsection B.
PREAMBLE
1. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
A.R.S. §§ 49-112, 49-474, 49-479 and 49-480
2. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate
regarding the rulemaking:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Kimberly Butler
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 3800 N Central Avenue, Suite 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Telephone: 602-506-6010
Fax: 602-506-6179
Submit Comments At: http://maricopa.gov/FormCenter/Regulatory-Outreach-17/Citizen-
Comments-94
3. Rulemaking process:
This rulemaking (AQ-2017-010-New Source Review) is following procedures identified in
state statutes and the Maricopa County EROP Policy:
9

County Manager Briefing: December 2017
Stakeholder Workshops: March 29, 2018
June 11, 2018
December 12, 2018
May 22, 2019
Board of Health Meeting to Initiate Regulatory Change: July 23, 2018
February 25, 2019
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking July 3, 2019
Board of Health Meeting to Recommend Approval to the
Board of Supervisors October 28, 2019
Board of Supervisors Formal Meeting to Set the Public Hearing November 6, 2019
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing December 11, 2019
4. Explanation of the rule, including the control officer's reasons for initiating the
rulemaking: Return to list of attachments
NSR is a long-standing Clean Air Act permitting program that requires businesses to get an
air pollution control permit before they start construction or make major modifications to
their business. NSR must ensure that air quality is not significantly degraded from the
addition of new or modified businesses, while also providing flexibility to businesses to
improve or modernize their operations. Air quality permits must include an air quality
analysis to demonstrate that new emissions emitted from the business will not cause or
contribute to a violation of a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
The Clean Air Act, Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to
“include a program to provide for the…regulation of the modification and construction of
any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that
NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required by Part C (New Source
Review (NSR) for major sources in attainment areas) and by Part D (NSR for major sources
in nonattainment areas)…and including a permit program that applies to non-major sources
and to minor modifications to major sources (also called Minor NSR).”
On August 10, 1988, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved Maricopa
County’s NSR Program into the Arizona SIP. On February 3, 2016, the Maricopa County
Board of Supervisors approved revisions to the MCAQD’s NSR rules consistent with
10

revisions the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and the EPA made to
the NSR Program required by the federal Clean Air Act. On May 19, 2016, the MCAQD’s
NSR rules were submitted to the EPA for approval and inclusion in the Arizona SIP. On
December 20, 2017, the EPA completed a review of the MCAQD’s NSR rules and provided
the MCAQD with a list of deficiencies.
On April 5, 2019, the EPA published in the Federal Register (84 FR 13543) a final rule
finalizing full approval of the following MCAQD’s NSR rules: Rule 210 (Title V Permit
Provisions), Rule 220 (Non-Title V Permit Provisions), Rule 240 (Federal Major New Source
Review (NSR)), and Rule 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)) and conditional approval
of the following MCAQD’s NSR rules: Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) and
Rule 200 (Permit Requirements). The EPA’s final rule was effective May 6, 2019. The
MCAQD must adopt and submit revisions to the MCAQD’s NSR rules and submit such
revisions to ADEQ for submittal to the EPA not later than one year from the effective date
of the EPA’s final rule - not later than May 6, 2020. If the MCAQD submits the MCAQD’s
NSR rule revisions by the deadline and the EPA approves the submission, then the
identified deficiencies will be cured and the EPA should be able to remove from the SIP the
previously approved MCAQD’s NSR rules and replace them with the MCAQD’s current
NSR rules.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to remedy deficiencies identified by the EPA in the
MCAQD’s NSR rules. The following rules are included in this rulemaking: Rule 100
(General Provisions and Definitions), Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Rule 210 (Title V
Permit Provisions), Rule 220 (Non-Title V Permit Provisions), Rule 230 (General Permits),
Rule 240 (Federal Major New Source Review (NSR)) and Rule 241 (Minor New Source
Review (NSR)).
The EPA identified the following eight deficiencies in the MCAQD’s NSR rules: (1) Rule
100, Definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10”; (2) Rule 200, Good engineering practice (GEP)
stack height provisions; (3) Rule 200, Agricultural equipment exemption demonstration; (4)
Rule 220, Sections 404.3(e) and (f) (Procedures for Certain Changes that do not Require a
Non-Title V Permit); (5) Rule 200, Section 403.2 (Permit Renewal and Expiration); (6) Rules
100 and 200 Appendix G references; (7) Rules 100 and 200 Arizona Testing Manual
11

references and (8) Rule 100 Definitions to be removed from the Arizona State
Implementation Plan (SIP) justifications.
In addition to remedying the EPA identified deficiencies, the MCAQD is proposing
revisions to address Stakeholder and Staff comments and EPA’s recommended clarifications.
Per the EPA’s Technical Support Document (TSD) dated May 17, 2018 for the MCAQD’s
NSR SIP submittal: “The following items do not affect the EPA’s current action but are
recommended clarifications or revisions for consideration the next time the MCAQD
undertakes updates to the submitted rules…As [the EPA] reviewed the NSR SIP submittal,
[the EPA] noted various minor typographical and editorial errors within the rule text.
Because none of these small errors create a deficiency within Maricopa’s NSR program, [the
EPA is] not discussing them in this TSD. Under separate cover [the EPA has] provided the
MCAQD with a copy of our list of these typographical errors.”
Although the proposed revisions to address the EPA’s recommended clarifications are not
described in detail in this notice, they can be readily discerned in the “strikeout and
underline” version of the rules attached to this notice and are described in all Stakeholder
Workshop notices and workshop slides/presentations that are posted on the EROP website.
Details about the EPA’s identified deficiencies and the MCAQD’s proposed remedies are
described below.
Deficiency 1:
The EPA proposed conditional approval of the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” in Rule
100 (General Provisions And Definitions), because the definitions do not include gaseous
emissions, which form particulates. However, in the EPA’s final conditional approval, the
EPA determined that their initial analysis was incorrect and are no longer finding the
definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” deficient.
Remedy 1:
Gaseous emissions do not have to be included in the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10”,
because the definition of “Regulated NSR Pollutant” includes the statement: “PM2.5
emissions and PM10 emissions include gaseous emissions”. Although the EPA does not find
the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” deficient, the EPA recommends that the MCAQD
12

consider revising the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” to provide clarity to the regulated
community. The MCAQD did not revise the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” in Rule 100,
because during the first Stakeholder Workshop conducted on March 29, 2018, Stakeholders
commented that the definitions are clear as written and should not be revised.
Deficiency 2:
Rule 200, Sections 201 and 315 (Good Engineering Practice (GEP) Stack Height Provisions)
are inconsistent with 40 CFR 51.100(ii) because they do not provide a numerical value or
formulas for calculating a numerical value relevant to stack height and they do not include
procedures for determining if the degree of emissions limitation is or is not affected by
stack height that exceeds GEP.
Remedy 2:
The MCAQD proposes to delete the definition of “GEP Stack Height” in Rule 200, to
revise Rule 200, Section 314 (Stack Height Provisions) and to delete stack height procedures
from Rule 240, Section 302.5 (Application Completeness) and Section 306 (Stack Height and
Dispersion Techniques).
Deficiency 3:
The MCAQD must provide a basis under 40 CFR 51.160(e) to demonstrate that regulation
of agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations exempted in Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305.1(c) is not needed for the MCAQD’s program to meet federal
NSR requirements for attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS or review for
compliance with the control strategy.
Remedy 3:
The permit exemption in Rule 200, Section 305.1(c) states agricultural equipment used in
normal farm operations does not require a permit, unless the equipment would otherwise
require a permit under Title V of the Act or unless the equipment is subject to a standard
under 40 CFR parts 60, 61 or 63. As written, the permit exemption appears to apply to all
emissions from agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations. The Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) regulates Agricultural Best Management
Practices which regulate the emissions of fugitive dust. The MCAQD regulates emissions of
all other regulated air pollutants, i.e., PM2.5, carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen
13

dioxide (NOx), ozone and sulfur dioxide (SO2), in amounts greater than the permitting
thresholds from stationary sources in normal farm operations.
The MCAQD proposes to delete the permit exemption in Rule 200, Section 305.1(c) and
replace it with a revised exemption in new Section 305.2(i). The revised exemption will be
limited to fugitive emissions from agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations.
With a limited scope, the revised exemption will more accurately reflect both the intent of
the exemption and the MCAQD’s current permitting practices.
The MCAQD has included a complete demonstration regarding the permit exemption in the
Report to the Board of Supervisors. The demonstration shows that regulation of agricultural
equipment used in normal farm operations exempted in Rule 200, Section 305.2(i) is not
needed for the MCAQD’s program to meet federal NSR requirements for attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS or review for compliance with the control strategy.
Deficiency 4:
The EPA proposed conditional approval of Rule 220, Sections 404.3(e) and (f) (Procedures
for Certain Changes that do not Require a Non-Title V Permit Revision), because these
provisions allow changes with potentially significant emission increases and should be listed
as changes that can be made after providing a notification to the MCAQD. In the EPA’s final
rule, the EPA determined that their initial analysis in their conditional approval was incorrect
and the EPA is no longer finding Rule 220, Sections 404.3(e) and (f) deficient. The
provisions in Rule 220, Section 404 are stopped or prohibited by requirements of Section
403, which stipulate that any change that would also result in a minor NSR modification will
always require a permit revision. The exemptions allowed under Section 404.3 are limited to
changes resulting in emission increases lower than the minor NSR modification thresholds.
Remedy 4:
Although the EPA has determined that Rule 220, Sections 404.3(e) and (f) are not deficient,
the MCAQD is proposing to clarify the text in these sections as follows: (1) To add text
stating that changes may be made if they do not require a permit revision pursuant to
Section 403.2; (2) To add text stating that changes may be made in advance of the changes
but after the written notice is received by the MCAQD; (3) To change “increases actual
emissions more than 10% of the major source threshold” to “increases actual emissions less
14

than 10% of the major source threshold” because the change would not qualify for advance
written notice; (4) To delete the section regarding making a change that amounts to
reconstruction of the source, because the change would not qualify for advance written
notice; and (5) To change “making a change that will result in emissions of a new regulated
air pollutant above an applicable regulatory threshold” to “making a change that will result in
emissions of a new regulated air pollutant at a rate that is less than 10% of the applicable
major source threshold for that pollutant”, because the change would not qualify for advance
written notice.
Deficiency 5:
Rule 200, Section 403.2 (Permit Renewal And Expiration) does not ensure the continuity of
the NSR terms and conditions when a Title V or Non-Title V permit expires. The MCAQD
may remedy this deficiency by adding a provision similar to paragraph B of ADEQ’s R18-2-
303.
Remedy 5:
The MCAQD proposes to add new Section 403.2(c) in Rule 200 that ensures continuity of
NSR terms and conditions when a Title V or Non-Title V permit expires. The proposed
new text reads: “The terms and conditions of installation permits issued before September
1, 1993, or in permits or permit revisions issued under Rule 210 or Rule 220 of these rules
and authorizing the construction or modification of a stationary source, remain federal
applicable requirements unless modified or revoked by the Control Officer.” The text
matches ADEQ R18-2-303(B).
Deficiency 6:
References to Appendix G (Incorporated Materials) in certain provisions in Rules 100 and
200 are deficient because Appendix G is neither included in the existing SIP nor has it been
included in the MCAQD’s NSR submittal.
Remedy 6:
The MCAQD proposes to remove references to Appendix G and, where appropriate, to cite
the appropriate Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in Rule 100, Definition of “AP-42”,
Definition of “Non-Precursor Organic Compound”, Definition of “Reference Material”
15

and Section 503 (Emission Statements Required As Stated In The Act) and in Rule 200,
Section 314 (Stack Height Provisions).
Deficiency 7:
References to the Arizona Testing Manual in Rules 100 and 200 are deficient because they
rely on provisions that are not SIP approved and the Arizona Testing Manual is significantly
out of date and not appropriate to be relied upon as the sole basis for testing procedures.
Remedy 7:
The MCAQD proposes to remove references to the Arizona Testing Manual in Rule 100,
Definition of “Reference Method” and in Rule 200, Section 408 (Testing Procedures). The
MCAQD proposes to retain the definition of “Arizona Testing Manual” in Rule 100; this
definition matches ADEQ R18-2-101(17).
Deficiency 8:
Certain definitions that the MCAQD proposed be removed from the SIP are used in other
SIP rules and cannot be removed from the SIP without further justification.
Remedy 8:
The MCAQD prepared a justification to delete 24 definitions from the SIP, which are
currently in the SIP in Rule 2 and Rule 21. The justification is included in the Report to the
Board of Supervisors and explains the following:
(1) To remove the following definitions from the SIP and to add them as new definitions in
Rule 100: dust, emission, fuel, fume, gasoline, motor vehicle, organic liquid, organic
solvent, plume, process, smoke, soot, vapor and visible emission
(2) To remove the following definitions from the SIP and to add revised definitions in Rule
100: begin actual construction (to match the federal definition in 40 CFR 51.166
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality)), modification (to remove the
phrase “any relevant de minimis amount”, because Rules 210, 240 and 241 already
explain the permitting and compliance implications of modifications, i.e., what
modifications trigger permit revision, logging, notification, BACT and RACT) and vapor
pressure (to revise the definition of “Insignificant Activity-Storage and Distribution” by
adding a method for determining vapor pressure and specifying which type of vapor
pressure should be used to determine if an activity is insignificant)
16

(3) To retain the following definitions in the SIP, until an MCAQD rule that contains the
definition is approved into the SIP: fly ash (in Rule 316), fuel burning equipment (in Rule
322 and Rule 323) and process source (in Rule 316)
(4) To remove the following definitions from the SIP and to not add them in Rule 100 nor
any other Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations: odors (dictionary
definition is sufficient), non-point source (definition does not support any SIP rules),
photochemically reactive solvent (definition does not support any SIP rules) and
supplementary control system (SCS) (definition does not support any SIP rules)
5. Studies relied on in the control officer's evaluation of or justification for the rule and
where the public may obtain or review the studies, all data underlying the studies,
any analysis of the studies and other supporting material.
Not applicable.
6. An economic, small business and consumer impact statement:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small
business and consumer impact statement, as prescribed by A.R.S. §§ 41-1055, subsections A,
B and C, and 41-1035:
An identification of the proposed rulemaking, including all of the following:
This rulemaking is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules - Rules 100 (General
Provisions and Definitions), 200 (Permit Requirements), 210 (Title V Permit Provisions),
220 (Non-Title V Permit Provisions), 230 (General Permits), 240 (Federal Major New
Source Review (NSR)) and 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)).
(a) The conduct and its frequency of occurrence that the rule is designed to change.
The MCAQD is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules to remedy deficiencies
identified by the EPA. This rulemaking is required to secure approval of the MCAQD’s
NSR rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions are explained in more
detail in Item 4 of this notice.
(b) The harm resulting from the conduct the rule is designed to change and the
likelihood it will continue to occur if the rule is not changed.
The MCAQD is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules to remedy deficiencies
identified by the EPA. This rulemaking is required to secure approval of the MCAQD’s
17

NSR rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and avoid sanctions and imposition
of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) under the Clean Air Act.
(c) The estimated change in frequency of the targeted conduct expected from the
rule change.
The MCAQD is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules to remedy deficiencies
identified by the EPA. This rulemaking is required to secure approval of the MCAQD’s
NSR rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). As with other rules, the MCAQD
will use education, outreach, and other compliance assurance tools to increase the
number of people in compliance with the revised rules. The MCAQD strives to achieve
the highest possible compliance rates.
A brief summary of the information included in the economic, small business and
consumer impact statement.
The economic, small business and consumer impact statement addresses each of the
elements required for an economic, small business and consumer impact statement, as
prescribed by A.R.S. §§ 41-1055, subsections A, B and C, and 41-1035.
Name and address of agency employees who may be contacted to submit or request
additional data on the information included in the economic, small business and
consumer impact statement.
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Kimberly Butler
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 3800 N Central Avenue, Suite 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Telephone: 602-506-6010
Fax: 602-506-6179
Submit Comments At: http://maricopa.gov/FormCenter/Regulatory-Outreach-17/Citizen-
Comments-94
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or
directly benefit from the proposed rulemaking.
18

Any business that engages in pollutant emitting activities is potentially subject to NSR.
Businesses that will be directly affected by this rulemaking will be businesses that construct
or modify stationary sources.
The types of businesses subject to NSR include, but are not limited to, natural gas-fueled
power plants, petroleum products terminals, landfills, metal processing, and manufacturers
of reinforced plastics, expandable foam, wood furniture, steel products, and aircraft engine
and parts. Smaller businesses subject to NSR include, include but are not limited to, rock
quarrying and crushing operations, concrete batch plants, asphalt plants, semiconductor
manufacturers, chemical manufacturers, crematories, dry cleaners, landfills, wood product
manufacturers, commercial printers and publicly owned waste water treatment facilities.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies
directly affected by the implementation and enforcement of the proposed
rulemaking.
This rulemaking should not impose any new costs on the MCAQD or on any other
agencies affected by the proposed rulemaking.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly
affected by the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rulemaking.
This rulemaking should not impose any new costs on political subdivisions of this state
affected by the proposed rulemaking.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the proposed
rulemaking, including any anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll
expenditures of employers who are subject to the proposed rulemaking.
The MCAQD is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules to remedy deficiencies
identified by the EPA. This rulemaking is required to secure approval of the MCAQD’s
NSR rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and avoid sanctions and imposition
of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) under the Clean Air Act.
Some businesses may need a permit or may need to revise their permit as a result of the
proposed revisions to the definition of “Insignificant Activity” and to Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305 (Exemptions). If a business needs a permit, the business will
19

incur a permit application and processing fee. If a business needs to revise their permit,
the business will not incur a fee, because the MCAQD will re-open their permit for
cause.
Businesses should not be affected by the proposed revisions to the definitions of “begin
actual construction” and “modification”; the permitting procedures are not changing.
Rules 210, 240 and 241 explain the permitting and compliance implications of
modifications, i.e., what modifications trigger permit revision, logging, notification,
BACT and RACT. See Item 8 of this notice for more details.
This rulemaking should not have any effect on revenues or payroll expenditures for
businesses.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in
businesses, agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the
proposed rulemaking.
This rulemaking should have no impact on private or public employment in businesses,
agencies, and political subdivisions of this state.
A statement of the probable impact of the proposed rulemaking on small businesses.
The statement shall include:
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the proposed rulemaking.
Any business that engages in pollutant emitting activities is potentially subject to NSR.
Businesses that will be directly affected by this rulemaking will be businesses that
construct or modify stationary sources. The types of businesses subject to NSR include,
but are not limited to, natural gas-fueled power plants, petroleum products terminals,
landfills, metal processing, and manufacturers of reinforced plastics, expandable foam,
wood furniture, steel products, and aircraft engine and parts. Smaller businesses subject
to NSR include, but are not limited to, rock quarrying and crushing operations, concrete
batch plants, asphalt plants, semiconductor manufacturers, chemical manufacturers,
crematories, dry cleaners, landfills, wood product manufacturers, commercial printers
and publicly owned waste water treatment facilities.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the proposed
rulemaking.
20

Some businesses may need a permit or may need to revise their permit as a result of the
proposed revisions to the definition of “Insignificant Activity” and to Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305 (Exemptions). If a business needs a permit, the business will
incur a permit application and processing fee. If a business needs to revise their permit,
the business will not incur a fee, because the MCAQD will re-open their permit for
cause.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on
small businesses.
i. Establish less stringent compliance or reporting requirements in the rule for
small businesses.
This rulemaking does not impose any significant, new compliance requirements on
small businesses and does not establish any new reporting requirements for small
businesses.
ii. Establish less stringent schedules or deadlines in the rule for compliance or
reporting requirements for small businesses.
This rulemaking does not impose any significant, new compliance requirements on
small businesses and does not establish any new reporting requirements for small
businesses.
iii. Consolidate or simplify the rule's compliance or reporting requirements for
small businesses.
This rulemaking does not impose any significant, new compliance requirements on
small businesses and does not establish any new reporting requirements for small
businesses.
iv. Establish performance standards for small businesses to replace design or
operational standards in the rule.
This rulemaking does not impose any design requirements on small businesses. The
operational requirements imposed on small businesses are minimal. Some businesses
may need a permit or may need to revise their permit as a result of the proposed
revisions to the definition of “Insignificant Activity” and to Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305 (Exemptions). If a business needs a permit, the business
21

will incur a permit application and processing fee. If a business needs to revise their
permit, the business will not incur a fee, because the MCAQD will re-open their
permit for cause.
v. Exempt small businesses from any or all requirements of the rule.
This rulemaking does not impose any significant, new requirements on small
businesses.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly
affected by the proposed rulemaking.
This rulemaking should not result in any significant costs for private persons and
consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
This rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state
agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without
costs to pass through to customers, there is no projected change in consumer purchase
patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the
purpose of the proposed rulemaking, including the monetizing of the costs and
benefits for each option and providing the rationale for not using nonselected
alternatives.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules to remedy deficiencies
identified by the EPA. This rulemaking is required to secure approval of the MCAQD’s
NSR rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and avoid sanctions and imposition of a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) under the Clean Air Act.
A description of any data on which a rule is based with a detailed explanation of how
the data was obtained and why the data is acceptable data.
Not applicable.
7. The proposed effective date of the rule:
The proposed effective date of this rulemaking is December 11, 2019.
8. Such other matters as are prescribed by statute and that are applicable to the county
or to any specific rule or class of rules:
22

The MCAQD’s NSR rules are subject to a number of legal requirements.
First, under A.R.S. § 49-479(A), all county regulations must be “at least equal to or more
restrictive than those adopted by” ADEQ.
Second, under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may adopt or amend a rule, emission standard or
standard of performance that is as stringent or more stringent than a rule, emission standard
or standard of performance for similar sources adopted by ADEQ only if the county
complies with the applicable provisions of A.R.S. § 49-112.
Third, under A.R.S § 49-480(B), county “procedures for the review, issuance, revision and
administration of permits” must meet two statutory standards. Procedures for sources
subject to Title V of the Clean Air Act must be “substantially identical” to ADEQ’s
procedures. Procedures for sources that are not subject to Title V must “impose no greater
procedural burden on the permit applicant than” ADEQ’s permit rules.
Finally, MCAQD’s NSR rules are part of the SIP and must be approved by the EPA. In
order to secure the EPA’s approval, the MCAQD must demonstrate to the EPA that the
amendments would not “interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment of
the NAAQS and reasonable further progress toward attainment of the NAAQS or any other
applicable requirement” of the Clean Air Act.
The MCAQD’s NSR rules are “at least equal to or more restrictive than those adopted by”
ADEQ.
The MCAQD’s NSR rules are as stringent or more stringent than a rule, emission standard
or standard of performance for similar sources adopted by ADEQ and the MCAQD’s NSR
rules are in compliance with A.R.S. §§ 49-112(A) and (B).
In regards to A.R.S. § 49-112(A), the MCAQD’s NSR rules meet the following requirements:
(1) Are necessary to address a peculiar local condition, (2) Are either necessary to prevent a
significant thread to public health or the environment that results from a peculiar local
condition and are technically and economically feasible or are required under a federal
statute or regulation or are authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement with the
federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule, ordinance or
regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation and (3) Any fee or tax adopted under
23

the rules do not exceed the reasonable costs of the county to issue and administer the permit
or plan approval program.
In regards to A.R.S. § 49-112(B), the MCAQD’s NSR rules are not being adopted in lieu of a
state program and the cost of obtaining permits or other approvals from the MCAQD will
approximately equal or be less than the fee or cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals
under A.R.S. Title 49 or any rule adopted pursuant to A.R.S. Title 49.
Maricopa County contains a maintenance area for the 1971 NAAQS for carbon monoxide
and nonattainment areas for the following NAAQS:
 1987 NAAQS for PM10;
 2008 NAAQS for ozone; and
 2015 NAAQS for ozone.
The MCAQD’s NSR rules and procedures contain requirements specific to nonattainment
area status and impacts on nearby nonattainment areas. These requirements result in permit
conditions that address the source's proximity to the PM10 and ozone nonattainment areas
and specific atmospheric, geographical conditions found at the source's location. Specifically,
various SIPs for Maricopa County have required the adoption of reasonably available control
technology (RACT), best available control technology (BACT) and most stringent measures
(MSM) as required by the Clean Air Act §§ 172, 182, 188, and 189.
The MCAQD’s “procedures for the review, issuance, revision and administration of
permits” meet the two statutory standards: (1) Procedures for sources subject to Title V of
the Clean Air Act are “substantially identical” to ADEQ’s procedures and (2) Procedures for
sources that are not subject to Title V “impose no greater procedural burden on the permit
applicant than” ADEQ’s permit rules.
The MCAQD’s NSR rules are part of the SIP. The EPA has identified eight deficiencies in
the MCAQD’s NSR rules. The MCAQD is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules to
remedy deficiencies and to secure the EPA’s approval of the MCAQD’s NSR rules into the
SIP. In order to remedy some of the definciencies, the MCAQD’s NSR rules must match
the federal NSR rules. For example, the MCAQD is revising the definition of “begin actual
construction” to match the federal definition in 40 CFR 51.166 (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality). Without this revision, the EPA stated that the EPA cannot
24

approve the definition, because the EPA would be approving into the SIP a provision
allowing certain types of construction to begin without first obtaining the necessary NSR
permits. The text in the definition of “begin actual construction” that the EPA cannot
approve is text that is in A.R.S. § 49-401.01(7). Although the MCAQD’s definition of “begin
actual construction” will not match A.R.S. § 49-401.01(7), the definition will be approvable
into the SIP.
Also, the MCAQD is revising the definition of “modification” to remove the phrase “any
relevant de minimis amount”. Without this revision, the EPA stated that the EPA cannot
approve this definition, because the EPA would be approving into the SIP a provision
allowing inappropriate Director’s discretion and allowing major source determinations to be
made on a potential to emit to potential to emit basis. The text that the EPA cannot approve
(the phrase “any relevant de minimis amount”) is text that is in A.R.S. § 49-401.01(24).
Although the MCAQD’s definition of “modification” will not match A.R.S. § 49-401.01(24),
the definition will be approvable into the SIP.
9. List of all previous notices posted to the Maricopa County EROP website addressing
the proposed rule and a concise explanatory statement, as prescribed by A.R.S. § 49-
471.07, subsection B:
(a) List of all previous notices posted to the Maricopa County EROP website
addressing the proposed rule:
Briefing Notification to County Manager January 26, 2018
Notice of Stakeholder Workshop March 14, 2018
May 23, 2018
November 21, 2018
May 3, 2019
Notice of Board of Health Meeting July 6, 2018
February 8, 2019
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking July 3, 2019
Notice of Board of Health Meeting October 14, 2019
(b) The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for a concise
explanatory statement, as prescribed by A.R.S. § 49-471.07, subsection B:
i. A description of any change between the proposed rule or ordinance, the final
rule or ordinance or notice of final supplemental rule or ordinance.
25

The following changes were made after the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was
published on July 3, 2019:
1. Added “as of July 1, 2019 (and no future amendments or addtions)” to “40 CFR
51, Appendix W” to the definition of “Screening Model” in Rule 100 (General
Provisions and Definitions) to match the Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality’s (ADEQ’s) proposed amendments in R18-2-301 and R18-2-406, which
are proposed in response to the EPA’s comment that the incorporations by
reference are out-of-date
2. Added “municipal waste combustor acid gases (measured as sulfur dioxide and
hydrogen chloride)” and the emissions rate “40 tons per year” to the definition
of “Significant”, Section 200.119(a)(2) in Rule 100 (General Provisions and
Definitions) to match 40 CFR 52.21
3. Added “or equal to” and “stationary source” in the first sentence in Rule 200
(Permit Requirements), Section 301 (Permits Required) to jive with text in Rule
200, Section 303.1 (Non-Title V Permit); sentence reads in part: “…shall not
begin actual construction of, operate, or make a modification to any stationary
source that emits or has the potential to emit any regulated air pollutant greater
than or equal to the stationary source permitting thresholds…”
4. Changed “a regulated air pollutant” to “any regulated air pollutant” in Rule 200
(Permit Requirements), Section 303.1 (Non-Title V Permit) to jive with text in
Rule 200, Section 301 (Permits Required)
5. Deleted “PM10” from Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Section 305.2(i)
(Exemptions) to clarify that it is fugitive emissions from agricultural equipment
used in normal farm operations that are exempt from a permit not only fugitive
PM10 emissions from agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations that
are exempt from a permit
6. Added “as of July 1, 2019 (and no future amendments or addtions)” to “40 CFR
51, Appendix W (Guideline on Air Quality Models)” in Rule 240 (Federal Major
New Source Review (NSR)), Section 304.16 (Permit Requirements for New
Major Sources or Major Modifications Located in Nonattainment Areas) to
26

match ADEQ’s proposed amendments in R18-2-301 and R18-2-406, which are
proposed in response to the EPA’s comment that the incorporations by
reference are out-of-date
7. Added “as of July 1, 2019 (and no future amendments or addtions)” to “40 CFR
51, Appendix W” in Rule 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)), Section 312
(Modeling Required) to match ADEQ’s proposed amendments in R18-2-301 and
R18-2-406, which are proposed in response to the EPA’s comment that the
incorporations by reference are out-of-date
ii. A summary of the comments and arguments for and against the notice and
the county’s response to the comments and arguments. Return to list of attachments
The following discussion evaluates the arguments for and against the rules and
includes responses to comments received on the proposed rules or the preamble in
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The MCAQD received written feedback from
eight Stakeholders. Six stakeholders expressed support and two stakeholders
expressed “other” to the proposed changes. Of the eight stakeholders who provided
feedback, five also provided written comments. The MCAQD evaluated the
comments and drafted responses.
Comment 1: The Hickman’s family farm operation is directly affecting our air
quality. I want to see all confined animal feed operations regulated
for air quality.
Response 1: The purpose of this rulemaking is to remedy deficiencies identified by
the EPA in the MCAQD’s NSR rules. NSR is a long-standing Clean
Air Act permitting program that requires businesses to get an air
pollution control permit before they start construction or make major
modifications to their business; NSR does not address concentrated
animal feeding operations (CAFOs). However, the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) enforces R18-2-609
through 613.01, which are general rules that require all agricultural
operations across the state to take reasonable precautions to
27

minimize dust emissions – to implement agricultural best
management practices (Ag BMPs).
Comment 2: I’m in favor of the proposed changes and for recognizing ammonia
as a pollutant.
Response 2: The MCAQD appreciates your support for the proposed changes.
Comment 3: I’m in support of adding ammonia as a precursor and keeping odors
in the definitions.
Response 3: The MCAQD appreciates your support for the proposed changes.
Comment 4: My comment is regarding the change in the definitions of “PM2.5”
and “PM10” to include "gaseous" emissions. Gaseous emissions
include condensables that are not included in many historic
particulate matter (PM) emission factors that have been used to
permit PM emissions in the past and currently. Many of the PM
emission factors that are currently employed only include the
"filterable" portion of PM, so when the PM definition is expanded to
include the condensables that are part of the gaseous emissions, if the
source is tested, it may no longer be able to comply since additional
condensable PM was added to the definition while they were not part
of the obtained permit limit. For landfills, the PM emission factor for
combustion of landfill gas is from AP-42, Section 2.4., in which, this
emission factor is only based on "filterable" emissions. If additional
PM is added to the definition that was never considered or
understood at the time of permitting, and then if the site is required
to test for all PM under the new definition, it then has a chance to fail
the test, even though the source continues to operate in compliance
based on the understanding of PM emissions at the time of
permitting. Furthermore, the EPA has not updated any PM emission
factors to include the condensables for flares and still relies on the
emission factor for only the filterable portion. This scenario came to
light at a facility in NY that was required to test for all PM even
28

though it was only permitted for the filterable portion of the PM.
The site was below its PM limit if just filterable emissions were
considered, however, since the site had to also test for the
condensable portion of PM, it tested above its permitted limit (that
never included condenables in the first place). Therefore, the concern
is that if the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” are expanded to
include "gaseous" emissions, many of the previous permits may be
based on only filterable PM emissions, and sites should not be
penalized for not changing any emissions when a definition is
expanded to beyond its original scope when permitted.
Response 4: The EPA proposed conditional approval of the definitions of
“PM2.5” and “PM10” in Rule 100 (General Provisions And
Definitions), because the definitions do not include gaseous
emissions, which form particulates. However, in the EPA’s final
conditional approval, the EPA determined that their initial analysis
was incorrect and are no longer finding the definitions of “PM2.5”
and “PM10” deficient. Gaseous emissions do not have to be included
in the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10”, because the definition of
“Regulated NSR Pollutant” includes the statement: “PM2.5 emissions
and PM10 emissions include gaseous emissions”. Although the EPA
does not find the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” deficient, the
EPA recommends that the MCAQD consider revising the definitions
of “PM2.5” and “PM10” to provide clarity to the regulated community.
The MCAQD did not revise the definitions of “PM2.5” and “PM10” in
Rule 100, because during the first Stakeholder Workshop conducted
on March 29, 2018, Stakeholders commented that the definitions are
clear as written and should not be revised.
Comment 5: Rule 100 (General Provisions And Definitions), Definition Of
“Insignificant Activity-Internal Combustion (IC) Equipment”: Delete
29

the text “annual emissions do not exceed 4,000 pounds of NOx or
CO”. The introductory paragraph to the definition of “Insignificant
Activity” provides thresholds that apply to all insignificant activities.
There is no need to repeat the language in this paragraph. The
operating hour threshold should apply to each unit. This change
should also be included in Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Section
305.7 (Exemptions).
Response 5: The MCAQD deleted the text “annual emissions do not exceed 4,000
pounds of NOx or CO” from the definition of “Insignificant
Activity-Internal Combustion (IC) Equipment” and revised the
introductory paragraph to the definition of “Insignificant Activity” to
provide thresholds that apply to all insignificant activities.
Comment 6: Rule 100 (General Provisions And Definitions), Definition Of
“Minor NSR Modification”: The purpose of Rule 241 is to provide a
procedure for the review of minor new sources and minor
modifications for the protection of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). Allowing consideration of proposed emission
decreases at the source does not affect attainment or maintenance of
NAAQS and encourages replacement of out-dated equipment. For
example, if an applicant proposes to install a new gas-fired turbine
and dismantle an old gas-fired boiler, the emissions decrease
associated with the old boiler should be considered in the ambient air
quality impact of the overall project. Therefore, the following
sentence should be added to the definition of “Minor NSR
Modification”: “However, if an ambient air quality impact assessment
under Rule 241, Section 308 is required for the change, the
assessment shall consider any proposed decreases in the potential to
emit of other emission units at the same stationary source, if the
applicant requests such consideration.”
Response 6: The MCAQD did not revise the definition of “Minor NSR
Modification”, because Rule 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)),
30

Section 308.3 states: “The ambient air quality impact assessment
required by this rule shall take into account any limitations, controls,
or emissions decreases that are or will be enforceable in the permit or
permit revision for the source.”
Comment 7: Rule 100 (General Provisions And Definitions), Definition Of
“Minor NSR Modification”: There are a number of sources in
Maricopa County that accepted permit limits to avoid classification as
a major source during a time that the major source threshold was
below the current values. The proposed change would allow those
sources to increase their operating rates and emission limits without
being subject to BACT or an ambient air quality assessment as long
as the increase could have been accommodated prior to the adoption
of the thresholds in Rule 241. Therefore, the following sentence
should be added to the definition of “Minor NSR Modification”: “An
increase in hours of operation, fuel use, production rate or an
emission limit that was accepted prior to February 3, 2016, to avoid
classification as a major source is not a physical change or a change in
the method of operation.”
Response 7: In Rule 100, Definition of “Minor NSR Modification”, the MCAQD
deleted the text “unless the change would be prohibited under any
federally enforceable permit condition established after December 12,
1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rules 210, 220, 240, or 241 of
these rules” and added the text “is not considered an operational
change unless such increase is prohibited under any permit condition
that is legally and practically enforceable by the MCAQD”. There was
a discrepancy between the definitions of “Modification” and “Minor
NSR Modification”. This text only allows those sources lacking an
enforceable limit to increase hours of operation or production rates
without the change being considered a “Modification”.
Comment 8: Insignificant and trivial activities are associated with very low
emission rates. The best available control technology (BACT) and
31

dispersion modeling requirements of Rule 241 are overly burdensome
for activities with low emission rates. Therefore, the following
sentence should be added to Rule 241, Section 103 (Exemption):
“The provisions of this rule shall not apply to equipment and
operations considered insignificant or trivial under Rule 100,
Definition of “Insignificant Activity”, even if the group of equipment
and operations is greater than applicable thresholds. For example,
each piece of natural gas-fired equipment rated at less than 300,000
Btu per hour is exempt from the provisions of this rule even if the
combined rated capacity of natural-gas fired equipment is over
2,000,000 Btu per hour.”
Response 8: The MCAQD did not revise the text in Rule 241 (Minor New Source
Review (NSR)), Section 103 (Exemptions). Any natural gas and/or
liquefied petroleum gas-fired emission unit rated less than 300,000
Btu per hour is exempt from a permit (Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements), Section 305.2(e)) and insignificant activities are
exempt from a permit (Rule 200, Section 305.2(b)); however, the sum
of emissions from multiple activities, processes or emissions units in
any one of the activities, processes or emissions units identified in
Rule 100, Definition of “Insignificant Activity” that exceeds a
permitting threshold shall not be considered an insignificant activity.
Comment 9: It is assumed that the Control Officer would not request dispersion
modeling if the overall source emissions will not increase. The
following proposed language for Rule 241, Section 303 (Ambient Air
Quality Impact Assessment Requirements) would provide
clarification: “The Control Officer shall not require an ambient air
quality impact assessment if the post-change site-wide potential to
emit for the source will decrease or remain unchanged.”
Response 9: The MCAQD did not add the proposed language to Rule 241,
Section 303. Per Rule 241 (Minor New Source Review (NSR)),
Section 303 (Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessment Requirements),
32

the Control Officer would request dispersion modeling, if there is
reason to believe a new source or minor NSR modification could
interfere with attainment or maintenance of a national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS). When determining whether a new source
or minor NSR modification could interfere with a NAAQS, the
Control Officer must take into consideration the source’s emission
rates, whether increasing, decreasing or remaining unchanged.
Comment 10: Natural gas combustion is associated with very low particulate matter
emissions and should be exempt from the ambient air quality impact
assessment as emissions are unlikely to interfere with attainment or
maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard. Similarly,
emissions from insignificant and trivial activities are unlikely to
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. Therefore,
the following sentence should be added to Rule 241, Section 308.3
(Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessments): “The assessment shall
not take into account particulate matter emissions from natural-gas
fired equipment or emissions from equipment or operations
considered insignificant or trivial under Rule 100, Definition of
“Insignificant Activity”, even if the group of equipment and
operations is greater than the applicable thresholds of Rule 100,
Definition of “Insignificant Activity”.”
Response 10: The MCAQD did not revise the text in Rule 241 (Minor New Source
Review (NSR)), Section 308.3 (Ambient Air Quality Impact
Assessments) to exempt natural gas combustion from the ambient air
quality impact assessment. Natural gas combustion is an insignificant
activity (Rule 100, Definition of “Insignificant Activity”) and
insignificant activities are exempt from a permit (Rule 200, Section
305.2(b)); therefore, natural gas combustion would not be included in
an ambient air quality impact assessment.
33

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION I – GENERAL PROVISIONS
RULE 100
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 DECLARATION OF INTENT
102 LEGAL AUTHORITY
103 VALIDITY
104 CIRCUMVENTION
105 RIGHT OF INSPECTION OF PREMISES
106 RIGHT OF INSPECTION OF RECORDS
107 ADVISORY COUNCIL
108 HEARING BOARD
109 ANTI-DEGRADATION
110 AVAILABILITY OF POLLUTION INFORMATION
111 ANNUAL REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS (RFP) REPORT
112 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
200.1 A.A.C.
200.2 ACT
200.3 ACTUAL EMISSIONS
200.4 ADMINISTRATOR
200.5 ADVISORY COUNCIL
200.6 AFFECTED FACILITY
200.7 AFFECTED SOURCE
200.8 AFFECTED STATE
200.9 AIR CONTAMINANT
200.10 AIR POLLUTION
200.11 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT
34

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.12 ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS
200.13 AMBIENT AIR
200.14 AP-42
200.15 APPLICABLE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
200.16 APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT
200.17 ARIZONA TESTING MANUAL
200.18 APPROVED
200.19 AREA SOURCE
200.20 A.R.S.
200.21 ASME
200.22 ASTM
200.23 ATTAINMENT AREA
200.24 BEGIN ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION
200.25 BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BACT)
200.26 BRITISH THERMAL UNIT (BTU)
200.27 BUILDING, STRUCTURE, FACILITY, OR INSTALLATION
200.28 CATEGORICAL SOURCES
200.29 CFR
200.30 CIRCUMSTANCES OUTSIDE THE CONTROL OF THE SOURCE
200.31 CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY
200.32 CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
200.33 COMMENCE
200.34 200.31 COMPLETE
200.35 200.32 CONSTRUCTION
200.36 CONVENTIONAL AIR POLLUTANT
200.37 200.33 CONTROL OFFICER
200.34 CONVENTIONAL AIR POLLUTANT
200.38 200.35 DEPARTMENT
200.39 200.36 DIRECTOR
200.40 200.37 DISCHARGE
200.41 200.38 DIVISION
35

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.39 DUST
200.42 200.40 DUST GENERATING OPERATION
200.43 200.41 EFFLUENT
200.44 ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING UNIT
200.42 EMISSION
200.45 200.43 EMISSION STANDARD
200.46 200.44 EMISSIONS UNIT
200.47 200.45 EPA
200.48 200.46 EQUIVALENT METHOD
200.49 200.47 EXCESS EMISSIONS
200.50 200.48 EXISTING SOURCE
200.51 200.49 FACILITY
200.52 200.50 FEDERAL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT
200.53 FEDERAL LAND MANAGER
200.54 200.51 FEDERALLY ENFORCEABLE
200.55 200.52 FEDERALLY LISTED HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT
200.56 200.53 FINAL PERMIT
200.54 FUEL
200.57 200.55 FUEL OIL
200.58 200.56 FUGITIVE EMISSION
200.57 FUME
200.58 GASOLINE
200.59 GREENHOUSE GASES (GHGs)
200.59 200.60 HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT (HAP)
200.60 HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY (HAPRACT)
200.61 INDIAN GOVERNING BODY
200.62 INDIAN RESERVATION
200.63 200.61 INSIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY
200.64 200.62 MAJOR MODIFICATION
200.65 200.63 MAJOR SOURCE
200.66 200.64 MAJOR SOURCE THRESHOLD
36

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.67 200.65 MALFUNCTION
200.68 200.66 MATERIAL PERMIT CONDITION
200.69 200.67 MAXIMUM CAPACITY TO EMIT
200.70 200.68 METHOD OF OPERATION
200.71 200.69 MINOR NSR MODIFICATION
200.70 MINOR NSR MODIFICATION THRESHOLD
200.72 200.71 MOBILE SOURCE
200.73 200.72 MODIFICATION
200.73 MOTOR VEHICLE
200.74 200.74 NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD (NAAQS)
200.75 200.75 NET EMISSIONS INCREASE
200.76 200.76 NEW SOURCE
200.77 200.77 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NSPS)
200.78 200.78 NITROGEN OXIDES (NOX)
200.79 200.79 NONATTAINMENT AREA
200.80 200.80 NON-PRECURSOR ORGANIC COMPOUND
200.81 NONROAD INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE
200.82 OFF-SPECIFICATION USED OIL
200.83 ON-SPECIFICATION USED OIL
200.81 200.84 OPEN OUTDOOR FIRE
200.82 200.85 OPERATION
200.83 200.86 ORGANIC COMPOUND
200.84 200.87 ORGANIC LIQUID
200.88 ORGANIC SOLVENT
200.85 200.89 OWNER OR OPERATOR
200.86 200.90 PARTICULATE MATTER
200.87 200.91 PERMITTING AUTHORITY
200.88 200.92 PERMITTING THRESHOLD
200.89 200.93 PERSON
200.90 200.94 PLANNING AGENCY
200.95 PLUME
37

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.91 200.96 PM2.5
200.92 200.97 PM10
200.93 200.98 POLLUTANT
200.94 200.99 PORTABLE SOURCE
200.95 200.100 POTENTIAL TO EMIT
200.101 PROCESS
200.96 200.102 PROPOSED PERMIT
200.97 200.103 PROPOSED FINAL PERMIT/PROPOSED FINAL PERMIT REVISION
200.98 200.104 PUBLIC NOTICE THRESHOLD
200.99 200.105 QUANTIFIABLE
200.100 REACTIVATION OF A VERY CLEAN COAL-FIRED ELECTRIC UTILITY
STEAM GENERATING UNIT
200.101 200.106 REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS
200.102 200.107 REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (RACT)
200.103 200.108 REFERENCE METHOD
200.104 200.109 REGULATED AIR POLLUTANT
200.105 200.110 REGULATED MINOR NSR POLLUTANT
200.106 200.111 REGULATED NSR POLLUTANT
200.107 200.112 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
200.108 200.113 REPLICABLE
200.109 REPOWERING
200.110 200.114 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL
200.111 200.115 SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE
200.112 200.116 SCREENING MODEL
200.117 SEASONAL SOURCE
200.113 200.118 SECTION 302(J) CATEGORY
200.114 200.119 SIGNIFICANT
200.120 SMOKE
200.115 200.121 SOLVENT-BORNE COATING MATERIAL
200.122 SOOT
200.116 200.123 SOURCE OR STATIONARY SOURCE
200.117 200.124 SPECIAL INSPECTION WARRANT
38

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.118 200.125 STANDARD CONDITIONS
200.119 200.126 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP)
200.120 STATIONARY SOURCE
200.121 200.127 SUBCONTRACTOR
200.122 200.128 SYNTHETIC MINOR
200.123 TEMPORARY CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION
PROJECT
200.124 200.129 TITLE V
200.125 200.130 TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR (TRS)
200.126 200.131 TRADE SECRETS
200.127 200.132 TRIVIAL ACTIVITY
200.128 200.133 UNCLASSIFIED AREA
200.134 USED OIL
200.135 VAPOR
200.136 VISIBLE EMISSIONS
200.129 200.137 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND (VOC)
200.138 YEAR
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 AIR POLLUTION PROHIBITED
302 APPLICABILITY OF MULTIPLE RULES
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 CERTIFICATION OF TRUTH, ACCURACY, AND COMPLETENESS
402 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION
403 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE FOR NEWLY AMENDED RULE PROVISIONS
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
502 DATA REPORTING
503 EMISSION STATEMENTS REQUIRED AS STATED IN THE ACT
504 RETENTION OF RECORDS
505 ANNUAL EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORT
39

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Revised 07/13/1988; Revised 10/01/1990; Revised 06/22/1992; Revised 11/16/1992; Repealed
and Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 02/15/1995; Revised 04/03/1996; Revised 06/19/1996;
Revised 03/04/1998; Revised 05/20/1998; Revised 07/26/2000; Revised 03/07/2001; Revised
08/22/2001; Revised 11/06/2002; Revised 03/15/2006; Revised 06/06/2007; Revised 09/25/2013;
Revised 02/03/2016; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION I – GENERAL PROVISIONS
RULE 100
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 DECLARATION OF INTENT: The Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations
prevent, reduce, control, correct, or remove regulated air pollutants originating within the
territorial limits of Maricopa County and carry out the mandates of Arizona Revised Statutes
(ARS), Title 49-The Environment.
102 LEGAL AUTHORITY: These rules are adopted under the authority granted by ARS §49-479.
103 VALIDITY: If any section, subsection, clause, phrase, or provision of these rules is held to be
invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion.
104 CIRCUMVENTION: A person shall not build, erect, install, or use any article, machine,
equipment, condition, or any contrivance, the use of which, without resulting in a reduction in
the total release of regulated air pollutants to the atmosphere, conceals or dilutes an emission
which would otherwise constitute a violation of these rules. No person shall circumvent these
rules to dilute regulated air pollutants by using more emission openings than is considered
normal practice by the industry or activity in question.
105 RIGHT OF INSPECTION OF PREMISES: The Control Officer, during reasonable hours,
for the purpose of enforcing and administering these rules or any provision of ARS relating to
the emission or control prescribed pursuant thereto, may enter every building, premises, or other
place, except the interior of structures used as private residences. In the event that consent to
enter for inspection purposes has been refused or circumstances justify the failure to seek such
consent, special inspection warrants may be issued by a magistrate. Every person is guilty of a
petty offense under ARS §49-488 who in any way denies, obstructs, or hampers such entrance or
inspection that is lawfully authorized by warrant.
106 RIGHT OF INSPECTION OF RECORDS: When the Control Officer has reasonable
cause to believe that any person has violated or is in violation of any provision of this rule, any
rule adopted under this rule, or any requirement of a permit issued under this rule, the Control
Officer may request, in writing, that such person produce all existing books, records, and other
documents evidencing tests, inspections, or studies which may reasonably relate to compliance
40

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
or non-compliance with rules adopted under this rule. The Control Officer may request, in
writing, that a person furnish information to determine compliance with the Maricopa County
Air Pollution Control Regulations or issued permits. No person shall fail nor refuse to produce
all existing documents information required in such written request by the Control Officer.
107 ADVISORY COUNCIL: An Advisory Council appointed by the Board of Supervisors may
advise and consult with the Board of Supervisors, the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
MCAQD, and the Control Officer in effecting the mandates of ARS Title 49.
108 HEARING BOARD: The Board of Supervisors shall appoint a 5-member hearing board
knowledgeable in the field of air pollution. At least three members shall not have a substantial
interest, as defined in ARS §38-502(11), in any person required to obtain an air pollution permit
or subject to enforcement orders issued under these rules. Each member shall serve a term of
three years.
109 ANTI-DEGRADATION: The standards in these rules shall not be construed as permitting
the preventable degradation of air quality in any area of Maricopa County.
110 AVAILABILITY OF POLLUTION INFORMATION: The public shall be informed on a
daily basis of average daily concentration of three pollutants: particulates, carbon monoxide, and
ozone. This information shall be disseminated through the use of electronic media, newspapers,
radio, and television. The levels of each pollutant shall be expressed through the use of the Air
Quality Index (AQI) and a written copy of such information shall be made available at the office
of the Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
111 ANNUAL REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS (RFP) REPORT: Each year, the
department MCAQD shall prepare or assist in the preparation of a report on the progress in
implementation of nonattainment area plans. The primary function of the report is to review the
implementation schedules for control measures and emission reduction forecasts in the
nonattainment area plans.
112 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION: Copies of 40 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix A,
Table 2A currently enforced by the department MCAQD are available electronically at:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionCfr.action?collectionCode=CFR; at the Maricopa
Air Quality Department.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: To aid in the understanding of these rules, the following general
definitions are provided. Additional definitions, as necessary, can be found in each rule of the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations. In the event of any inconsistency between any of
the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations, the definition in the specific rule takes
precedence.
200.1 A.A.C.: Arizona Administrative Code.
200.2 ACT: The Clean Air Act of 1963 (P.L. 88-206; 42 United States Code sections 7401 through
7671q), as amended through December 31, 2014 (and no future editions).
41

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.3 ACTUAL EMISSIONS: The actual rate of emissions of a regulated pollutant from an
emissions unit, as determined in Section 200.3(a) through Section 200.3(e) of this rule:
a. In general, actual emissions as of a particular date shall equal the average rate, in tons per
year, at which the unit actually emitted the pollutant during a consecutive 24-month
period that precedes the particular date and that is representative of normal source
operation. The Control Officer may allow the use of a different time period upon a
determination that it is more representative of normal source operation. Actual
emissions shall be calculated using the emissions unit's actual operating hours,
production rates, and types of materials processed, stored, or combusted during the
selected time period.
b. The Control Officer may presume that source-specific allowable emissions for the unit
are equivalent to the actual emissions of the unit.
c. For any emissions unit at a Title V source that has not begun normal operations on the
particular date, actual emissions shall equal the unit’s potential to emit on that date.
d. For any emissions unit at a Non-Title V source that has not begun normal operations on
the particular date, actual emissions shall be based on applicable control equipment
requirements and projected conditions of operation.
e. This definition shall not apply for calculating whether a significant emissions increase
has occurred, or for establishing a PAL. Instead, the definitions of projected actual
emissions and baseline actual emissions in Rule 240 of these rules shall apply for those
purposes.
200.4 ADMINISTRATOR: The Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency.
200.5 ADVISORY COUNCIL: The Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Advisory Council
appointed by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.
200.6 AFFECTED FACILITY: With reference to a stationary source, any apparatus to which a
standard is applicable.
200.7 AFFECTED SOURCE: A source that includes one or more emissions units which are
subject to emission reduction requirements or limitations under Title IV-Acid Deposition
Control of the Act.
200.8 AFFECTED STATE: Any State whose air quality may be affected and that is contiguous
to Arizona or that is within 50 miles of the permitted source.
200.9 AIR CONTAMINANT: Includes smoke, vapors, charred paper, dust, soot, grime, carbon,
fumes, gases, sulfuric acid mist aerosols, aerosol droplets, odors, particulate matter,
windborne matter, radioactive materials, noxious chemicals, or any other material in the
outdoor atmosphere.
200.10 AIR POLLUTION: The presence in the outdoor atmosphere of one or more air
contaminants, or combinations thereof, in sufficient quantities, which either alone or in
connection with other substances, by reason of their concentration and duration, are or tend
to be injurious to human, plant, or animal life, or causes damage to property, or
42

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
unreasonably interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property of a substantial
part of a community, or obscures visibility, or which in any way degrades the quality of the
ambient air below the standards established by the Board of Supervisors.
200.11 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT: Equipment used to eliminate, reduce,
or control the emission of air pollutants into the ambient air.
200.12 ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS: The emission rate of a stationary source calculated using
both the maximum rated capacity of the source (unless the source is subject to federally
enforceable limits which restrict the operating rate or hours of operation) and the most
stringent of the following:
a. The applicable standards as set forth in 40 CFR 60, 61 and or 63;
b. The applicable emissions limitations approved into the state implementation plan,
including those with a future compliance date; or
c. The emissions rate specified as a federally enforceable permit condition, including those
with a future compliance date.
200.13 AMBIENT AIR: That portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the
general public has access.
200.14 AP-42: The EPA document "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors," as
incorporated by reference in Appendix G of these rules.
200.15 APPLICABLE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: Those provisions of the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) approved by the Administrator or a Federal Implementation Plan
(FIP) promulgated for Arizona or any portion of Arizona in accordance with Title I-Air
Pollution Prevention And Control of the Act by the Administrator.
200.16 APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT: Applicable requirement means any of the following:
a. Any federal applicable requirement as defined in Section 200.49 200.50 of this rule.
b. Any other requirement established under the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations or ARS Title 49, Chapter 3, Articles 1, 3, 7, and 8.
200.17 ARIZONA TESTING MANUAL: Sections 1 and 7 of the Arizona Testing Manual for
Air Pollutant Emissions amended as of March 1992 (and no future editions).
200.18 APPROVED: Approved in writing by the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Officer.
200.19 AREA SOURCE: Any stationary source that is not a major source. For purposes of these
rules, the term "area source" shall not include motor vehicles or nonroad vehicles subject to
regulation under Title II-Emission Standards for Moving Sources of the Act.
a. Any stationary source that is not a major source. For purposes of these rules, the term
“area source” shall not include motor vehicles or nonroad vehicles subject to the
regulation under Title II-Emission Standards for Moving Sources of the Act.
b. An area source of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) is a source of HAP that is not a
major source of HAP and is not part of a major source of HAP emissions. A major
source of HAP emissions is defined in the definition of “Major Source” of this rule.
43

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.20 A.R.S.: The Arizona Revised Statutes. The titles of the most frequently used ARS references
in these rules are listed below:
A.R.S. § 38-502(11) Public Officers and Employees, Conduct of Office, Conflict
of Interest of Officers and Employees, Definitions,
Substantial Interest
A.R.S. Title 49 The Environment
A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3 The Environment, Air Quality
A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 4 The Environment, Solid Waste Management
A.R.S. § 49-109 The Environment, General Provisions, Department of
Environmental Quality, Certificate of Disclosure of
Violations; Definition; Remedies
A.R.S. § 49-401 The Environment, Air Quality, General Provisions,
Declaration of Policy
A.R.S. § 49-426 The Environment, Air Quality, State Air Pollution Control,
Permits; Duties of Director; Exceptions; Applications;
Objections; Fees
A.R.S. § 49-426.04 The Environment, Air Quality, State Air Pollution Control,
State List of Hazardous Air Pollutants
A.R.S. § 49-426.05 The Environment, Air Quality, State Air Pollution Control,
Designation of Sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants
A.R.S. § 49-429 The Environment, Air Quality, State Air Pollution Control,
Permit Transfers; Notice; Appeal
A.R.S. § 49-464 The Environment, Air Quality, State Air Pollution Control,
Violation; Classification; Penalties; Definition
A.R.S. § 49-473 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Board of Supervisors
ARS § 49-476.01 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Monitoring
A.R.S. § 49-478 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Hearing Board
A.R.S. § 49-480 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Permits; Fees
A.R.S. § 49-480.03 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Federal Hazardous Air Pollutant Program; Date
Specified By Administrator; Prohibition
A.R.S. § 49-480.04 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, County Program for Control of Hazardous Air
Pollutants
44

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
A.R.S. § 49-482 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Appeals To Hearing Board
A.R.S. § 49-483 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Permit Transfers; Notice; Appeal
A.R.S. § 49-487 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Classification and Reporting; Confidentiality of
Records
A.R.S. § 49-488 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Special Inspection Warrant
A.R.S. § 49-490 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Hearings on Orders of Abatement
A.R.S. § 49-498 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Notice of Hearing; Publication; Service
A.R.S. § 49-501 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Unlawful Open Burning; Definition; Exceptions;
Fine
A.R.S. § 49-511 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Violations, Order of Abatement
A.R.S. § 49-514 The Environment, Air Quality, County Air Pollution
Control, Violation; Classification; Definition
200.21 ASME: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
200.22 ASTM: The American Society for Testing and Materials.
200.23 ATTAINMENT AREA: Any area in the state that has been identified in regulations
promulgated by the Administrator as being in compliance with national ambient air quality
standards.
200.24 BEGIN ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION: Initiation of physical on-site construction
activities on an emissions unit, which are of a permanent nature. Such activities include, but
are not limited to, installation of building supports and foundations, laying of underground
pipework, and construction of permanent storage structures. With respect to a change in
method of operation, “begin actual construction” refers to those on-site activities, other than
preparatory activities, which mark the initiation of the change.
a. For purposes of title I, parts C and D and section 112 of the Act, and for purposes of
applicants that require permits containing limits designed to avoid the application of title
I, parts C and D and section 112 of the Act, these activities include installation of
building supports and foundations, laying of underground pipe work, and construction
of permanent storage structures but do not include any of the following, subject to
Section 200.24(c) of this rule:
(1) Clearing and grading, including demolition and removal of existing structures and
equipment, stripping and stockpiling of topsoil.
45

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) Installation of access roads, driveways and parking lots.
(3) Installation of ancillary structures, including fences, office buildings and temporary
storage structures that are not a necessary component of an emissions unit or
associated air pollution control equipment for which the permit is required.
(4) Ordering and on-site storage of materials and equipment.
b. For purposes other than those identified in Section 200.24(a) of this rule, these
activities do not include any of the following, subject to Section 200.24(c) of this rule:
(1) Clearing and grading, including demolition and removal of existing structures and
equipment, stripping and stockpiling of topsoil and earthwork cut and fill for
foundations.
(2) Installation of access roads, parking lots, driveways and storage areas.
(3) Installation of ancillary structures, including fences, warehouses, storerooms and
office buildings, provided none of these structures impacts the design of any
emissions unit or associated air pollution control equipment.
(4) Ordering and on-site storage of materials and equipment.
(5) Installation of underground pipework, including water, sewer, electric and
telecommunications utilities.
(6) Installation of building and equipment supports, including concrete forms, footers,
pilings, foundations, pads and platforms, provided none of these supports impacts
the design of any emissions unit or associated air pollution control equipment.
c. An applicant’s performance of any activities that are excluded from the definition of
“begin actual construction” under Sections 200.24(a) or (b) of this rule shall be at the
applicant’s risk and shall not reduce the applicant’s obligations under these rules. The
Control Officer shall evaluate an application for a permit or permit revision and make
a decision on the same basis as if the activities allowed under Sections 200.24(a) or (b)
of this rule had not occurred.
200.25 BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BACT): An emissions limitation,
based on the maximum degree of reduction for each pollutant, subject to regulation under
the Act, which would be emitted from any proposed stationary source or modification,
which the Control Officer, on a case-by-case basis, taking into account energy,
environmental, and economic impacts and other costs, determines is achievable for such
source or modification through application of production processes or available methods,
systems, and techniques, including fuel cleaning or treatment or innovative fuel combination
techniques for control of such pollutant. Under no circumstances shall BACT be determined
to be less stringent than the emission control required by an applicable provision of these
rules or of any State or Federal laws (“Federal laws” include the EPA approved State
Implementation Plan (SIP)). If the Control Officer determines that technological or
economic limitations on the application of measurement methodology to a particular
emissions unit would make the imposition of an emissions standard infeasible, a design,
equipment, work practice, operational standard, or combination thereof may be prescribed
46

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
instead to satisfy the requirement for the application of BACT. Such standard shall, to the
degree possible, set forth the emissions reduction achievable by implementation of such
design, equipment, work practice or operation, and shall provide for compliance by means
which achieve equivalent results.
200.26 BRITISH THERMAL UNIT (BTU): The quantity of heat required to raise the
temperature of one pound of water one degree Fahrenheit (°F) at 39.1°F.
200.27 BUILDING, STRUCTURE, FACILITY, OR INSTALLATION: All the pollutant-
emitting equipment and activities that belong to the same industrial grouping, that are
located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and that are under the control of
the same person or persons under common control, except the activities of any vessel.
Pollutant-emitting activities shall be considered as part of the same industrial grouping if they
belong to the same "Major Group" as described in the "Standard Industrial Classification
Manual, 1987".
200.28 CATEGORICAL SOURCES: The following classes of sources:
a. Coal cleaning plants with thermal dryers;
b. Kraft pulp mills;
c. Portland cement plants;
d. Primary zinc smelters;
e. Iron and steel mills;
f. Primary aluminum ore reduction plants (with thermal dryers);
g. Primary copper smelters;
h. Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 50 250 tons of refuse per day;
i. Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants;
j. Petroleum refineries;
k. Lime plants;
l. Phosphate rock processing plants;
m. Coke oven batteries;
n. Sulfur recovery plants;
o. Carbon black plants using the furnace process;
p. Primary lead smelters;
q. Fuel conversion plants;
r. Sintering plants;
s. Secondary metal production plants;
47

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
t. Chemical process plants, which shall not include ethanol production facilities that
produce ethanol by natural fermentation included in North American Industry
Classification System codes 325193 or 312140;
u. Fossil-fuel boilers, or combinations thereof, totaling more than 250 million British
thermal units (Btu) per hour heat input;
v. Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage capacity more than 300,000
barrels;
w. Taconite ore processing plants;
x. Glass fiber processing plants;
y. Charcoal production plants;
z. Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants and combined cycle gas turbines of more than 250
million Btu per hour rated heat input;
aa. Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7, 1980, is being regulated
under Section 111-Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources of the Act or
under Section 112-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants of the
Act.
200.29 CFR: The United States Code of Federal Regulations with standard references in these
rules by Title and Part, so that “40 CFR 51” means “Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 51.”
200.30 CIRCUMSTANCES OUTSIDE THE CONTROL OF THE SOURCE: Shall include,
but not be limited to, circumstances where a violation resulted from a sudden and
unavoidable breakdown of the process or the control equipment, resulted from unavoidable
conditions during a startup or shutdown, or resulted from upset of operations.
200.31 CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY: Any technology, including technologies applied at the
pre-combustion, combustion, or post-combustion stage, at a new or existing facility that will
achieve significant reductions in air emissions of sulfur dioxide or oxides of nitrogen
associated with the utilization of coal in the generation of electricity or process steam that
was not in widespread use as of November 15, 1990.
200.32 CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: A project using funds
appropriated under the heading “Department Of Energy-Clean Coal Technology”, up to a
total amount of $2,500,000,000 for commercial demonstration of clean coal technology or
similar projects, funded through appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency.
The Federal contribution for a qualifying project shall be at least 20% of the total cost of the
demonstration project.
200.33 COMMENCE: As applied to construction of a major source or a major modification, that
the owner or operator has all necessary preconstruction approvals or permits and has either:
a. Begun, or caused to begin, a continuous program of actual on-site construction of the
source, to be completed within a reasonable time; or
48

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Entered into binding agreements or contractual obligations, which cannot be canceled or
modified without substantial loss to the owner or operator, to undertake a program of
actual construction of the source to be completed within a reasonable time.
200.34 200.31 COMPLETE: In reference to an application for a permit or permit revision, “complete”
means that the application contains all the information necessary for processing the
application. Designating an application complete for purposes of permit or permit revision,
processing does not preclude the Control Officer from requesting nor from accepting any
additional information.
200.35 200.32 CONSTRUCTION: Any physical change or change in the method of operation, including
fabrication, erection, or installation, demolition, or modification of an emissions unit, which
would result in a change in actual emissions.
200.36 CONVENTIONAL AIR POLLUTANT: Any pollutant for which the Administrator has
promulgated a primary or secondary national ambient air quality standard.
200.37 200.33 CONTROL OFFICER: The executive head of the department authorized or designated
to enforce air pollution regulations, the executive head of an air pollution control district
established under A.R.S. § 49-473, or the designated agent.
200.34 CONVENTIONAL AIR POLLUTANT: Any pollutant for which the Administrator has
promulgated a primary or secondary national ambient air quality standard, including
percursors to such pollutants.
200.38 200.35 DEPARTMENT: The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD).
200.39 200.36 DIRECTOR: The director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ).
200.40 200.37 DISCHARGE: The release or escape of an effluent any air contaminant into the
atmosphere from a source.
200.41 200.38 DIVISION: The Division no longer exists; consequently, all references in these rules to
Division refer to Department the MCAQD.
200.39 DUST: Finely divided solid particulate matter occurring naturally or created by mechanical
processing, handling or storage of materials in the solid state.
200.42 200.40 DUST GENERATING OPERATION: Any activity capable of generating fugitive dust,
including but not limited to, land clearing, maintenance, and land clean-up using mechanized
equipment, earthmoving, weed abatement by discing or blading, excavating, construction,
demolition, bulk material handling (e.g., bulk material hauling and/or transporting, bulk
material stacking, loading, and unloading operations), storage and/or transporting operations
(e.g., open storage piles), the operation of any outdoor equipment, the operation of
motorized machinery, establishing and/or using staging areas, parking areas, material storage
areas, or access routes to and from a site, establishing and/or using unpaved haul/access
roads to, from, and within a site, disturbed surface areas associated with a site, and installing
initial landscapes using mechanized equipment. For the purpose of this definition, landscape
maintenance and playing on or maintaining a field used for non-motorized sports shall not
be considered a dust generating operation. However, landscape maintenance shall not
49

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
include grading, trenching, or any other mechanized surface disturbing activities performed
to establish initial landscapes or to redesign existing landscapes.
200.43 200.41 EFFLUENT: Any air contaminant which is emitted and subsequently escapes into the
atmosphere.
200.44 ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING UNIT: Any steam electric generating unit
that is constructed for the purpose of supplying more than 1/3 of its potential electric
output capacity and more than 25 MW electric output to any utility power distribution
system for sale. Any steam supplied to a steam distribution system, for the purpose of
providing steam to a steam-electric generator that would produce electrical energy for sale, is
also considered in determining the electrical energy output capacity of the affected facility.
200.42 EMISSION: An air contaminant, gas stream or the act of discharging an air contaminant or
a gas stream, visible or invisible.
200.45 200.43 EMISSION STANDARD: The definition of emission standard, as summarized from
A.R.S. § 49-514(T) and A.R.S. § 49-464(V), is: A numeric limitation on the volume or
concentration of air pollutants in emissions from a source or a specific design, equipment, or
work practice standard, the purpose of which is to eliminate or reduce the volume or
concentration of pollutants emitted by a source. The term emission standard does not
include opacity standards. Violations of emission standards shall be determined in the
manner prescribed by the applicable regulations issued by the Administrator or the Director
or the Control Officer.
200.46 200.44 EMISSIONS UNIT: Any part of a stationary source which emits or would have the
potential to emit any regulated air pollutant and includes an electric steam generating unit.
200.47 200.45 EPA: The United States Environmental Protection Agency.
200.48 200.46 EQUIVALENT METHOD: Any method of sampling and analyzing for an air pollutant,
which has been demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction to have a consistent and
quantitatively known relationship to the reference method, under specified conditions.
200.49 200.47 EXCESS EMISSIONS: Emissions of an air pollutant in excess of an emission standard, as
measured by the compliance test method applicable to such emission standard.
200.50 200.48 EXISTING SOURCE: Any source that is not a new source.
200.51 200.49 FACILITY: The definition of facility is included in the definition of “affected facility” and
“building, structure, facility or installation” of this rule.
200.52 200.50 FEDERAL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT: Any of the following (including
requirements that have been promulgated or approved by the EPA through rulemaking at
the time of issuance but have future effective compliance dates):
a. Any standard or other requirement provided for in the applicable implementation plan
approved or promulgated by the EPA through rulemaking under Title I-Air Pollution
Prevention and Control of the Act that implements the relevant requirements of the
Act, including any revisions to that plan promulgated in 40 CFR 52.
50

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Any term or condition of any unitary permits issued under regulations approved or
promulgated through rulemaking under Title I-Air Pollution Prevention and Control,
including Parts C or D, of the Act.
c. Any standard or other requirement under Section 111-Standards of Performance for
New Stationary Sources of the Act, includes including Section 111(d).
d. Any standard or other requirement under Section 112-National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants of the Act, including any requirement concerning
accident prevention under Section 112(r)(7) of the Act.
e. Any standard or other requirement of the acid rain program under Title IV-Acid
Deposition Control of the Act or the regulations promulgated thereunder and
incorporated under Rule 371-Acid Rain of these rules.
f. Any requirements established under Section 504(b)-Permit Requirements and
Conditions or Section 114(a)(3)-Inspections, Monitoring, and Entry of the Act.
g. Any standard or other requirement governing solid waste incineration under Section
129-Solid Waste Combustion of the Act.
h. Any standard or other requirement for consumer and commercial products pursuant
to Section 183(e)-Federal Ozone Measures of the Act.
i. Any standard or other requirement for tank vessels pursuant to Section 183(f)-Federal
Ozone Measures of the Act.
j. Any standard or other requirement of the program to control air pollution from outer
continental shelf sources under Section 328-Air Pollution from Outer Continental
Shelf Activities of the Act.
k. Any standard or other requirement of the regulations promulgated to protect
stratospheric ozone under Title VI-Stratospheric Ozone Protection of the Act, unless
the Administrator has determined that such requirements need not be contained in a
Title V permit; and
l. Any national ambient air quality standard or increment or visibility requirement under
Part C-Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality of Title I-Air Pollution
Prevention and Control of the Act, but only as it would apply to temporary sources
permitted under Section 504(e)-Permit Requirements and Conditions of the Act.
200.53 FEDERAL LAND MANAGER: With respect to any lands in the United States, the
Secretary of the Department with authority over such lands.
200.54 200.51 FEDERALLY ENFORCEABLE: All limitations and conditions which are enforceable
by the Administrator under the Act, including all of the following:
a. All terms and conditions contained in a Title V permit, except those terms and
conditions which have been specifically designated as not federally enforceable;
b. The requirements of operating permit programs and permits issued under such permit
programs which have been approved by the Administrator, including the requirements
51

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
of State and County operating permit programs approved under Title V-Permits of the
Act or under any new source review permit program;
c. All limitations and conditions which are enforceable by the Administrator, including the
requirements of the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and the National
Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs);
d. The requirements of such other State or County rules or regulations approved by the
Administrator for inclusion in the State Implementation Plan (SIP);
e. The requirements of any federal regulation promulgated by the Administrator as part of
the State Implementation Plan (SIP); and
f. The requirements of State and County operating permit programs, other than Title V
programs, which have been approved by the Administrator and incorporated into the
applicable State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the criteria for federally enforceable
State Operating Permit Programs set forth in 54, Federal Register 27274, dated June 28,
1989. Such requirements include permit terms and conditions which have been entered
into voluntarily by a source under this rule and/or under Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit
Provisions of these rules.
g. Emissions limitations, controls, and other requirements, and any associated
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that are included in a permit
pursuant to Rule 201-Emissions Caps of these rules or Rule 220, Section 304-Permits
Containing Voluntarily Accepted Emissions Limitations, Controls, Or Other
Requirements (Synthetic Minor) of these rules.
200.55 200.52 FEDERALLY LISTED HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT: A Any air pollutant listed
pursuant to Rule 372, Section 309 of these rules Section 112(b) of the Act.
200.56 200.53 FINAL PERMIT: The version of a permit issued by the Control Officer after completion
of all review required by Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations.
200.54 FUEL: Any material which is burned for the purpose of producing energy.
200.57 200.55 FUEL OIL: Number 2 through Number 6 fuel oils as specified in ASTM D396-90a-
Specification for Fuel Oils, gas turbine fuel oils Numbers 2-GT through 4-GT as specified in
ASTM D2880-90a-Specification for Gas Turbine Fuel Oils, or diesel fuel oils Numbers 2-D
and 4-D as specified in ASTM D975-90a-Specification for Diesel Fuel Oils. For the purpose
of this definition, on-specification used oil, also referred to as “on-specification burner fuel”,
“used fuel oil”, or “waste oil”, is not “fuel oil”.
200.58 200.56 FUGITIVE EMISSION: Any emission which could not reasonably pass through a stack,
chimney, vent, or other functionally equivalent opening.
200.57 FUME: Solid particulate matter resulting from the condensation and subsequent
solidification of vapors of melted solid materials.
200.58 GASOLINE: Any petroleum distillate, petroleum distillate/alcohol blend, petroleum
distillate/organic compound blend, or alcohol that meets both of the following conditions:
52

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. Has a Reid vapor pressure between 4.0 and 14.7 psi (200-760 mm Hg) as determined by
ASTM D323-06.
b. Is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines.
200.59 GREENHOUSE GASES (GHGs): The air pollutant defined in 40 CFR 86.1818-12(a) as
the aggregate group of six greenhouse gases: Carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane,
hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride.
200.59 200.60 HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT (HAP): Any federally listed hazardous air
pollutant.
200.60 HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY (HAPRACT): An emissions standard for hazardous air pollutants which
the Control Officer, acting pursuant to §49-480.04(C), determines is reasonably available for a
source. In making the foregoing determination, the Control Officer shall take into
consideration the estimated actual air quality impact of the standard, the cost of complying
with the standard, the demonstrated reliability and widespread use of the technology required
to meet the standard, and any non-air quality health and environmental impacts and energy
requirements. For purposes of this definition, an emissions standard may be expressed as a
numeric emissions limitation or as a design, equipment, work practice, or operational
standard.
200.61 INDIAN GOVERNING BODY: The governing body of any tribe, band, or group of
Indians subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and recognized by the United States
as possessing power of self-government.
200.62 INDIAN RESERVATION: Any federally recognized reservation established by Treaty,
Agreement, Executive Order, or Act of Congress.
200.63 200.61 INSIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY: For the purpose of this rule, an insignificant activity
shall be any activity, process, or emissions unit that is not subject to a source-specific
applicable requirement, that emits no more than 0.5 ton per year of hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) and no more than two tons per year of a regulated air pollutant , and
that is listed below or is approved as an insignificant activity under Rule 200 (Permit
Requirements) of these rules. Source-specific applicable requirements include requirements
for which emissions unit-specific information is needed to determine applicability. For the
purpose of this definition, an insignificant activity shall be any specific activity, process or
emissions unit which meets the following criteria: (1) Emits less than the permitting
thresholds as defined in this rule and is listed in this definition or (2) Is not subject to
permit requirements pursuant to Rule 200-Permit Requirements, Sections 303.2(a) or (b)
of these rules. The sum of emissions from multiple activities, processes or emissions units
of any one of the activities, processes or emissions units identified in (a) – (y) below that
exceeds a permitting threshold shall not be considered an insignificant activity.
a. Food Processing Equipment:
(1) a. Any confection cooker and associated venting or control equipment cooking edible
products intended for human consumption.
53

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) b. Any oven in a food processing operation where less than 1,000 pounds of product are
produced per day of operation.
b. General Combustion Activities:
(1) c. All Any natural gas and/or liquefied petroleum gas-fired pieces of equipment over rated
equal to or greater than 300,000 Btu per hour, only if:
(1) The combined input capacities added together from all such equipment are less than
2,000,000 Btu per hour, and
(2) The emissions come from fuel burning, and
(3) The equipment is used solely for heating buildings for personal comfort or for
producing hot water for personal use.
(2) d. Any oil-fueled heating piece of equipment (except off-spec. oil) piece of heating
equipment burning fuel oil with a maximum rate input capacity or an aggregate input
capacity of less than:
(a) (1) 500,000 Btu per hour if the only emissions came are from fuel burning, or
(b) (2) 1,000,000 Btu per hour if the only emissions came are from fuel burning and the
equipment is used solely for heating buildings for personal comfort or for producing
hot water for personal use.
c. e. Surface Coating and Printing Equipment: Any equipment or activity at a stationary
source using no more than 300 gallons per year of surface coating material or any
combination of surface coating material and solvent, which contains either VOC or
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or both.
d. f. Solvent Cleaning Equipment: Any non-vapor cleaning machine (degreaser) or dip-tank:
(1) Having a liquid surface area of 1 square foot (0.09 square meters) or less, or
(2) Having a maximum capacity of 1 gallon (3.79 liters) or less.
e. Internal Combustion (IC) Equipment:
(1) IC engine-driven compressors, IC engine-driven electrical generator sets, and IC
engine-driven water pumps used only for emergency replacement or standby service
(including testing of same), not to exceed 4,000 pounds of NOx or CO at 500 hours
of operation per year.
(2) Any piston-type IC engine with a manufacturer’s maximum continuous rating of 50
brake horsepower (bhp).
g. Any internal combustion (IC) engine with a manufacturer’s maximum continuous rating
of 50 brake horsepower (bhp) or less.
h. For a stationary source subject to Title V, the following equipment when used only for
emergency replacement or standby service (including testing of same), not to exceed a
total potential to emit of 2,000 pounds of NOx and not to exceed a total potential to emit
of 2,000 pounds of CO from all internal combustion (IC) engines and not to exceed 500
54

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
hours of operation per year per IC engine. Potential to emit is calculated at 500 hours of
operation per year per IC engine.
(1) IC engine-driven compressors; or
(2) IC engine-driven electrical generator sets; or
(3) IC engine-driven water pumps.
i. For a stationary source not subject to Title V, the following equipment when used only for
emergency replacement or standby service (including testing of same), not to exceed a
total potential to emit of 2,000 pounds of NOx and not to exceed a total potential to emit
of 2,000 pounds of CO from all internal combustion (IC) engines and not to exceed 100
hours of operation per year per IC engine. Potential to emit is calculated at 100 hours of
operation per year per IC engine.
(1) IC engine-driven compressors; or
(2) IC engine-driven electrical generator sets; or
(3) IC engine-driven water pumps.
f. j. Laboratories and Pilot Plants: Lab equipment used exclusively for chemical and physical
analyses.
g. Storage and Distribution:
(1) k. Chemical or petroleum Organic liquid or gasoline storage tanks or containers that hold
250 gallons or less and would have emissions of a regulated air pollutant.
(2) l. Any emissions unit, operation, or activity that handles or stores receives no more than
12,000 gallons of a liquid in a year with a Reid vapor pressure less than 1.5 0.5 psia, as
determined by ASTM D323-15a.
(3) m. Any equipment used exclusively for the storage of unheated organic material with:
(1) An initial boiling point of 150 Centigrade (C) (302 Fahrenheit (F)) or greater, as
determined by ASTM D1078-11; or
(2) A vapor pressure of no more than 5 millimeters mercury (mm Hg) (0.1 pound per
square inch (psi) absolute), as determined by ASTM D2879-11.
(4) n. Any equipment with a capacity of no more than 4,200 gallons (100 barrels) used
exclusively to store oil with specific gravity 0.8762 or higher (30 API or lower), as
measured by API test method 2547 or ASTM D1298-12b.
(5) o. Any equipment used exclusively for the storage of liquefied gases in unvented pressure
vessels, except for emergency pressure-relief valves.
(6) p. Any equipment used exclusively to compress or hold dry natural gas. Any ICE internal
combustion (IC) engine or other equipment associated with the dry natural gas should
shall not be considered an insignificant activity, unless such ICE IC engine or other
equipment independently qualifies as an insignificant activity.
(7) q. Any equipment used exclusively for the storage of fresh, commercial, or purer grade of:
55

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(1) Sulfuric or phosphoric acid with acid content of no more than 99% by weight; or
(2) Nitric acid with acid content of no more than 70% by weight.
h. Miscellaneous Activities:
(1) r. Any blast cleaning equipment using a suspension of abrasive material in water and the
control equipment venting such blast cleaning equipment. Wet abrasive blasting.
(2) s. Cooling towers: Any water cooling tower which: (1) has a circulation rate of less than
10,000 gallons per minute; and (2) is not used to cool process water, water from
barometric jets, or water from barometric condensers. Any water cooling tower which has
a circulation rate of less than 3,000 gallons per minute.
t. Any water cooling towers which:
(1) Have a combined circulation rate of less than 10,000 gallons per minute; and
(2) Are not used to cool process water, water from barometric jets, or water from
barometric condensers.
(3) u. Batch mixers with rated capacity of 5 cubic feet or less.
(4) v. Wet sand and gravel production facilities that obtain material from subterranean and
subaqueous beds, whose production rate is 200 tons per hour or less, and whose
permanent in-plant roads are paved and cleaned to control dust. This does not include
activities in emissions units, which are used to crush or grind any nonmetallic minerals.
(5) w. Any brazing, soldering, welding, or cutting torch equipment used in manufacturing and
construction activities and with the potential to emit hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
metals, provided the total emissions of HAPs do not exceed 0.5 ton per year.
(6) x. Hand-held or manually operated equipment used for buffing, polishing, carving, cutting,
drilling, machining, routing, sanding, sawing, surface grinding, or turning of ceramic art
work, precision parts, leather, metals, plastics, fiberboard, masonry, carbon, glass, or
wood.
(7) y. Any aerosol can puncturing or crushing operation that processes less than 500 cans per
day provided such operation uses a closed loop recovery system. uses:
(1) A closed loop recovery system that emits no regulated air pollutants, or
(2) A recovery system that vents all emissions through a properly operated and
maintained carbon canister, provided not more than 500 cans are processed through
the equipment per day.
(8) Any laboratory fume hood or vent provided such equipment is used exclusively for
the purpose of teaching, research, or quality control.
200.64 200.62 MAJOR MODIFICATION: The following definition of “Major Modification” applies to
all rules in the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations except for Rule 240-
Federal Major New Source Review (NSR). Rule 240 of these rules has a definition of “Major
Modification” and that definition is specific to stationary sources subject to Rule 240.
56

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. Any physical change in or change in the method of operation of a major source that
would result in both a significant emissions increase of any regulated NSR pollutant and
a significant net emissions increase of that pollutant from the stationary source.
b. Any emissions increase or net emissions increase that is significant for nitrogen oxides or
volatile organic compounds is significant for ozone.
c. For the purpose of this definition, none of the following is a physical change or a change
in the method of operation:
(1) Routine maintenance, repair, and replacement;
(2) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by reason of an order under Sections 2(a)
and (b) of the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of 1974, 15
U.S.C. §792, or by reason of a natural gas curtailment plan under the Federal Power
Act, 16 U.S.C. §792-825r;
(3) Use of an alternative fuel by reason of an order or rule under Section 125-Measures
To Prevent Economic Disruption Or Unemployment of the Act;
(4) Use of an alternative fuel at a steam generating unit to the extent that the fuel is
generated from municipal solid waste;
(5) For the purpose of determining the applicability of Rule 240-Federal Major New
Source Review (NSR), Section 304 (Permit Requirements for New Major Sources Or
Major Modifications Located In Nonattainment Areas) of these rules, any of the
following:
(a) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary source that the source
was capable of accommodating before December 12, 1976, unless the change
would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit condition
established after December 12, 1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rule 200-
Permit Requirements, Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 240-Federal
Major New Source Review (NSR), Rule 245-Continuous Source Emission
Monitoring, and Rule 270-Performance Tests of these rules; or
(b) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary source that the source is
approved to use under any permit issued under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rule
200-Permit Requirements, Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 240-Federal
Major New Source Review (NSR), Rule 245-Continuous Source Emission
Monitoring, and Rule 270-Performance Tests of these rules; or
(c) An increase in the hours of operation or in the production rate, unless the
change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit condition
established after December 12, 1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rule 200-
Permit Requirements, Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 240-Federal
Major New Source Review (NSR), Rule 245-Continuous Source Emission
Monitoring, and Rule 270-Performance Tests of these rules.
(6) For the purpose of determining applicability of Rule 240-Federal Major New Source
Review (NSR), Section 305 (Permit Requirements for New Major Sources Or Major
57

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Modifications Located In Attainment Or Unclassifiable Areas) of these rules, any of
the following:
(a) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary source that the source
was capable of accommodating before January 6, 1975, unless the change would
be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit condition established after
January 6, 1975, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rule 200-Permit Requirements,
Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 240-Federal Major New Source Review
(NSR), Rule 245-Continuous Source Emission Monitoring, and Rule 270-
Performance Tests of these rules; or
(b) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary source that the source is
approved to use under any permit issued under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rule
200-Permit Requirements, Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 240-Federal
Major New Source Review (NSR), Rule 245-Continuous Source Emission
Monitoring, and Rule 270-Performance Tests of these rules; or
(c) An increase in the hours of operation or in the production rate, unless the
change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit condition
established after January 6, 1975, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rule 200-Permit
Requirements, Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 240-Federal Major New
Source Review (NSR), Rule 245-Continuous Source Emission Monitoring, and
Rule 270-Performance Tests of these rules.
(7) Any change in ownership at a stationary source;
(8) The installation, operation, cessation, or removal of a temporary clean coal
technology demonstration project, if the project complies with:
(a) The State Implementation Plan (SIP); and
(b) Other requirements necessary to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards during the project and after it is terminated;
(9) For electric utility steam generating units located in attainment and unclassified areas
only, the installation or operation of a permanent clean coal technology
demonstration project that constitutes repowering, if the project does not result in
an increase in the potential to emit of any regulated pollutant emitted by the unit.
This exemption shall apply on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis; and
(10) For electric utility steam generating units located in attainment and unclassified areas
only, the reactivation of a very clean coal-fired electric utility steam generating unit.
d. This definition shall not apply with respect to a particular regulated NSR pollutant
when the major source is complying with the requirements of Plantwide Applicability
Limitations (PALs) as described in Rule 240 of these rules. Instead, the definition of
“PAL” major modification in Rule 240 of these rules shall apply.
200.65 200.63 MAJOR SOURCE: A source that meets any of the following criteria:
a. A major source as defined in Rule 240-Federal Major New Source Review (NSR) of
these rules.
58

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. A major source under Section 112 (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants) of the Act:
(1) For pollutants other than radionuclides, any stationary source that emits or has the
potential to emit, in the aggregate, including fugitive emissions, 10 tons per year (tpy)
or more of any hazardous air pollutant which has been listed under Section 112(b) of
the Act, 25 tpy or more of any combination of such hazardous air pollutants, or such
lesser quantity as described in Title 18 (Environmental Quality), Chapter 2
(Department of Environmental Quality Air Pollution Control), Article 11 (Federal
Hazardous Air Pollutants) of the Arizona Administrative Code. Notwithstanding the
preceding sentence, emissions from any oil or gas exploration or production well
(with its associated equipment) and emissions from any pipeline compressor or
pump station shall not be aggregated with emissions from other similar units,
whether or not such units are in a contiguous area or under common control, to
determine whether such units or stations are major source; or
(2) For radionuclides, major source shall have the meaning specified by the
Administrator by rule.
c. A major stationary source, as defined in Section 302 of the Act, that directly emits or
has the potential to emit, 100 tpy or more of any air pollutant including any major
source of fugitive emissions of any such pollutant. The fugitive emissions of a
stationary source shall not be considered in determining whether it is a major
stationary source for the purpose of Section 302(j) of the Act, unless the source
belongs to a section 302(j) category of the Act.
200.66 200.64 MAJOR SOURCE THRESHOLD: The lowest applicable emissions rate for a pollutant
that would cause the source to be a major source, at the particular time and location, under
the definition of “major source” of this rule.
200.67 200.65 MALFUNCTION: Any sudden and unavoidable failure of air pollution control
equipment, process, or process equipment to operate in a normal and usual manner. Failures
that are caused by poor maintenance, careless operation, or any other upset condition or
equipment breakdown which could have been prevented by the exercise of reasonable care
shall not be considered malfunctions a malfunction.
200.68 200.66 MATERIAL PERMIT CONDITION:
a. For the purpose of A.R.S. § 49-464(G) and A.R.S. § 49-514(G), a material permit
condition shall mean a condition which satisfies all of the following:
(1) The condition is in a permit or permit revision issued by the Control Officer or by
the Director after the effective date of this rule.
(2) The condition is identified within the permit as a material permit condition.
(3) The condition is one of the following:
(a) An enforceable emission standard imposed to avoid classification as a major
modification or major source or to avoid triggering any other applicable
requirement.
59

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(b) A requirement for the installation or certification of a monitoring device.
(c) A requirement for the installation of air pollution control equipment.
(d) A requirement for the operation of air pollution control equipment.
(e) An opacity standard required by Section 111 (Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources) of the Act or Title I (Air Pollution Prevention and Control),
Part C or D, of the Act.
(4) b. Violation of the condition is not covered by Subsections (A) through (F) or (H) through
(J) of A.R.S. § 49-464 or Subsections (A) through (F) or (H) through (J) of A.R.S. § 49-
514.
b. c. For the purpose of Section 200.72 200.66(a)(3)(c), (d), and (e) of this rule, a permit
condition shall not be material where the failure to comply resulted from circumstances
which were outside the control of the source.
200.69 200.67 MAXIMUM CAPACITY TO EMIT: The maximum amount a source is capable of
emitting under its physical and operational design without taking any limitations on
operations or air pollution controls into account.
200.70 200.68 METHOD OF OPERATION: The definition of “method of operation” is included in
defined the same as the definition of “operation” of in this rule.
200.71 200.69 MINOR NSR MODIFICATION: Any of the following changes, that do if the change
does not qualify as meet the definition of a “Major Source” or “Major Modification”:
a. Any physical change in or change in the method of operation of an emission unit or a
stationary source that either:
(1) Increases the potential to emit of a regulated minor NSR pollutant by an amount
greater than or equal to the minor NSR modification threshold, or
(2) Results in the potential to emit of a regulated minor NSR pollutant not previously
emitted by such emission unit or stationary source in an amount greater than or
equal to the minor NSR modification threshold for that pollutant.
b. Construction of one or more new emissions units that have the potential to emit
regulated minor NSR pollutants at an amount greater than or equal to the minor NSR
modification threshold.
c. A change covered by Sections 200.71 200.69(a) or (b) of this rule constitutes a minor
NSR modification regardless of whether there will be a net decrease in total source
emissions or a net increase in total source emissions that is less than the minor NSR
modification threshold as a result of decreases in the potential to emit of other
emission units at the same stationary source.
d. For the purpose of this definition, the following do not constitute a physical change or
change in the method of operation:
(1) A change consisting solely of the construction of, or changes to, a combination of
emissions units qualifying as an insignificant activity.
60

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) For a stationary source that is required to obtain a Non-Title V permit under Rule
200 of these rules and that is subject to source-wide emissions caps under Rule 201
of these rules, a change that will not result in the violation of the existing emissions
cap for that regulated minor NSR pollutant.
(3) Replacement of an existing emission unit by a an emission unit with a potential to
emit regulated minor NSR pollutants that is less than or equal to the potential to
emit of the existing emission unit, provided the replacement does not cause an
increase in emissions at other emission units at the stationary source or emit any
new pollutant above the permitting thresholds. A An emission unit installed under
this provision is subject to any limits applicable to the emission unit it replaced.
(4) Routine maintenance, repair, and replacement.
(5) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by reason of an order under Sections 2(a)
and (b) of the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of 1974, 15
U.S.C. 792, or by reason of a natural gas curtailment plan under the Federal Power
Act, 16 U.S.C. 792 to 825r.
(6) Use of an alternative fuel by reason of an order or rule under Section 125 of the
Act.
(7) Use of an alternative fuel at a steam generating unit to the extent that the fuel is
generated from municipal solid waste.
(8) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary source that either:
(a) The source was capable of accommodating before December 12, 1976, unless
the change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit
condition established after December 12, 1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under
Rules 210, 220, 240, or 241 of these rules; or
(b) The source is approved to use under any permit issued under 40 CFR 52.21, or
under Rules 210, 220, or 240 these rules.
(9) An increase in the hours of operation or in the production rate, unless the change
would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit condition established
after December 12, 1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rules 210, 220, 240, or
241 of these rules is not considered an operational change unless such increase is
prohibited under any permit condition that is legally and practically enforceable by
the MCAQD.
(10) Any change in ownership at a stationary source.
e. For purposes of this definition:
(1) “Potential to emit” means the lower of a stationary source’s or emission unit’s
potential to emit or its allowable emissions.
(2) In determining potential to emit, the fugitive emissions of a stationary source shall
not be considered unless the source belongs to a section 302(j) category.
(3) All of the roadways located at a stationary source constitute a single emissions unit.
61

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
f. Minor NSR Modification Threshold: For the purpose of this definition, “minor NSR
modification threshold” is defined as: For a regulated minor NSR pollutant, the
following applies:
Maximum Capacity To Emit Emission Rate In Tons Per Year
Pollutant
(TPY)
PM2.5 7.5
(primary emissions only; levels for precursors are set below)
PM10 7.5
SO2 20
NOx 20
VOC 20
CO 50
Pb 0.3
200.70 MINOR NSR MODIFICATION THRESHOLD: For each regulated minor NSR
pollutant, the following emission thresholds apply for the proposed change:
Pollutant Potential To Emit In Tons Per Year (TPY)
5.0
PM2.5
(primary emissions only; levels for precursors are set below)
PM10 7.5
SO2 20
NOx 20
VOC 20
CO 50
Pb 0.3
200.72 200.71 MOBILE SOURCE: Any combustion engine, device, machine or equipment that
operates during transport and that emits or generates air contaminants whether in motion
or at rest. This definition does not include auxiliary engines that are not used to propel the
device, machine or equipment.
200.73 200.72 MODIFICATION: A physical change in or a change in the method of operation of a
source which increases the actual emissions of any regulated air pollutant emitted by such
source by more than any relevant de minimis amount, or which results in the emission of
any regulated air pollutant not previously emitted. by more than such de minimis amount.
An increase in emissions at a minor source shall be determined by comparing the source’s
potential to emit before and after the modification. The following exemptions apply:
a. A physical or operational change does not include routine maintenance, repair or
replacement.
62

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. An increase in the hours of operation or if the production rate is not considered an
operational change unless such increase is prohibited under any permit condition that
is legally and practically enforceable by the department MCAQD.
c. A change in ownership at a source is not considered a modification.
200.73 MOTOR VEHICLE: Any self-propelled vehicle designed for transporting persons or
property on public highways.
200.74 200.74 NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD (NAAQS): The ambient air
pollutant concentration limits established by the administrator pursuant to Section 109 of
the Clean Air Act.
200.75 200.75 NET EMISSIONS INCREASE: For the purpose of Rule 240, Sections 305 and 306 of
these rules, a net emissions increase shall be defined by the federal regulations incorporated
by reference. For the purpose of Rule 220 of these rules, a net emissions increase shall be an
emissions increase for a particular modification plus any other increases and decreases in
actual emissions at the facility that are creditable and contemporaneous with the particular
modification where:
a. A creditable increase or decrease in actual emissions is contemporaneous with a
particular modification if it occurs between the date five (5) years before a complete
application for a permit or permit revision authorizing the particular change is
submitted or actual construction of the particular change begins, whichever occurs
earlier, and the date that the increase from the particular change occurs.” Any
replacement unit that requires shakedown becomes operational only after a reasonable
shakedown period, not to exceed 180 days.
b. A decrease in actual emissions is creditable only if it satisfies the requirements for
emission reduction credits in Rule 204 of these rules and has approximately the same
qualitative significance for public health and welfare as that attributed to the increase
from the particular modification, and is federally enforceable at and after the time that
construction of the modification commences.
200.76 200.76 NEW SOURCE: A source for which construction has not commenced before the effective
date of an applicable rule or standard to which a source is subject.
200.77 200.77 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NSPS): Standards adopted by the
Administrator under Section 111(b) of the Act.
200.78 200.78 NITROGEN OXIDES (NOX): All oxides of nitrogen except nitrous oxide, as measured
by test methods set forth in the Appendices to 40 CFR Part 60.
200.79 200.79 NONATTAINMENT AREA: An area so designated by the Administrator, acting under
Section 107 (Air Quality Control Regions) of the Act, as exceeding national primary or
secondary ambient air standards for a particular pollutant or pollutants.
200.80 200.80 NON-PRECURSOR ORGANIC COMPOUND: Any of the organic compounds that
have been designated by the EPA as having negligible photochemical reactivity as listed in
Appendix G of these rules as listed in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
200.81 NONROAD INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE:
63

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. Equipment that meets the following requirements are nonroad IC engines:
(1) An internal combustion engine that is (or will be) used in or on a piece of equipment
that is self-propelled or serves a dual purpose by both propelling itself and
performing another function (such as garden tractors, off-highway mobile cranes,
and bulldozers); or
(2) An internal combustion engine that is (or will be) used in or on a piece of
equipment that is intended to be propelled while performing its function (such as
lawnmowers and string trimmers); or
(3) An internal combustion engine that by itself or in or on a piece of equipment is
portable or transportable, meaning designed to be and capable of being carried or
moved from one location to another. Indicia of transportability include but are not
limited to, wheels, skids, carrying handles, dollies, trailers, or platforms.
b. The following are not nonroad IC engines:
(1) An engine used to propel a motor vehicle, an aircraft, or equipment used solely for
competition; or
(2) An engine regulated by a federal New Source Performance Standard promulgated
under Section 111 of the Act; or
(3) An engine otherwise included in Section 200.81(a)(3) of this rule that remains or
will remain at a location for more than 12 consecutive months. Any engine (or
engines) that replace(s) an engine at a location and that is intended to perform the
same or similar function as the engine replaced will be included in calculating the
consecutive time period. This paragraph does not apply to an engine after the
engine is removed from the location.
(4) An engine otherwise included in Section 200.81(a)(3) of this rule that remains or
will remain at a seasonal source during the full annual operating period of the
seasonal source. Any engine (or engines) that replace(s) an engine at a seasonal
source and is intended to perform the same or similar function as the engine
replace will be included in calculating the consecutive time period. This paragraph
does not apply to an engine after the engine is removed from the location.
200.82 OFF-SPECIFICATION USED OIL: Used oil which exceeds any of the allowable levels
in 40 CFR 279.11.
200.83 ON-SPECIFICATION USED OIL: Used oil that is not off-specification used oil.
200.81 200.84 OPEN OUTDOOR FIRE: Any combustion of material of any type of material outdoors,
where the products of combustion are not directed through a flue.
200.82 200.85 OPERATION: Any physical action resulting in a change in the location, form, or physical
properties of a material, or any chemical action resulting in a change in the chemical
composition or properties of a material.
200.83 200.86 ORGANIC COMPOUND: Any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide,
carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate.
64

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.84 200.87 ORGANIC LIQUID: Any organic compound which exists as a liquid under any actual
conditions of use, transport, or storage. For the purposes of these rules, gasoline is not
considered an organic liquid.
200.88 ORGANIC SOLVENT: Any liquid composed wholly or in part of a carbon compound
which is capable of dissolving another substance or carrying it in suspension.
200.85 200.89 OWNER OR OPERATOR: Any person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or
supervises an affected facility or a stationary source.
200.86 200.90 PARTICULATE MATTER: Any material, except condensed water containing no more
than analytical trace amounts of other chemical elements or compounds, which has a
nominal aerodynamic diameter smaller than 100 microns (micrometers) and which exists in a
finely divided form as a liquid or solid at actual conditions.
200.87 200.91 PERMITTING AUTHORITY: The department MCAQD or a County department,
agency, or air pollution control district that is charged with enforcing a permit program
adopted under A.R.S. § 49-480, Subsection A.
200.88 200.92 PERMITTING THRESHOLD: The stationary source emission rate at which a permit or
permit revision is required. For a each regulated air pollutant, the following applies emission
thresholds apply:
Maximum Capacity Potential To Emit Emission
Rate
Pollutant In Tons Per Year (TPY)
0.5
PM2.5 (primary emissions only; levels for precursors are set
below)
PM10 0.5
SO2 1.0
NOx 1.0
VOC 0.5
CO 1.0
Pb 0.3
Single HAP (other than Pb) 0.5
Total HAPs 1.0
Any other regulated air pollutant 1.0
200.89 200.93 PERSON: Any individual, public or private corporation, company, partnership, firm,
association or society of persons, the Federal Government and any of its departments or
agencies, or the State and any of its agencies, departments or political subdivisions, as well as
a natural person.
200.90 200.94 PLANNING AGENCY: An organization designated by the governor pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 7504.
65

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
200.95 PLUME: Visible effluent.
200.91 200.96 PM2.5: Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5
microns (micrometers), as measured by the applicable State and Federal Reference Test
Methods.
200.92 200.97 PM10: Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10
microns (micrometers), as measured by the applicable State and Federal Reference Test
Methods.
200.93 200.98 POLLUTANT: An air contaminant the emissions or ambient concentration of which is
regulated under these rules.
200.94 200.99 PORTABLE SOURCE: Any stationary source that is capable of being transported and
operated in more than one county of this state.
200.95 200.100 POTENTIAL TO EMIT (PTE): The maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit
pollutants, excluding secondary emissions, under its physical and operational design. Any
physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the source to emit a pollutant, including
air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or
amount of material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design, if
the limitation or the effect it would have on emissions is legally and practically enforceable
by any rule, ordinance, order or permit adopted or issued under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3
or the state implementation plan.
200.101 PROCESS: One or more operations, including equipment and technology, used in the
production of good or services or the control of by-product or waste.
200.96 200.102 PROPOSED PERMIT: The version of a permit for which the Control Officer offers
public participation under Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions or Rule 220-Non-Title V
Permit Provisions of these rules or offers affected State review under Rule 210-Title V
Permit Provisions of these rules.
200.97 200.103 PROPOSED FINAL PERMIT / PROPOSED FINAL PERMIT REVISION: The
version of a Non-Title V permit or permit revision that the Control Officer proposes to
issue in compliance with Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules or a Title V
permit or permit revision that the Control Officer proposes to issue and forwards to the
Administrator for review, in compliance with Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these
rules. A proposed final permit/proposed final permit revision constitutes a final and
enforceable authorization to begin actual construction of, but not to operate, a new Title V
source or a modification to a Title V source.
200.98 200.104 PUBLIC NOTICE THRESHOLD: For a each regulated air pollutant, the following
applies emission thresholds apply :
Public Notice Threshold TPY
Public Notice Threshold TPY
Pollutant (PTE to PTE Emission
(New or Permit Renewals PTE)
Increase)
VOC 25 25
NOX 25 25
66

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Public Notice Threshold TPY
Public Notice Threshold TPY
Pollutant (PTE to PTE Emission
(New or Permit Renewals PTE)
Increase)
SO2 25 25
PM10 7.5 7.5
5.0 5.0
PM2.5
(primary emissions only; levels for precursors are set above)
CO 50 50
Pb 0.3 0.3
Any Single HAP 5.0 5.0
Total HAPs 12.5 12.5
200.99 200.105 QUANTIFIABLE: With respect to emissions, including the emissions involved in
equivalent emission limits and emission trades, capable of being measured or otherwise
determined in terms of quantity and assessed in terms of character. Quantification may be
based on emission factors, stack tests, monitored values, operating rates and averaging times,
materials used in a process or production, modeling, or other reasonable measurement
practices.
200.100 REACTIVATION OF A VERY CLEAN COAL-FIRED ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM
GENERATING UNIT: Any physical change or change in the method of operation,
associated with commencing commercial operations by a coal-fired utility unit after a period
of discontinued operation, if the unit:
a. Has not been in operation for the 2-year period before enactment of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 and the emissions from the unit continue to be carried in the
Maricopa County emissions inventory at the time of enactment;
b. Was equipped before shutdown with a continuous system of emissions control that
achieves a removal efficiency for sulfur dioxide of no less than 85% and a removal
efficiency for particulates of no less than 98%;
c. Is equipped with low nitrogen oxides (NOx) burners before commencement of
operations following reactivation; and
d. Is otherwise in compliance with the Act.
200.101 200.106 REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS: The schedule of emission reductions
defined within a nonattainment area plan as being necessary to come into compliance with
a national ambient air quality standard by the primary standard attainment date.
200.102 200.107 REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (RACT): For facilities
subject to Regulation III-Control Of Air Contaminants of these rules, the emissions
limitation of the existing source performance standard. For facilities not subject to
Regulation III-Control Of Air Contaminants of these rules, the lowest emission limitation
that a particular source is capable of achieving by the application of control technology that
67

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility. Such technology
may previously have been applied to a similar, but not necessarily identical, source category.
RACT for a particular facility, other than a facility subject to Regulation III-Control Of Air
Contaminants of these rules, is determined on a case-by-case basis, considering the
technological feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the application of the control technology to
the source category.
a. For facilities subject to Regulation III (Control of Air Contaminants) of these rules, the
emissions limitations that are applicable to an emission unit at the time the permit is
issued.
b. For facilities not subject to Regulation III (Control of Air Contaminants) of these rules,
the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of achieving by the
application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological
and economic feasibility. Such technology may previously have been applied to a similar,
but not necessarily identical, source category.
c. RACT for a particular facility, other than a facility subject to Regulation III (Control of
Air Contaminants) of these rules, is determined on a case-by-case basis, considering the
technological feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the application of the control
technology to the source category.
200.103 200.108 REFERENCE METHOD: Any of the methods of sampling and analyzing for an air
pollutant as described in the Arizona Testing Manual for Air Pollutant Emissions; 40 CFR
50, Appendices A through L K; 40 CFR 51, Appendix M; 40 CFR 52, Appendices D and E;
40 CFR 60, Appendices A through F; and 40 CFR 61, Appendices B and C, as incorporated
by reference in Appendix G of these rules.
200.104 200.109 REGULATED AIR POLLUTANT: Any of the following:
a. Any conventional air pollutant.
b. Nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
c. b. Any air contaminant that is subject to a standard promulgated under Section 111
(Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources) of the Act or under Section 112
(National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) of the Act.
d. c. Any Class I or II substance listed in Section 602 (Stratospheric Ozone Protection; Listing
of Class I and Class II Substances) of the Act.
d. For the purpose of this definition, greenhouse gases shall not be considered a regulated
air pollutant.
200.105 200.110 REGULATED MINOR NSR POLLUTANT: Any pollutant for which a national
ambient air quality standard has been promulgated and the following precursors for such
pollutants:
a. VOC and nitrogen oxides as precursors to ozone.
68

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide as precursors to PM2.5. If a PM2.5 nonattainment area
is designated in Maricopa County, then VOC and ammonia are also PM2.5 precursors in
that nonattainment area.
200.106 200.111 REGULATED NSR POLLUTANT: A pollutant as defined in Rule 240-Federal Major
New Source Review (NSR) of these rules.
200.107 200.112 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS: All applicable requirements, department MCAQD
rules, and all State requirements pertaining to the regulation of air contaminants.
200.108 200.113 REPLICABLE: With respect to methods or procedures sufficiently unambiguous such that
the same or equivalent results would be obtained by the application of the method or
procedure by different users.
200.109 REPOWERING: The Control Officer shall give expedited consideration to permit
applications for any source that satisfies the following criteria and that is granted an
extension under Section 409-Repowered Sources of the Act:
a. Repowering means replacing an existing coal-fired boiler with one of the following clean
coal technologies:
(1) Atmospheric or pressurized fluidized bed combustion;
(2) Integrated gasification combined cycle;
(3) Magnetohydrodynamics;
(4) Direct and indirect coal-fired turbines;
(5) Integrated gasification fuel cells; or
(6) As determined by the Administrator, in consultation with the United States Secretary
of Energy, a derivative of one or more of the above listed technologies; and
(7) Any other technology capable of controlling multiple combustion emissions
simultaneously with improved boiler or generation efficiency and with significantly
greater waste reduction relative to the performance of technology in widespread
commercial use as of November 15, 1990.
b. Repowering also includes any oil, gas, or oil and gas-fired units which have been awarded
clean coal technology demonstration funding as of January 1, 1991 by the United States
Department of Energy.
200.110 200.114 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: One of the following:
a. For a corporation: A president, secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of the corporation
in charge of a principal business function, or any other person who performs similar
policy or decision-making functions for the corporation, or a duly authorized
representative of such person if the representative is responsible for the overall
operation of one or more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities applying for
or subject to a permit and either;
(1) The sources employ more than 250 persons or have gross annual sales or
expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second quarter 1980 dollars); or
69

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) The delegation of authority to such representatives is approved in advance by the
permitting authority;
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: A general partner or the proprietor,
respectively;
c. For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: Either a principal executive
officer or ranking elected official. For the purpose of this rule, a principal executive
officer of a Federal agency includes the chief executive officer having responsibility for
the overall operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency (e.g., a Regional
Administrator); or
d. For affected sources:
(1) The designated representative insofar as actions, standards, requirements, or
prohibitions under Title IV-Acid Deposition Control of the Act or the regulations
promulgated thereunder are concerned; and
(2) The designated representative for any other purposes under 40 CFR Part 70.
200.111 200.115 SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE: Preventive maintenance undertaken in order to avoid
a potential breakdown or upset of air pollution control equipment.
200.112 200.116 SCREENING MODEL: Air dispersion modeling performed with screening techniques
in accordance with 40 CFR 51, Appendix W as of July 1, 2019 (and no future amendments
or additions).
200.117 SEASONAL SOURCE: A stationary source that remains in a single location on a
permanent basis, i.e., at least two years, and that operates at that single location
approximately three months (or more) each year.
200.113 200.118 SECTION 302(J) CATEGORY:
a. Any of the classes of sources listed in the definition of “categorical sources” of this
rule; or
b. Any category of affected facility which, as of August 7, 1980, is being regulated under
Sections 111 or 112 of the Act.
200.114 200.119 SIGNIFICANT:
a. In reference to a significant emissions increase, a significant net emissions increase, or a
stationary source’s potential to emit:
(1) A rate of emissions of conventional pollutants that would equal or exceed any of the
following:
Pollutant Emissions Rate (TPY)
Carbon Monoxide 100
Nitrogen Oxides 40
Sulfur Dioxide 40
PM10 15
70

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Pollutant Emissions Rate (TPY)
PM2.5 10 tpy of direct primary PM2.5 emissions; 40 tpy of sulfur dioxide
emissions; 40 tpy of nitrogen oxide emissions.
Ozone 40 tpy of VOC or nitrogen oxides
Lead 0.6
(2) For purposes of determining the applicability of Rule 220 or Rule 240, Section 305
of these rules, a rate of emissions of non-conventional pollutants that would equal or
exceed any of the following:
Pollutant Emissions Rate (TPY)
Particulate Matter 25
Fluorides 3
Sulfuric Acid Mist 7
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) 10
Total Reduced Sulfur (including hydrogen sulfide) 10
Reduced Sulfur Compounds (including hydrogen sulfide) 10
Municipal waste combustor organics (measured as total tetra-through- 3.5 x 10-6
octa-chlorinated: dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans)
Municipal waste combustor metals (measured as particulate matter) 15
Municipal waste combustor acid gases (measured as sulfur dioxide and 40
hydrogen chloride)
Municipal solid waste landfill emissions (measured as nonmethane organic 50
compounds)
Any pollutant subject to regulation not specifically listed in this section of Any emission rate
this definition or in Section 200.114 200.119 (a)(1) of this rule
b. In ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious or severe, the emission rate for
nitrogen oxides or VOC determined under Rule 240-Federal Major New Source Review
(NSR) of these rules.
c. In a carbon monoxide nonattainment area classified as serious, a rate of emissions that
would equal or exceed 50 tons per year, if the Administrator has determined that
stationary sources contribute significantly to carbon monoxide levels in that area.
d. In PM2.5 nonattainment areas, an emission rate that would equal or exceed 40 tons per
year of VOC or ammonia as precursor precursors of PM2.5.
e. Notwithstanding the emission rates listed in Section 200.114 200.119(a)(1) or (2) of this
rule, for purposes of determining the applicability of Rule 240, Section 305 of this rule,
any emissions rate or any net emissions increase associated with a major source or major
modification, which would be constructed within 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) of a Class I
71

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
area and have an impact on the ambient air quality of such area equal to or greater than 1
microgram/cubic meter (µg/m3) (24-hour average).
200.120 SMOKE: Particulate matter resulting from incomplete combustion.
200.115 200.121 SOLVENT-BORNE COATING MATERIAL: Any liquid coating-material in which the
solvent is primarily or solely a VOC. For the purpose of this definition, “primarily” means
that of the total solvent mass that evaporates from the coating, the VOC portion weighs
more than the non-VOC portion.
200.122 SOOT: The carbonaceous particulate product of incomplete combustion which may be a
component of smoke.
200.116 200.123 SOURCE OR STATIONARY SOURCE: Any building, structure, facility, or installation,
that emits or may emit any regulated air pollutant, that may cause or contribute to air
pollution or the use of which may eliminate, reduce or control the emission of air
pollution.
200.117 200.124 SPECIAL INSPECTION WARRANT: An order, in writing, issued in the name of the
State of Arizona, signed by a magistrate, directed to the Control Officer or his deputies
authorizing him to enter into or upon public or private property for the purpose of making
an inspection authorized by law.
200.118 200.125 STANDARD CONDITIONS: A temperature of 293K (68 degrees Fahrenheit or 20
degrees Celsius) and a pressure of 101.3 kilopascals (29.92 in. Hg or 1013.25 mb). When
applicable, all analyses and tests shall be calculated and reported at standard gas temperatures
and pressure values.
200.119 200.126 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP): The accumulated record of enforceable
air pollution control measures, programs and plans adopted by the Director and submitted
to and approved by the Administrator pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 7410.
200.120 STATIONARY SOURCE: Any building, structure, facility or installation which emits or
may emit any regulated pollutant. “Building,” “structure,” “facility,” or “installation”
means all of the pollutant-emitting activities which belong to the same industrial grouping,
are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under the control of
the same person or persons under common control. Pollutant emitting activities shall be
considered as part of the same industrial grouping if they belong to the same “Major
Group” as described in the “Standard Industrial Classification Manual”, 1987.
200.121 200.127 SUBCONTRACTOR: Any person, firm, partnership, corporation, association, or other
organization that conducts work at a site under contract with or under the control or
supervision of the owner and/or operator or another subcontractor.
200.122 200.128 SYNTHETIC MINOR: Any source whose maximum capacity to emit a pollutant under
its physical and operational design would exceed the major source threshold levels but is
restricted by an enforceable emissions limitation that prevents such source from exceeding
major source threshold levels.
200.123 TEMPORARY CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: A
clean coal technology demonstration project operated for five years or less and that complies
72

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
with the applicable implementation plan and other requirements necessary to attain and
maintain the national ambient air quality standards during the project and after the project is
terminated.
200.124 200.129 TITLE V: Title V of the Federal Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 and the 40 CFR Part 70
EPA regulations adopted to implement the Act.
200.125 200.130 TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR (TRS): The sum of the sulfur compounds, primarily
hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide, and dimethyl disulfide, that are
released during kraft pulping and other operations and measured by Method 16 in 40 CFR
60, Appendix A.
200.126 200.131 TRADE SECRETS: Information to which all of the following apply:
a. A person has taken reasonable measures to protect from disclosure and the person
intends to continue to take such measures.
b. The information is not, and has not been, reasonably obtainable without the person’s
consent by other persons, other than governmental bodies, by use of legitimate means,
other than discovery based on a showing of special need in a judicial or quasi-judicial
proceeding.
c. No statute, including A.R.S. § 49-487, specifically requires disclosure of the information
to the public.
d. The person has satisfactorily shown that disclosure of the information is likely to cause
substantial harm to the business’s competitive position.
200.127 200.132 TRIVIAL ACTIVITY: For the purpose of this rule definition, a trivial activity shall be
any activity, process, or emissions unit that, in addition to meeting the criteria for
insignificant activity, has extremely low emissions. No activity, process, or emissions unit
that is conducted as part of a manufacturing process or is related to the source’s primary
business activity shall be considered trivial. Trivial activities are listed below. and may be
omitted from Title V permit applications and from Non-Title V permit applications.
a. General Mobile Source Combustion Activities: Combustion emissions from
propulsion of mobile sources, except for vessel emissions from outer continental shelf
sources.
b. Surface Coating and Printing Equipment: Equipment used for surface coating,
painting, dipping or spraying operations, except those that will emit volatile organic
compounds (VOC) or hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).
c. Cleaning Equipment: Laundry activities, except for dry-cleaning and steam boilers.
d. Internal Combustion Equipment:
(1) Internal combustion (IC) engines used for landscaping purposes.
(2) Emergency (backup) electrical generators at residential locations.
e. Testing and Monitoring Equipment:
73

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(1) Routine calibration and maintenance of laboratory equipment or other analytical
instruments.
(2) Equipment used for quality control/assurance or inspection purposes, including
sampling equipment used to withdraw materials for analysis.
(3) Hydraulic and hydrostatic testing equipment.
(4) Environmental chambers not using HAP gases.
(5) Shock chambers.
(6) Humidity chambers.
(7) Solar simulators.
(8) Vents from continuous emissions monitors and other analyzers.
f. Office Equipment:
(1) Air-conditioning units used for human comfort that do not have applicable
requirements under Title VI of the Act.
(2) Ventilating units used for human comfort that do not exhaust air pollutants into the
ambient air from any manufacturing/industrial or commercial process.
(3) Consumer use of office equipment and products, not including printers or businesses
primarily involved in photographic reproduction.
(4) Bathroom/toilet vent emissions.
(5) Tobacco smoking rooms and areas.
(6) Consumer use of paper trimmers/binders.
g. Repair and Maintenance:
(1) Janitorial services and consumer use of janitorial products.
(2) Plant maintenance and upkeep activities (e.g., groundskeeping, general repairs,
cleaning, painting, welding, plumbing, re-tarring roofs, installing insulation, and paving
parking lots), provided these activities are not conducted as part of a manufacturing
process, are not related to the source’s primary business activity, and not otherwise
triggering a permit modification. Cleaning and painting activities that are part of plant
maintenance qualify only if they are not subject to VOC or HAP control
requirements. Asphalt batch plant owners or operators must still get a permit, if
otherwise required.
(3) Repair or maintenance shop activities not related to the source’s primary business
activity (excluding emissions from surface coating or degreasing (solvent metal
cleaning) activities) and not otherwise triggering a permit modification.
h. Storage and Distribution:
(1) Storage tanks, vessels, containers holding or storing liquid substances that will not
emit any VOC or HAPs. Exemptions for storage tanks containing petroleum liquids
74

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
or other VOCs should be based on size limits and vapor pressure of liquids stored and
are not appropriate for this list.
(2) Demineralized water tanks and demineralizer vents.
(3) Boiler water treatment operations, not including cooling towers.
i. Hand Operated Equipment:
(1) Hand-held equipment for buffing, polishing, cutting, drilling, sawing, grinding,
turning, or machining wood, metal, or plastic.
(2) Hand-held applicator equipment for hot melt adhesives with no VOC in the adhesive
formulation.
(3) Portable electrical generators that can be moved by hand from one location to
another. “Moved by hand” means that it can be moved without the assistance of any
motorized or non-motorized vehicle, conveyance, or device.
(4) Air compressors and pneumatically operated equipment, including hand tools.
j. Food Equipment: Non-commercial food preparation.
k. Water and Waste Water Treatment:
(1) Process water filtration systems and demineralizers.
(2) Oxygen scavenging (de-aeration) of water.
l. Emergency Equipment:
(1) Fire suppression systems.
(2) Emergency road flares.
200.129 200.133 UNCLASSIFIED AREA: An area which the Administrator, because of lack of adequate
data, is unable to classify as an attainment or nonattainment area for a specific pollutant. For
purposes of these rules, unclassified areas are to be treated as attainment areas.
200.134 USED OIL: Includes oil that has been contaminated as a result of handling, transportation
or storage.
200.135 VAPOR: The gaseous form of a substance normally occurring in a liquid or solid state.
200.136 VISIBLE EMISSIONS: Any emissions which are visually detectable without the aid of
instruments and which contain particulate matter.
200.129 200.137 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND (VOC): Any organic compound which
participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions, except the non-precursor organic
compounds.
200.138 YEAR: For the purpose of determining emissions of a regulated air pollutant, a year shall be
defined as any 12-consecutive month period.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
75

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
301 AIR POLLUTION PROHIBITED: No person shall discharge from any source whatever
into the atmosphere regulated air pollutants which exceed in quantity or concentration that
specified and allowed in these rules, the A.A.C. or A.R.S., or which cause damage to property, or
unreasonably interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property of a substantial part of
a community, or obscure visibility, or which in any way degrade the quality of the ambient air
below the standards established by the Board of Supervisors or the Director.
302 APPLICABILITY OF MULTIPLE RULES: Whenever more than one standard in this rule
applies to any source or whenever a standard in this rule and a standard in the Maricopa County
Air Pollution Control Regulations Regulation III (Control of Air Contaminants) applies to any
source, the rule or combination of rules resulting in the lowest rate or lowest concentration of
regulated air pollutants released to the atmosphere shall apply, unless otherwise specifically
exempted or designated.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 CERTIFICATION OF TRUTH, ACCURACY, AND COMPLETENESS: Any
application form or report submitted under these rules shall contain certification by a responsible
official of truth, accuracy, and completeness of the application form or report as of the time of
submittal. This certification and any other certification required under these rules shall state that,
based on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the statements and information
in the document are true, accurate, and complete.
402 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION:
402.1 The Control Officer shall make all permits, including all elements required to be in the
permit under Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules and Rule 220-Non-
Title V Permit Provisions of these rules, available to the public.
402.2 Any records, reports, or information obtained from any person under these rules shall
be available to the public, unless the Control Officer has notified the person in writing
as specified in Section 402.3 of this rule and unless a person:
a. Precisely identifies the information in the permit(s), records, or reports, which is
considered confidential.
b. Provides sufficient supporting information to allow the Control Officer to evaluate
whether such information satisfies the requirements related to trade secrets as
defined in Section 200.110 of this rule.
402.3 Within 30 days of receipt of a notice of confidentiality that complies with Section
402.2 of this rule, the Control Officer shall make a determination as to whether the
information satisfies the requirements for trade secrets as described in Section 200.110
of defined in this rule and so notify the applicant in writing. If the Control Officer
agrees with the applicant that the information covered by the notice of confidentiality
satisfies the statutory requirements, the Control Officer shall include a notice in the
administrative record of the permit application that certain information has been
considered confidential.
76

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
402.4 A claim of confidentiality shall not excuse a person from providing any and all
information required or requested by the Control Officer.
402.5 A claim of confidentiality shall not be a defense for failure to provide such
information.
403 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE FOR NEWLY AMENDED RULE PROVISIONS:
Unless otherwise specified, the newly amended provisions of a rule shall become effective
upon the adoption date of the rule. An owner, operator, or person subject to the newly
amended rule shall submit a permit application and associated plans as necessary or a permit
revision application and associated plans as necessary within 90 days of the adoption date of
the newly amended rule.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS: The owner or operator of any air pollution source shall
maintain records of all emissions testing and monitoring, records detailing all malfunctions
which may cause any applicable emission limitation to be exceeded, records detailing the
implementation of approved control plans and compliance schedules, records required as a
condition of any permit, records of materials used or produced, and any other records relating to
the emission of air contaminants which may be requested by the Control Officer.
502 DATA REPORTING: When requested by the Control Officer, a person shall furnish to the
Department MCAQD information to locate and classify air contaminant sources according to
type, level, duration, frequency, and other characteristics of emissions and such other
information as may be necessary. This information shall be sufficient to evaluate the effect on air
quality and compliance with these rules. The owner or operator of a source requested to submit
information under Section 501 of this rule may subsequently be required to submit annually, or
at such intervals specified by the Control Officer, reports detailing any changes in the nature of
the source since the previous report and the total annual quantities of materials used or air
contaminants emitted.
503 EMISSION STATEMENTS REQUIRED AS STATED IN THE ACT: Upon request of
the Control Officer and as directed by the Control Officer, the owner or operator of any source
which emits or may emit oxides of nitrogen (NOx) or volatile organic compounds (VOC) shall
provide the Control Officer with an emission statement, in such form as the Control Officer
prescribes, showing measured actual emissions or estimated actual emissions of NOx and VOC
from that source. At a minimum, the emission statement shall contain all information required
by the Air Emissions Reporting Requirements in 40 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix A, Table 2A,
which is incorporated by reference in Appendix G of these rules. The statement shall contain
emissions for the time period specified by the Control Officer. The statement shall also contain a
certification by a responsible official of the company that the information contained in the
statement is accurate to the best knowledge of the individual certifying the statement. Statements
shall be submitted annually to the Department MCAQD. The Control Officer may waive this
requirement for the owner or operator of any source which emits less than 25 tons per year of
77

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
oxides of nitrogen or volatile organic compounds with an approved emission inventory for
sources based on AP-42 or other methodologies approved by the Administrator.
504 RETENTION OF RECORDS: Information and records required by applicable requirements
and copies of summarizing reports recorded by the owner or operator and submitted to the
Control Officer shall be retained by the owner or operator for five years after the date on which
the information is recorded or the report is submitted. Non-Title V sources may retain such
information, records, and reports for less than five years, if otherwise allowed by these rules.
505 ANNUAL EMISSIONS INVENTORY REPORT:
505.1 Upon request of the Control Officer and as directed by the Control Officer, the owner
or operator of a business stationary source shall complete and shall submit to the
Control Officer an annual emissions inventory report. The report is due by April 30, or
90 days after the Control Officer makes the inventory form(s) available, whichever
occurs later. These requirements apply whether or not a permit has been issued and
whether or not a permit application has been filed.
505.2 The annual emissions inventory report shall be in the format provided by the Control
Officer.
505.3 The Control Officer may require submittal of supplemental emissions inventory
information forms for air contaminants under A.R.S. § 49-476.01 and A.R.S. § 49-
480.03.
78

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 200
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE (GEP) STACK HEIGHT
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMITS REQUIRED
302 TITLE V PERMIT
303 NON-TITLE V PERMIT
304 GENERAL PERMIT
305 EXEMPTIONS
306 DUST CONTROL PERMIT
307 SUBCONTRACTOR REGISTRATION
308 PERMIT TO BURN
309 STANDARDS FOR APPLICATIONS
310 PERMIT CONDITIONS
311 PROHIBITION-PERMIT MODIFICATION
312 PERMIT POSTING REQUIRED
313 MINOR NSR TRANSITION
314 313 ACCELERATED PERMITTING
315 314 STACK HEIGHT PROVISIONS
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF PERMIT OR PERMIT REVISION
402 PERMIT REOPENINGS; REVOCATION AND REISSUANCE;
TERMINATION
79

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
403 PERMIT RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION
404 PERMIT TRANSFERS
405 PERMITS CONTAINING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF FEDERAL
DELAYED COMPLIANCE ORDERS (DCO) OR CONSENT DECREES
406 APPEAL
407 AIR QUALITY IMPACT MODELS
408 TESTING PROCEDURES
409 PERMIT FEES
410 PORTABLE SOURCES
411 PUBLIC RECORDS; CONFIDENTIALITY
SECTION 500-MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
80

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Revised 07/13/1988; Repealed and Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 02/15/1995; Revised
06/19/1996; Revised 05/20/1998; Revised 08/22/2001; Revised 06/06/2007; Revised 03/26/2008;
Revised 02/03/2016; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 200
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To provide an orderly procedure for the review of new sources of air pollution
and for the modification and operation of existing sources new or modified sources through
the issuance of permits.
102 APPLICABILITY: Unless otherwise noted Except a provided in Section 305 of this rule,
this rule applies to each source requiring a permit or permit revision, as provided in Section
301 of this rule.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definition shall
apply, in addition to those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of
these rules. In the event of any inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution
control rules, the definition in this rule takes precedence. See Rule 100-General Provisions and
Definitions of these rules for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined in this
rule.
201 GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE (GEP) STACK HEIGHT: A stack height meeting
the requirements described in Rule 240 (Federal Major New Source Review (NSR)) of these
rules.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMITS REQUIRED: Except as otherwise provided in these rules, an owner or
operator shall not begin actual construction of, operate, or make a modification to any
stationary source subject to regulation under these rules that emits or has the potential to
emit any regulated air pollutant greater than or equal to the stationary source permitting
thresholds defined in Rule 100 of these rules, without first obtaining a permit or permit
revision from the Control Officer. The Maricopa County Air Quality Department issues the
following types of permits: Title V permits, Non-Title V permits, General permits, Dust
Control permits, and Permits to Burn. The standards and/or requirements for these permits
are described in Sections 302, through 305 303, 304, 306, and 308 of this rule. Additional
standards, administrative requirements, and monitoring and records requirements for some
of these permits are described in individual rules of these rules, as specified in Sections 302,
through 305 303, 304, 306, and 308 of this rule.
81

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
302 TITLE V PERMIT:
302.1 A Title V final permit or, in the case of an existing permitted source, a Title V final
permit revision shall be required for an owner or operator to begin actual
construction of, to operate modify, or to modify operate any of the following:
a. Any major source as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of
these rules.
b. Any solid waste incineration unit required to obtain a permit pursuant to Section
129(e) of the Act.
c. Any affected source as defined in Rule 100 of these rules.
d. Any stationary source in a source category designated by the Administrator
pursuant to 40 CFR 70.3 and adopted by the Board of Supervisors by rule.
302.2 Notwithstanding the requirements of Sections 301 and 302 of this rule, an owner or
operator may begin actual construction, but not operation, of a source requiring a
Title V final permit or Title V final permit revision upon the Control Officer’s
issuance of the proposed final permit or proposed final permit revision.
303 NON-TITLE V PERMIT: Unless a Title V final permit or Title V final permit revision is
required, a Non-Title V final permit or, in the case of an existing permitted source, a Non-
Title V final permit revision shall be required for:
303.1 An owner or operator to begin actual construction of, modify, or operate any
stationary source that emits, or has the maximum capacity potential to emit, or cause
the source to emit regulated air pollutants any regulated air pollutant in an amount
greater than or equal to the following stationary source permitting thresholds:
Maximum Capacity
Potential to Emit
Emission Rate in Tons
Pollutant Per Year (TPY)
PM2.5 (primary emissions only; levels for precursors are set below) 0.5
PM10 0.5
SO2 1.0
NOx 1.0
VOC 0.5
CO 1.0
Pb 0.3
Single HAP (other than Pb) 0.5
Total HAPs 1.0
Any other regulated air pollutant 1.0
82

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
303.2 An owner or operator to begin actual construction of, operate modify, or modify
operate any of the following:
a. Any source other than a major source, including an area source, subject to a
standard, limitation, or other requirement under Section 111 of the Act.
However, a source is not required to obtain a permit solely because it is subject
to one of the standards under Section 111 of the Act listed in Sections
303.2(a)(1) and (2) of this rule and meets the criteria under Section 305.7 of this
rule. Any stationary source that is subject to a standard, limitation or other
requirement under Section 111 of the Act. However, a source that is subject to
the standards in Sections 303.2(a)(1) or (2) of this rule and has a potential to emit
less than the permitting thresholds in Section 303.1 of this rule is not required to
obtain a Non-Title V permit.
(1) 40 CFR 60, Subpart IIII (Stationary Compression Ignition Internal
Combustion Engines).
(2) 40 CFR 60, Subpart JJJJ (Stationary Spark Ignition Internal Combustion
Engines).
b. Any source other than a major source, including an area source, subject to a
standard or other requirement pursuant to Section 112 of the Act. However, a
source is not required to obtain a permit solely because it is subject to Section
112(r) of the Act or as specified below: Any stationary source, including an area
source, that is subject to a standard, limitation or other requirement under
Section 112 of the Act. However, a source that is subject to the standards under
Section 112(r) of the Act or a source that is subject to the standards in Sections
303.2(b)(1) through (5) of this rule and has a potential to emit less than the
permitting thresholds in Section 303.1 of this rule is not required to obtain a
Non-Title V permit.
(1) If a source is subject to one of the standards under Section 112 of the Act
listed in Sections 303.2(b)(1)(a) through (d) of this rule and has a maximum
capacity to emit less than the permitting thresholds in Section 303.1 of this
rule.
(a) 40 CFR 61.145.
(b) (1) 40 CFR 63, Subpart WWWWW (Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers).
(c) (2) 40 CFR 63, Subpart HHHHHH (Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface
Coating Operations).
(d) A regulation or requirement under Section 112(r) of the Act.
(2) If a source is subject to one of the standards under Section 112 of the Act
listed in Sections 303.2(b)(2)(a) through (c) of this rule and meets the criteria
under Sections 305.4, 305.7, or 305.9 of this rule as applicable.
(a) (3) 40 CFR 63, Subpart ZZZZ (Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines).
(b) (4) 40 CFR 63, Subpart CCCCCC (Gasoline Distribution).
83

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(c) (5) 40 CFR 63, Subpart JJJJJJ (Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers
Area Sources), published at 76 FR 15554 (March 21, 2011).
304 GENERAL PERMIT: An owner or operator of a source, which is a member of a facility
class regulated by a General permit developed and issued pursuant to Rule 230-General
Permits of these rules, may apply for an authority to operate under the General permit in lieu
of applying for an individual source permit.
304.1 An owner or operator of a source may apply for a General permit to commence
construction of, to operate, or to modify a source that is a member of a facility class
for which a General permit has been developed pursuant to Rule 230 of these rules.
The provisions of Rule 230 of these rules shall apply to General permits, except as
otherwise provided in Rule 230 of these rules.
304.2 An owner or operator of a source, which is a member of the class of facilities
covered by a General permit, may apply for an authority to operate under the
General permit in lieu of applying for a Non-Title V permit or a Title V permit.
305 EXEMPTIONS: The activities listed in Sections 305.1 through 305.10 of this rule shall be
exempt from obtaining a permit. However, any single or combination of the following
activities, except those activities listed in Sections 305.1 and 305.2 of this rule, that emit
more than 0.5 ton per year of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or more than two tons per
year of a regulated air pollutant shall require a permit. Any activity that is exempt from
obtaining a permit according to this rule shall still comply with all other applicable
requirements of these rules.
305.1 The following sources shall not require a permit, unless the source is a major source
or unless operation without a permit would result in a violation of the Act:
a. Sources subject to 40 CFR 60, Subpart AAA, Standards of Performance for New
Residential Wood Heaters.
b. Sources and source categories that would be required to obtain a permit solely
because they are subject to 40 CFR 61.145 or 40 CFR 61.150.
c. Agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations. Agricultural equipment
used in normal farm operations, for the purposes of this rule, does not include
equipment that would be classified as a source that would require a permit under
Title V of the Act, or would be subject to a standard under 40 CFR parts 60, or
61.
305.2 The following activities or equipment shall not require a permit. Any activity that is
exempt from obtaining a permit shall still comply with all other applicable
requirements. As applicable, sufficient records based on throughput or hours of
operation shall be maintained to substantiate the applicability of any exemption.
a. Trivial activities, as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of
these rules
84

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Insignificant activities, as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions
of these rules
c. Application equipment and processes used exclusively to apply coatings to
stationary structures and/or their appurtenances at the site of installation, to
portable buildings including mobile homes at the site of installation, to pavement
or to curbs, excluding asphalt kettles.
d. Flame cultivation in agricultural activities, provided all of the following
provisions are met:
(1) A flame is used to expose weeds to 2000F for approximately 0.1 second to
vaporize the water in the plant cells destroying the photosynthesis process;
the process is not intended to burn the plant material.
(2) The equipment has an aggregated input capacity of less than 2,000,000 Btu
per hour.
(3) The fuel used is liquefied propane.
(4) The resulting flame desiccates and does not combust the plant material
without continued application of the flame.
e. Any natural gas and/or liquefied petroleum gas-fired emission unit rated less
than 300,000 Btu per hour.
f. Any internal combustions (IC) engine operated as a nonroad IC engine.
g. Hydroblasting/pressure washing.
h. Any laboratory fume hood or vent provided such equipment is used exclusively
for the purpose of teaching, research or quality control.
i. Fugitive emissions from agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations.
For the purposes of this exemption, agricultural equipment used in normal farm
operations shall not include:
(1) Equipment that would otherwise require a permit under Title V of the Act;
or
(2) Equipment that is subject to a standard under 40 CFR parts 60, 61 or 63.
305.2 Trivial activities
305.3 Food Processing Equipment:
a. Any confection cooker and associated venting or control equipment cooking edible
products intended for human consumption.
b. Any oven in a food processing operation where less than 1,000 pounds of product
are produced per day of operation.
305.4 General Combustion Activities:
a. All natural gas and/or liquefied petroleum gas-fired pieces of equipment over
300,000 BTU per hour, only if the input capacities added together are less than
85

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
2,000,000 BTU per hour, the emissions come from fuel burning, and the equipment
is used solely for heating buildings for personal comfort or for producing hot water
for personal use.
b. Any oil-fueled heating piece of equipment (except off-spec. oil) with a maximum
rate input capacity or an aggregate input capacity of less than:
(1) 500,000 BTU/hour if only emissions came from fuel burning, or
(2) 1,000,000 BTU/hour if only emissions came from fuel burning and the
equipment is used solely for heating buildings for personal comfort or for
producing hot water for personal use.
305.5 Surface Coating and Printing Equipment: Any equipment or activity using no more
than 300 gallons per year of surface coating or any combination of surface coating and
solvent, which contains either VOC or hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or both.
305.6 Solvent Cleaning Equipment: Any non-vapor cleaning machine (degreaser) or dip-tank
having a liquid surface area of 1 square foot (0.09 square meters) or less, or having a
maximum capacity of 1 gallon (3.79 liters) or less.
305.7 Internal Combustion (IC) Equipment:
a. IC engine-driven compressors, IC engine-driven electrical generator sets, and IC
engine-driven water pumps used only for emergency replacement or standby service
(including testing of same), not exceed 4,000 pounds of NOx or CO at 500 hours of
operation per year.
b. Any piston-type IC engine with a manufacturer’s maximum continuous rating of no
more than 50 brake horsepower (bhp).
305.8 Laboratories and Pilot Plants: Lab equipment used exclusively for chemical and physical
analyses.
305.9 Storage and Distribution:
a. Chemical or petroleum storage tanks or containers that hold 250 gallons or less and
would have emissions of a regulated air pollutant.
b. Any emissions unit, operation, or activity that handles or stores no more than 12,000
gallons of a liquid with a vapor pressure less than 1.5 psia .
c. Any equipment used exclusively for the storage of unheated organic material with:
(1) an initial boiling point of 150 Centigrade (C) (302 Fahrenheit (F)) or greater, as
determined by ASTM D1078-11; or (2) a vapor pressure of no more than 5
millimeters mercury (mmHg) (0.1 pound per square inch (psi) absolute), as
determined by ASTM D2879-11.
d. Any equipment with a capacity of no more than 4,200 gallons (100 barrels) used
exclusively to store oil with specific gravity 0.8762 or higher (30 API or lower), as
measured by API test method 2547 or ASTM D1298-12b.
86

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
e. Any equipment used exclusively for the storage of liquefied gases in unvented
pressure vessels, except for emergency pressure-relief valves.
f. Any equipment used exclusively to compress or hold dry natural gas. Any ICE or
other equipment associated with the dry natural gas should not be considered an
insignificant activity, unless such ICE or other equipment independently qualifies as
an insignificant activity.
g. Any equipment used exclusively for the storage of fresh, commercial, or purer grade
of: (1) sulfuric or phosphoric acid with acid content of no more than 99% by weight;
or (2) nitric acid with acid content of no more than 70% by weight.
305.10 Miscellaneous Activities:
a. Any blast cleaning equipment using a suspension of abrasive material in water and
the control equipment venting such blast cleaning equipment.
b. Cooling towers: Any water cooling tower which: (1) has a circulation rate of less
than 10,000 gallons per minute; and (2) is not used to cool process water, water
from barometric jets, or water from barometric condensers.
c. Batch mixers with rated capacity of 5 cubic feet or less.
d. Wet sand and gravel production facilities that obtain material from subterranean
and subaqueous beds, whose production rate is 200 tons per hour or less, and
whose permanent in-plant roads are paved and cleaned to control dust. This does
not include activities in emissions units, which are used to crush or grind any non-
metallic minerals.
e. Any brazing, soldering, welding, or cutting torch equipment used in manufacturing
and construction activities and with the potential to emit hazardous air pollutant
(HAP) metals, provided the total emissions of HAPs do not exceed 0.5 ton per
year.
f. Hand-held or manually operated equipment used for buffing, polishing, carving,
cutting, drilling, machining, routing, sanding, sawing, surface grinding, or turning
of ceramic art work, precision parts, leather, metals, plastics, fiberboard, masonry,
carbon, glass, or wood.
g. Any aerosol can puncturing or crushing operation that processes less than 500
cans per day provided such operation uses a closed loop recovery system.
h. Any laboratory fume hood or vent provided such equipment is used exclusively for
the purpose of teaching, research, or quality control.
306 DUST CONTROL PERMIT: A Dust Control permit shall be required before a person,
including but not limited to, the property owner, lessee, developer, responsible official, Dust
Control permit applicant (who may also be the responsible party contracting to do the
work), general contractor, prime contractor, supervisor, management company, or any
person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises a dust-generating operation
subject to the requirements of Rule 310 of these rules, causes, commences, suffers, allows, or
87

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
engages in any dust-generating operation that disturbs a total surface area of 0.10 acre (4,356
square feet) or more. The provisions of Rule 310 of these rules shall apply to Dust Control
permits, except as otherwise provided in Rule 310 of these rules.
307 SUBCONTRACTOR REGISTRATION:
307.1 A subcontractor who is engaged in dust-generating operations at a site that is subject
to a Dust Control permit issued by a the Control Officer and that requires control of
PM10 emissions from dust-generating operations shall register with the Control
Officer by submitting information in the manner prescribed by the Control Officer.
The Control Officer shall issue a registration number after payment of the fee. The
Control Officer may establish and assess a fee for the registration based on the total
cost of processing the registration and issuance of a registration number.
307.2 The subcontractor shall have its registration number readily accessible on-site while
conducting any dust-generating operations. The subcontractor’s registration number
must be visible and readable by the public without having to be asked by the public
(e.g., included/posted in a sign that is visible on the subcontractor’s vehicle or
equipment, included/posted on a sign that is visible in the window of the
subcontractor’s vehicle or equipment, or included/posted on a sign where the
subcontractor is working on the site).
308 PERMIT TO BURN: A permit is required for any open outdoor fire authorized under the
exceptions in A.R.S. § 49-501 or Rule 314 of these rules.
309 STANDARDS FOR APPLICATIONS: All permit applications shall be filed in the
manner and form prescribed by the Control Officer. The application shall contain all the
information necessary to enable the Control Officer to make the determination to grant or
to deny a permit or permit revision. , which shall contain such terms and conditions as the
Control Officer deems necessary to assure a source's compliance with the requirements of
these rules. The issuance of any permit or permit revision shall not relieve the owner or
operator from compliance with any federal laws, Arizona laws, or these rules, nor does any
other law, regulation or permit relieve the owner or operator from obtaining a permit or
permit revision required under these rules.
309.1 Insignificant Activities: Insignificant activities shall be addressed as follows in an
application.
a. An insignificant activity shall be any activity, process, or emissions unit that
meets all of the following:
(1) Is not subject to a source-specific applicable requirement. Source-specific
applicable requirements include requirements for which emissions unit-
specific information is needed to determine applicability.
(2) Is either included in the definition of “insignificant activity” in Rule 100 of
these rules or is approved by the Control Officer and the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as an insignificant activity
under this rule.
88

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. a. For Title V Permit Applications:
(1) An owner or operator of a Title V source may shall , in its permit application,
list and generally group insignificant activities as defined in Rule 100-General
Provisions and Definitions of these rules. The permit application need not
provide emissions data regarding insignificant activities, except as necessary
to complete the assessment required by Rule 210, Section 301.4 of these
rules. comply with Section 309.1(a)(3) of this rule.
(2) An owner or operator of a Title V source may request approval for the
classification of an activity as insignificant by including such request in its
permit application, along with justification that such activity meets the
definition of insignificant activity in Rule 100 of these rules.
(3) An owner or operator of a Title V source shall include information in its
permit application regarding insignificant activities, if such information is
needed to determine: (1) the applicability of or to impose any applicable
requirement; (2) whether the source is in compliance with applicable
requirements; or (3) the fee amount required under these rules. In such cases,
emissions calculations or other necessary information regarding the
insignificant activities shall be included in the application.
c. b. For Non-Title V Permit Applications:
(1) An owner or operator of a Non-Title V source is not required to list or
describe, in its permit application, insignificant activities, which are defined in
Rule 100 of these rules, except as necessary to complete the assessment
required by Rule 210, Sections 301.4 of these rules. shall list in its permit
application insignificant activities as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions
and Definitions of these rules. The permit application need not provide
emissions data, except as necessary to comply with Sections 309.1(b)(2) and
(3) of this rule.
(2) If a Non-Title V source’s potential emissions are approaching an applicable
requirement threshold, including but not limited to, best available control
technology (BACT) requirements or major source status, then the owner or
operator of such Non-Title V source may be required to include, in its permit
application, a description of its insignificant activities and emissions
calculations data for such insignificant activities.
(3) An owner or operator of a Non-Title V source shall include information in
its permit application regarding insignificant activities, if such information is
needed to determine: (1) the applicability of or to impose any applicable
requirement; (2) whether the source is in compliance with applicable
requirements; or (3) the fee amount required under these rules. In such cases,
emissions calculations or other necessary information regarding the
insignificant activities shall be included in the application.
89

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
309.2 Trivial Activities: Trivial activities as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and
Definitions of these rules may be omitted from Title V permit applications and from
Non-Title V permit applications.
a. A trivial activity shall be any activity, process, or emissions unit that, in addition
to meeting the criteria for insignificant activity, has extremely low emissions.
b. No activity, process, or emissions unit that is conducted as part of a
manufacturing process or is related to the source’s primary business activity shall
be considered trivial.
c. Trivial activities as defined in Rule 100 of these rules may be omitted from Title
V permit applications and from Non-Title V permit applications.
310 PERMIT CONDITIONS: The Control Officer may impose any permit conditions that
are necessary to ensure compliance with federal laws, Arizona laws, or these rules.
310.1 The Control Officer may require, as specified in Section 310.2 and or Section 310.5
of this rule, any source of regulated air pollutants to monitor, sample, or perform
other studies to quantify emissions of regulated air pollutants or levels of air
pollution that may reasonably be attributable to that source, if the Control Officer:
a. Determines that monitoring, sampling, or other studies are necessary to
determine the effects of the source on levels of air pollution; or
b. Has reasonable cause to believe a violation of this rule, rules adopted pursuant to
this rule, these rules or a permit issued pursuant to this rule has been committed;
or
c. Determines that those studies or data are necessary to accomplish the purposes
of this rule and that the monitoring, sampling, or other studies by the source are
necessary in order to assess the impact of the source on the emission of regulated
air contaminants pollutants.
310.2 The Control Officer may require a source of air contaminants, by permit or order, to
perform monitoring, sampling, or other quantification of its emissions or air
pollution that may reasonably be attributed to such a source. Before requiring such
monitoring, sampling, or other quantification by permit or order, the Control Officer
shall consider the relative cost and accuracy of any alternatives which may be
reasonable under the circumstances such as emission factors, modeling, mass balance
analyses, or emissions projections. The Control Officer may require such
monitoring, sampling, or other quantification by permit or order if the Control
Officer determines in writing that all of the following conditions are met:
a. The actual or potential emissions of air pollution may adversely affect public
health or the environment.
b. An adequate scientific basis for the monitoring, sampling, or quantification
method exists.
90

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
c. The monitoring, sampling, or quantification method is technically feasible for the
subject contaminant and the source.
d. The monitoring, sampling, or quantification method is reasonably accurate.
e. The cost of the method is reasonable in light of the use to be made of the data.
310.3 The issuance of a permit or permit revision under this rule shall not relieve the
owner or operator of the responsibility to comply fully with applicable provisions of
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and any other requirements under local, State,
or Federal law.
310.4 The permittee shall comply with all conditions of the permit, including all applicable
requirements of Arizona air quality statutes and the air quality rules. Compliance with
permit terms and conditions does not relieve, modify, or otherwise affect the
permittee’s duty to comply with all applicable requirements of Arizona air quality
statutes and the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations. Any permit
non-compliance is grounds for enforcement action; for a permit termination,
revocation, and reissuance or revision; or for permit denial. Non-compliance with
any federally enforceable requirement in a permit constitutes a violation of the Act.
310.5 Orders issued or permit conditions imposed pursuant to this rule shall be appealable
to the hearing board in the same manner as that prescribed for orders of abatement
in A.R.S. § 49-489 and A.R.S. § 49-490 and for permit conditions in A.R.S. § 49-482.
311 PROHIBITION – PERMIT MODIFICATION: A person shall not willfully deface,
alter, forge, counterfeit, or falsify any permit issued under the provisions of these rules.
312 PERMIT POSTING REQUIRED: Any person who has been granted a permit shall keep
a complete permit clearly visible and accessible on the site where the equipment is installed.
All equipment covered by the permit shall be listed in the permit by a serial number or other
equipment identification symbol and shall be identified on a plant diagram.
313 MINOR NSR TRANSITION: Existing sources are not subject to the minor NSR
provisions of Rule 241 of these rules, unless the source undertakes a minor NSR
modification.
314 313 ACCELERATED PERMITTING:
314.1 313.1 Notwithstanding any other provisions of these rules, the following qualify a source
for a request-submittal to submit a request for accelerated permit processing: (1) an
application for a Title V permit or for a Non-Title V permit; (2) any permit revision;
and (3) any coverage authority to operate under a general General permit. Such a
request-submittal shall be submitted in writing to the Control Officer at least 30 days
in advance of filing the application and shall be accompanied by fees as described in
Rule 280 of these rules.
91

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
314.2 313.2 When an applicant has requested accelerated permit processing, the Control Officer
may shall, to the extent practicable, undertake to process the permit or permit
revision in accordance with the following schedule:
a. For applications for initial Title V and Non-Title V permits under Rules 210 and
220 of these rules, for significant permit revisions under Rule 210 of these rules,
or for non-minor permit revisions under Rule 220 of these rules, final action on
the permit or on the permit revision: shall be taken within Within 90 days or
after the Control Officer determines that the application is complete for a Non-
Title V source and within 120 days after the Control Officer determines that the
application is complete for a Title V source. Except for a new major source or a
major modification subject to the requirements of Rule 240 of these rules, an
application for a new permit, a significant permit revision, or a permit renewal
shall be deemed to be complete unless the Control Officer notifies the applicant
by certified mail within 30 days of receipt of the application that the application
is not complete.
b. For applications for coverage authority to operate under a general General
permit under Rule 230 of these rules, final action: shall be taken within Within 30
days after receipt of the application.
c. For minor permit revisions governed by Rule 210 of these rules and Rule 220 of
these rules, the permit revision shall be issued within final action: Within 60 days
after receipt of the application.
314.3 313.3 Before issuing a permit or permit revision pursuant to this section, the applicant shall
pay to the Control Officer all fees due as described in Rule 280 of these rules.
Nothing in this section shall affect the public participation requirements of Rules 210
or 220 of these rules, or EPA and affected state review as required under Rule 210 of
these rules.
315 314 STACK HEIGHT PROVISIONS: The degree of emission limitation required of any
source of any pollutant shall not be affected by so much of any source’s stack height that
exceeds good engineering practice or by any other dispersion technique, except as
determined by the procedures of provided in 40 CFR 51.118(b) and the EPA regulations
cross-referenced therein as incorporated by reference in Appendix G of these rules. For the
purposes of Section 314 of this rule, the definition in 40 CFR 51.100 shall apply.
314.1 Before the Control Officer issues a permit or permit revision under this rule to a
source with a stack height which exceeds good engineering practice (GEP) stack
height, the Control Officer shall notify the public of the availability of the
demonstration study and provide opportunity for a public hearing.
314.2 Any field study or fluid model used to demonstrate GEP stack height and any
determination of excessive concentration must be approved by the EPA and the
Control Officer prior to any emission limit being established.
314.3 The provisions of Section 314 of this rule do not restrict, in any manner, the actual
stack height of any stationary source or facility.
92

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF PERMIT OR PERMIT REVISION:
401.1 The Control Officer shall deny a permit or revision if the applicant does not
demonstrate that every such source for which a permit or permit revision is sought is
so designed, controlled, or equipped with such air pollution control equipment that
the source may be expected to operate without emitting or without causing to be
emitted air contaminants in violation of the provisions of these rules or applicable
State Implementation Plan (SIP) plan requirements.
401.2 Prior to acting on an application for a permit, the Control Officer may require the
applicant to provide and to maintain such devices and procedures as are necessary
for sampling and for testing purposes in order to secure information that will
disclose the nature, extent, quantity, or degree of air contaminants discharged into
the atmosphere from the source described in the application. In the event of such a
requirement, the Control Officer shall notify the applicant in writing of the type and
characteristics of such devices and procedures.
401.3 In acting upon an application for a permit renewal, if the Control Officer finds that
such source has not been constructed in accordance with any prior permit or permit
revision issued pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-480.01, the Control Officer shall require the
permittee to obtain a permit revision or shall deny the permit renewal. The Control
Officer shall not accept any further application for a permit for such source so
constructed until the Control Officer finds that such source has been reconstructed
in accordance with a prior permit or a permit revision, or until a revision to the
permit has been obtained. The Control Officer may issue a permit with a compliance
schedule for a an existing source that is not in compliance with all applicable
requirements at the time of permit issuance.
401.4 After a decision on a permit or on a permit revision, the Control Officer shall notify
the applicant and any person who filed a comment on the permit pursuant to A.R.S.
§ 49-480 or on the permit revision pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-480.01 in writing of the
decision, and if the permit is denied, the reasons for such denial. Service of this
notification may be made in person or by first class mail. The Control Officer shall
not accept a further application unless the applicant has corrected the circumstances
giving rise to the objections as specified by the Control Officer as reasons for such
denial.
402 PERMIT REOPENINGS; REVOCATION AND REISSUANCE;
TERMINATION:
402.1 Reopening for Cause:
a. Each issued permit shall include provisions specifying the conditions under
which the permit will be reopened prior to the expiration of the permit. A permit
shall be reopened and revised under any of the following circumstances:
93

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(1) Additional applicable requirements under the Act become applicable to a
major source with a remaining permit term of three or more years. Such a
reopening shall be completed not later than 18 months after promulgation of
the applicable requirement. No such reopening is required if the effective
date of the requirement is later than the date on which the permit is due to
expire, unless the original permit or any of its terms and conditions has been
extended pursuant to Section 403.2 of this rule. Any permit revision required
pursuant to this rule shall comply with Section 403 of this rule for a permit
renewal and shall reset the five year permit term.
(2) Additional requirements, including excess emissions requirements, become
applicable to an affected source under the Acid Rain Program. Upon
approval by the Administrator, excess emissions offset plans shall be deemed
to be incorporated into the Title V permit.
(3) The Control Officer or the Administrator determines that the permit
contains a material mistake or that inaccurate statements were made in
establishing the emissions standards or other terms or conditions of the
permit.
(4) The Control Officer or the Administrator determines that the permit must
be revised or revoked to assure compliance with the applicable requirements.
b. Proceedings to reopen and issue a permit, including appeal of any final action
relating to a permit reopening, shall follow the same procedures as apply to initial
permit issuance and shall, except for reopenings under Section 402.1(a)(1) of this
rule, affect only those parts of the permit for which cause to reopen exists. Such
reopening shall be made as expeditiously as is practicable.
c. Action to reopen a permit under this section shall not be initiated before a notice
of such intent is provided to the source by the Control Officer at least 30 days in
advance of the date that the permit is to be reopened, except that the Control
Officer may provide a shorter time period in the case of an emergency.
d. When a permit is reopened and revised pursuant to this rule, the Control Officer
may make appropriate revisions to the permit shield established pursuant to Rule
210 of these rules.
402.2 Reopening for Cause by the Administrator:
a. If the Administrator finds that cause exists to terminate, modify, or revoke and
reissue a permit pursuant to Section 402.1 of this rule, the Administrator may
notify the Control Officer and the permittee of such finding in writing. Within
ten days of receipt of notice from the Administrator that cause exists to reopen a
Title V permit, the Control Officer shall notify the source.
b. Within 90 days of receipt of notice from the Administrator that cause exists to
reopen a permit, the Control Officer shall forward to the Administrator a
proposed determination of termination, modification, or revocation and
reissuance of the permit. The Control Officer may request a 90-day extension of
94

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
this limit if it is necessary to request a new or revised permit application or
additional information from the applicant for, or holder of, a Title V permit.
c. The Control Officer shall have 90 days from receipt of an objection by the
Administrator to attempt to resolve the objection.
402.3 The Control Officer may issue a notice of termination of a permit issued under these
rules if:
a. The Control Officer has reasonable cause to believe that the permit was obtained
by fraud or misrepresentation.
b. The person applying for the permit failed to disclose a material fact required by
the application form or the regulation applicable to the permit, of which the
applicant had or should have had knowledge at the time the application was
submitted.
c. The terms and conditions of the permit have been or are being violated.
402.4 If the Control Officer issues a notice of termination under this rule, the notice shall
be served on the permittee by certified mail, return receipt requested. The notice
shall include a statement detailing the grounds for the revocation and a statement
that the permittee is entitled to a hearing.
403 PERMIT RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION:
403.1 Prior to renewing a permit issued under these rules, the Control Officer shall provide
notice in the same manner and form as provided in Rule 210 of these rules.
403.2 The Control Officer shall not renew a permit issued under these rules unless the
permittee applies for a permit renewal prior to the expiration of a permit in the
manner required by Rule 210 of these rules. If a timely and complete application for
a permit renewal is submitted, but the Control Officer has failed to issue or deny the
renewal permit before the end of the term of the previous permit, then the permit
shall not expire until the renewal permit has been issued or denied. Any testing that
is required for a renewal shall be completed before the proposed permit renewal is
issued by the Control Officer.
a. If a timely and complete application for a permit renewal is submitted, but the
Control Officer has failed to issue or deny the renewal permit before the end of
the term of the previous permit, then the permit shall not expire until the
renewal permit has been issued or denied.
b. Any testing that is required for a renewal shall be completed within six months
before the permit expiration date.
c. The terms and conditions of installation permits issued before September 1,
1993, or in permits or permit revisions issued under Rule 210 or Rule 220 of
these rules and authorizing the construction or modification of a stationary
source, remain federal applicable requirements unless modified or revoked by the
Control Officer.
95

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
403.3 The Control Officer shall publish notice of a permit renewal decision in the same
manner as that provided in Rule 210 of these rules for a Title V permit and as that
provided in Rule 220 of these rules for a Non-Title V permit.
404 PERMIT TRANSFERS:
404.1 Except as provided in A.R.S. § 49-429 and Section 404.2 of this rule, a Title V
permit, a Non-Title V permit, or a General permit may be transferred to another
person. Before the proposed transfer, the person who holds a valid Non-Title V
permit or a valid General permit shall comply with the administrative permit revision
procedures pursuant to Rule 220, Section 405.1 of these rules. At least 30 days
before the proposed transfer, the person who holds a valid Title V permit shall give
notice to the Control Officer in writing and shall comply with the administrative
permit amendment procedures pursuant to Rule 210, Section 404 of these rules.
Permit transfer notice shall contain the following:
a. The permit number and expiration date.
b. The name, address and telephone number of the current permit holder.
c. The name, address and telephone number of the person to receive the permit.
d. The name and title of the individual within the organization who is accepting
responsibility for the permit along with a signed statement by that person
indicating such acceptance.
e. A description of the equipment to be transferred.
f. A written agreement containing a specific date for transfer of permit
responsibility, coverage, and liability between the current and new permittee.
g. Provisions for the payment of any fees pursuant to Rule 280 of these rules that
will be due and payable before the effective date of transfer.
h. Sufficient information about the source's technical and financial capabilities of
operating the source to allow the Control Officer to make the decision in Section
404.2 of this rule including:
(1) The qualifications of each person principally responsible for the operation of
the source.
(2) A statement by the chief financial officer of the new permittee that it is
financially capable of operating the source in compliance with the law, and
the information that provides the basis for that statement.
(3) A brief description of any action for the enforcement of any federal or state
law, rule or regulation, or any county, city or local government ordinance
relating to the protection of the environment, instituted against any person
employed by the new permittee and principally responsible for operating the
source during the five years preceding the date of application. In lieu of this
description, the new permittee may submit a copy of the certificate of
96

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
disclosure or 10-K form required under A.R.S. § 49-109, or a statement that
this information has been filed in compliance with A.R.S. § 49-109.
404.2 The Control Officer shall deny the transfer if the Control Officer determines that the
organization receiving the permit is not capable of operating the source in
compliance with Article 3, Chapter 3, Title 49, Arizona Revised Statutes, the
provisions of these rules, or the provisions of the permit. Notice of the denial stating
the reason for the denial shall be sent to the original permit holder by certified mail
stating the reason for the denial within ten working days of the Control Officer's
receipt of the notice. If the transfer is not denied within ten working days after
receipt of the notice, the Control Officer shall approve such permit transfer.
404.3 To appeal the transfer denial:
a. Both the transferor and transferee shall petition the hearing board in writing for
a public hearing; and
b. The appeal process for a permit shall be followed.
405 PERMITS CONTAINING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF FEDERAL
DELAYED COMPLIANCE ORDERS (DCO) OR CONSENT DECREES:
405.1 The terms and conditions of either a DCO or consent decree shall be incorporated
into a permit through a permit revision. In the event the permit expires prior to the
expiration of the DCO or consent decree, the DCO or consent decree shall be
incorporated into any permit renewal.
405.2 The owner or operator of a source subject to a DCO or consent decree shall submit
to the Control Officer a quarterly report of the status of the source and construction
progress and copies of any reports to the Administrator required under the order or
decree. The Control Officer may require additional reporting requirements and
conditions in permits issued under this rule.
405.3 For the purpose of this rule, sources subject to a consent decree issued by a federal
court shall meet the same requirements as those subject to a DCO.
406 APPEAL: Denial The denial or revocation of a permit shall be stayed by the permittee’s
considered a final agency action unless the permittee files a written petition for a hearing,
filed in accordance with Rule 400 of these rules.
407 AIR QUALITY IMPACT MODELS:
407.1 Where the Control Officer requires a person to perform air quality impact modeling,
the modeling shall be performed in a manner consistent with the Guideline
Guidelines specified in Rule 240, Section 304 (Permit Requirements for New Major
Sources or Major Modifications Located in Nonattainment Areas) or Section 305
(Permit Requirements for New Major Sources or Major Modifications Located in
Attainment or Unclassificable Unclassifiable Areas) of these rules.
97

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
407.2 Model Substitution: Where the person can demonstrate that an air quality impact
model specified in the Guideline Guidelines is inappropriate, on a case-by-case basis,
the model may be modified or another model substituted. However, before such
modification or substitution can occur, the Control Officer must make a written
finding that:
a. No model in the Guideline Guidelines is appropriate; or
b. The data base required for the appropriate model in the Guideline Guidelines is
not available; and
c. A model proposed as a substitute or modification is likely to produce results
equal or superior to those obtained by models in the Guideline Guidelines.
407.3 Model Substitution EPA Approval: Written approval from the Administrator
must be obtained for any modification or substitution. In addition, use of a modified
or substituted model must be subject to notice and opportunity for public comment.
408 TESTING PROCEDURES: Except as otherwise specified, the applicable testing
procedures contained in the Arizona Testing Manual for Air Pollutant Emissions 40 CFR 52,
Appendices D and E; 40 CFR 60, Appendices A through F; and 40 CFR 61, Appendices B
and C shall be used to determine compliance with standards or permit conditions established
pursuant to these rules. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other
EPA-approved test methods may be used upon prior written approval from the Control
Officer.
409 PERMIT FEES: A fee shall be charged for each facility permit. No permit is valid until the
applicable permit fee has been received and until the permit is issued by the Control Officer.
410 PORTABLE SOURCES:
410.1 An owner or operator of a portable source which will operate for the duration of its
permit solely in Maricopa County shall obtain a permit from the Control Officer for
Maricopa County and is subject to Sections 410.2, and 410.3, and 410.4 of this rule.
A portable source with a current State of Arizona permit need not obtain a Maricopa
County permit but is subject to Sections 410.3, and 410.4, and 410.5 of this rule. Any
permit for a portable source shall contain conditions that will assure compliance with
all applicable requirements at all authorized locations. A portable source that has
permit issued by the Director and obtains a permit from the Control Officer for
Maricopa County shall request that the permit issued by the Director terminate the
permit be terminated. Upon issuance of the permit from the Control Officer for
Maricopa County, the permit issued by the Director is no longer valid.
410.2 An owner or operator of a portable source which has a Maricopa County permit but
proposes to operate outside of Maricopa County, shall obtain a permit from the
Director. A portable source that has a permit issued from the Control Officer for
Maricopa County and obtains a permit issued by the Director shall request that the
Control Officer terminate the permit issued by the Control Officer for Maricopa
County. Upon issuance of a permit by the Director, the permit issued by the Control
98

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Officer for Maricopa County is no longer valid. If the owner or operator relocates
the portable source in Maricopa County, the owner or operator shall notify the
Control Officer as required by Section 410.4 410.3 of this rule of the relocation of
the portable source. Whenever the owner or operator of a portable source operates a
portable source in Maricopa County, such owner or operator shall comply with all
regulatory requirements in these rules.
410.3 An owner of a portable source which requires a permit under this rule, shall obtain
the permit prior to renting or leasing said portable source. This permit shall be
provided by the owner to the renter or lessee, and the renter or lessee shall be bound
by the permit provisions. In the event a copy of the permit is not provided to the
renter or lessee, both the owner and the renter or lessee shall be responsible for the
operation of the portable source in compliance with the permit conditions and any
violations thereof.
410.4 410.3 A portable source may be transported from one location to another within or across
Maricopa County boundaries provided the owner or operator of such portable
source notifies the Director and any Control Officer who has jurisdiction over the
geographic area that includes the new location of the portable source by certified
mail at least ten working days before the portable source is transported to the new
location. The notification required under this rule shall include:
a. A description of the portable source to be transported including the Maricopa
County permit number or the State of Arizona permit number for such portable
source;
b. A description of the present location;
c. A description of the location to which the portable source is to be transported,
including the availability of all utilities, such as water and electricity, necessary for
the proper operation of all control equipment;
d. The date on which the portable source is to be moved;
e. The date on which operation of the portable source will begin at the new
location; and
f. The duration of operation at the new location.
410.5 410.4 An owner or operator of a portable source with a current State of Arizona permit
that moves such portable source into Maricopa County shall notify the Control
Officer that such portable source is being transported to a new location and shall
include in such notification a copy of the State of Arizona permit and a copy of any
conditions imposed by the State of Arizona permit. The source shall be subject to all
regulatory requirements of these rules.
411 PUBLIC RECORDS; CONFIDENTIALITY:
411.1 The Control Officer shall make all permits, including all elements required to be in
the permit pursuant to Rule 210 of these rules and Rule 220 of these rules available
to the public.
99

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
411.2 A notice of confidentiality pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-487(C) shall:
a. Precisely identify the information in the application documents, which is
considered confidential.
b. Contain sufficient supporting information to allow the Control Officer to
evaluate whether such information satisfies the requirements related to trade
secrets or, if applicable, how the information, if disclosed, could cause substantial
harm to the person's competitive position.
411.3 Within 30 days of receipt of a notice of confidentiality that complies with Section
411.2 of this rule, the Control Officer shall make a determination as to whether the
information satisfies the requirements for trade secret or competitive position
pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-487(C)(1) and so notify the applicant in writing. If the
Control Officer agrees with the applicant that the information covered by the notice
of confidentiality satisfies the statutory requirements, the Control Officer shall
include a notice in the administrative record of the permit application that certain
information has been considered confidential.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
100

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
MARICOPA COUNTY Return to list of attachments
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 210
TITLE V PERMIT PROVISIONS
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 EMISSIONS ALLOWABLE UNDER THE PERMIT
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESSING PROCEDURES
302 PERMIT CONTENTS
303 PERMIT REVIEW BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(EPA) AND AFFECTED STATES
304 EMISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS
305 COMPLIANCE PLAN; CERTIFICATION
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 FEES REQUIRED
402 PERMIT TERM
403 SOURCE CHANGES ALLOWED WITHOUT PERMIT REVISIONS
404 ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT AMENDMENTS
405 MINOR PERMIT REVISIONS
406 SIGNIFICANT PERMIT REVISIONS
407 PERMIT SHIELDS
408 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
101

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Revised 07/13/1988; Repealed and Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 02/15/1995; Revised
06/19/1996; Revised 05/20/1998; Revised 02/07/2001; Revised 05/07/2003; Revised 06/06/2007;
Revised 02/03/2016; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 210
TITLE V PERMIT PROVISIONS
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To provide an orderly procedure for the review of new Title V sources of air
pollution and of the modification and operation of existing Title V sources through the
issuance of Title V permits.
102 APPLICABILITY: Unless otherwise noted, this This rule applies to each source requiring a
Title V permit or permit revision.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definition shall
apply, in addition to those definitions found in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of
these rules. In the event of any inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control rules Regulations, the definition in this rule takes precedence.
201 EMISSIONS ALLOWABLE UNDER THE PERMIT: An A legally and practically
enforceable permit term or condition determined at issuance to be required by an applicable
requirement that establishes an emissions limit (including a work practice standard) or an a
legally and practically enforceable emissions cap that the source has assumed to avoid an
applicable requirement to which the source would otherwise be subject.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESSING PROCEDURES:
301.1 Standard Application Form and Required Information: To apply for any a
permit or permit revision under this rule, applicants shall complete the "Standard
Permit Application Form" and shall supply all information required by the "Filing
Instructions" as shown in Appendix B of these rules.
301.2 A timely application is:
a. For a source that becomes subject to the permit program as a result of a change
in a regulation and not as a result of construction or a physical or operational
change, one that is submitted within 12 months after the source becomes subject
to the permit program.
102

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. For purposes of permit renewal, a timely application is one that is submitted at
least six months, but not more than 18 months, prior to the date of permit
expiration.
c. Any existing source which becomes subject to a standard promulgated by the
Administrator under Section 112(d) of the Act shall, within 12 months of the
date on which the standard is promulgated, submit an application for a permit
revision demonstrating how the source will comply with the standard.
301.3 If, at the time an application for a permit required by these rules is submitted, an
applicable implementation plan allows the determination of an alternate emission
limit, a source may, in its application, propose an emission limit that is equivalent to
the emission limit otherwise applicable to the source under the applicable
implementation plan. The source shall also demonstrate that the equivalent limit is
quantifiable, accountable, enforceable, and subject to replicable compliance
determination procedures.
301.4 A complete application is one that satisfies all of the following:
a. To be complete, an An application shall provide all information required by
Section 301.1-Standard Application Form And Required Information of this rule.
An application for permit revision only need supply information related to the
proposed change, unless the source’s proposed permit revision will change the
permit from a Non-Title V Permit to a Title V Permit. A responsible official
shall certify the submitted information consistent with as required by Section
301.7-Certification Of Truth, Accuracy, And Completeness of this rule.
b. An application for a new permit or permit revision shall contain an assessment of
the applicability of the requirements of Rule 240- Federal Major New Source
Review (NSR) of these rules. If the proposed new source is a major source, as
defined in Rule 240 of these rules, or the proposed permit revision constitutes a
major modification, as defined in Rule 240 of these rules, then the application
shall comply also demonstrate compliance with all applicable requirements of
Rule 240 of these rules.
c. An application for a new permit or permit revision shall contain an assessment of
the applicability of the requirements of Rule 241-Minor New Source Review
(NSR) of these rules. If the applicant determines that the proposed new source is
subject to Rule 241 of these rules, or the proposed permit revision constitutes a
minor NSR modification, as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and
Definitions of these rules, then the application shall also comply with all the
applicable requirements of Rule 241 of these rules.
d. An application to construct or reconstruct any major source of hazardous air
pollutants shall contain a determination that maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) for new sources under Section 112 of the Act will be met.
Where MACT has not been established by the Administrator, such
determination shall be made on a case-by-case basis under 40 CFR 63.40 through
103

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
63.44. For purposes of this section of this rule, constructing or reconstructing a
major source shall have the meaning prescribed in 40 CFR 63.41.
e. An application for a new permit, a permit revision, or a permit renewal shall be
deemed to be complete, unless the Control Officer notifies the applicant by
certified mail within 60 days of receipt of the application that the application is
not complete. For a proposed new major source or a major modification subject
to the requirements of Rule 240-Federal Major New Source Review (NSR) of
these rules, the permit application shall be deemed to be submitted on the date
that the completeness determination is made under Rule 240 of these rules.
f. If, while processing an application that has been determined or deemed to be
complete, the Control Officer determines that additional information is
necessary to evaluate or to take final action on that application, the Control
Officer may request such information in writing and may set a reasonable
deadline for a response. Except for applications using the minor permit revisions
as set forth in Section 405 of this rule, a source's ability to continue operating the
existing source without a permit, as set forth in this rule Section 301.8 (Action on
Application) of this rule, shall be in effect from the date the application is
determined or deemed to be complete until the final permit is issued, provided
that the applicant submits any requested additional information by the deadline
specified by the Control Officer. The Control Officer may, after one submittal
by the applicant of one application under this rule, reject an application that is
still determined to be incomplete and shall notify the applicant of the decision by
certified mail.
g. The completeness determination shall not apply to revisions processed through
the minor permit revision process procedures as set forth in Section 405 of this
rule.
h. To be complete, an application for a new permit or an application for a permit
revision shall list and generally group insignificant activities, if applicable, which
are insignificant as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of
these rules. Except as necessary to complete the an assessment required by
Section 301.4 of this rule, the application need not provide emissions data
regarding insignificant activities. If the Control Officer determines that an
activity listed as insignificant does not meet the requirements of insignificant as
defined definition of “insignificant activity” in Rule 100-General Provisions And
Definitions of these rules (i.e., if emissions estimates are needed for another
purpose, such as determining the amount of permit fees) or that emissions data
for the source or activity is required to complete the assessment required by
Section 301.4 of this rule, then the Control Officer shall notify the applicant in
writing and shall specify the additional information required.
i. If a permit applicant requests terms and conditions allowing for the trading of
emission increases and decreases in at the permitted source solely for the
purpose of complying with a federally enforceable emission cap that is
established in the permit independent of otherwise applicable requirements, the
104

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
permit applicant shall include in its application proposed replicable procedures
and permit terms that ensure the emissions trades are quantifiable and
enforceable.
j. The Control Officer agrees with a notice of confidentiality submitted under
A.R.S. §49-487.
301.5 A source that has submitted information with an application under a claim of
confidentiality under A.R.S. § 49-487 and Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these
rules shall submit a copy of such the confidential information directly to the
Administrator.
301.6 Duty to Supplement or Correct Application: Any applicant who fails to submit
any relevant facts or who has submitted incorrect information in a permit application
shall, upon becoming aware of such failure or incorrect submittal, promptly submit
such supplementary facts or corrected information. In addition, an applicant shall
provide additional information as necessary to address any requirements that become
applicable to the source after the date it filed a complete application but prior to
release of a proposed final permit.
301.7 Certification of Truth, Accuracy, and Completeness: Any application form,
report, or compliance certification submitted under these rules shall contain
certification by a responsible official of the truth, accuracy, and completeness of the
application as of the time of submittal. This certification and any other certification
required under this rule shall state that, based on information and belief formed after
reasonable inquiry, the statements and information in the document are true,
accurate, and complete.
301.8 Action on Application:
a. The Except as provided in Rule 240-Federal Major Source New Source Review
(NSR) of these rules, Control Officer may issue a permit with a compliance
schedule for a source that is not in compliance with all applicable requirements at
the time of permit issuance.
b. In addition, the Control Officer may issue, revise, or renew a permit only if all of
the following conditions have been met:
(1) The permit application received by the Control Officer must be complete
according to Section 301.4 of this rule.
(2) Except for administrative or minor permit revisions qualifying as
administrative or minor under defined in Sections 404 and or 405 of this rule,
all of the requirements for public notice and participation under Section 408
of this rule must have been met.
(3) The Control Officer shall have complied with the requirements of Section
303 of this rule for notifying and responding to affected states and the
Administrator, if applicable, other notification requirements of Rule 240,
Section 304.2-Action on Application and Notification Requirements of these
rules.
105

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(4) The conditions of the permit shall require compliance with all applicable
requirements.
(5) For proposed final permits for which an application is required to be
submitted to the Administrator under Section 303.1 of this rule, and to which
the Administrator has properly objected to its issuance in writing within 45
days of receipt of the proposed final permit and all necessary supporting
information from the Department, the Control Officer has revised and
submitted a revised proposed final permit in response to the objection and
the Administrator has not objected to this revised proposed final permit
within 45 days of receipt.
(6) For permits to which the Administrator has objected to issuance under a
petition filed under 40 CFR 70.8(d), the Administrator’s objection has been
resolved.
c. The Control Officer may issue a notice of revocation of a permit issued under
this rule if:
(1) The Control Officer has reasonable cause to believe that the permit was
obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.
(2) The person applying for the permit failed to disclose a material fact required
by the permit application form or the regulation applicable to the permit, of
which the applicant had or should have had knowledge at the time the
application was submitted.
(3) The terms and conditions of the permit have been or are being violated and
the violation has not been corrected within a reasonable period of time as
specified by the Control Officer.
d. If the Control Officer issues a notice of denial or revocation of a permit under
this rule, the notice shall be served on the applicant or permittee by certified
mail, return receipt requested. The notice shall include a statement detailing the
grounds for the denial or revocation and explaining that the permit applicant or
permittee is entitled to a hearing under A.R.S. §49-482.
e. The Control Officer shall provide a statement that sets forth the legal and factual
basis for the proposed permit conditions including references to the applicable
statutory or regulatory provisions. The Control Officer shall send this statement
to the Administrator and to any other person who requests it.
f. Except as provided in 40 CFR 70.4(b)(11), Rule 200-Permit Requirements of
these rules and Rule 240-Permit Requirements For New Major Sources And
Major Modifications To Existing Major Sources Federal Major New Source
Review (NSR), of these rules, regulations promulgated under Title IV or Title V
of the Act, or the permitting of affected sources under the acid rain program, the
Control Officer shall take final action on each permit application (and request
application for revision or renewal) within 18 months after receiving a complete
application.
106

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
g. Priority shall be given by the Control Officer to taking action on applications for
construction or modification submitted under Title I, Parts C-Prevention of
Significant Deterioration and D-New Source Review of the Act.
h. A proposed permit decision shall be published within nine months of receipt of a
complete application and any additional information requested under Section
301.4(e) of this rule to process the application. The Control Officer shall provide
notice of the decision as provided in Section 408 of this rule and any public
hearing shall be scheduled as expeditiously as possible.
301.9 Requirement for a Permit: Except as noted allowed under the provisions in
Sections 403 and 405 of this rule, no source may operate after the time that it is
required to submit a timely and complete application, except in compliance with a
permit issued under this rule. However, if a source submits a timely and complete
application for initial permit issuance, revision, or renewal, the source's failure to
have a permit is not a violation of these rules until the Control Officer takes final
action on the application. This protection shall cease to apply if, subsequent to the
completeness determination, the applicant fails to submit, by the deadline specified
in writing by the Control Officer, any additional information identified as being
needed to process the application. If a source submits a timely and complete
application for a permit renewal, but the Control Officer has failed to issue or deny
the renewal permit before the end of the term of the previous permit, then the
permit shall not expire until the permit renewal has been issued or denied. This
section of this rule does not affect a source’s obligation to obtain a permit revision
before making a modification to the source.
302 PERMIT CONTENTS:
302.1 Each permit issued under this rule shall include the following elements:
a. The date of issuance, the permit term, and the deadline by which the permittee
must renew the permit.
b. Enforceable emission limitations and standards including those operational
requirements and limitations that assures compliance with all applicable
requirements at the time of issuance.
(1) The permit shall specify and reference the origin of and authority for each
term or condition, and identify any difference in form as compared to the
applicable requirement upon which the term or condition is based.
(2) The permit shall state that, where an applicable requirement of the Act is
more stringent than an applicable requirement of regulations promulgated
under Title IV of the Act and incorporated under Rule 371-Acid Rain of
these rules, both provisions shall be incorporated into the permit and shall be
enforceable by the Administrator.
(3) Any permit containing an equivalency demonstration for an alternative
emission limit submitted under Section 301.3 of this rule shall contain
provisions to ensure that any resulting emissions limit has been demonstrated
107

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
to be quantifiable, accountable, enforceable, and based on replicable
procedures.
(4) The permit shall specify applicable requirements for fugitive emission
limitations, regardless of whether the source category in question is included
in the list of sources contained in the definition of major source in Rule 100-
General Provisions and Definitions of these rules.
c. As necessary, the following requirements with respect to monitoring:
(1) Requirements, including stipulated requirements, concerning the use,
maintenance, and, where appropriate, installation of monitoring equipment
or methods;
(2) Where the applicable requirement does not require periodic testing or
instrumental or non-instrumental monitoring (which may consist of
recordkeeping designed to serve as monitoring), periodic monitoring
sufficient to yield reliable data from the relevant time period that are
representative of the source's compliance with the permit as reported under
Section 302.1(d) of this rule. Such monitoring requirements shall ensure use
of terms, test methods, units, averaging periods, and other statistical
conventions consistent with the applicable requirement. Recordkeeping
provisions may be sufficient to meet the requirements of this rule; and
(3) Any emissions monitoring and analysis procedures or test methods required
under the applicable requirements, including any procedures and methods
promulgated under Sections 114(a)(3) or 504(b) of the Act.
d. With respect to recordkeeping, the permit shall incorporate all applicable
recordkeeping requirements and require, where applicable, the following:
(1) Records of required monitoring information that include the following:
(a) The date, place as defined in the permit, and time of sampling or
measurements;
(b) The date(s) analyses were performed;
(c) The name of the company or entity that performed the analysis;
(d) The analytical techniques or methods used;
(e) The results of such analysis; and
(f) The operating conditions as existing at the time of sampling or
measurement.
(2) Retention of records of all required monitoring data and support information
for a period of at least five years from the date of the monitoring sample,
measurement, report, or application. Support information includes all
calibration and maintenance records and all original strip-chart recordings for
continuous monitoring instrumentation, and copies of all reports required by
the permit.
108

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
e. With respect to reporting, the permit shall incorporate all applicable reporting
requirements and require the following:
(1) Submittal of reports of any required monitoring at least every six months. All
instances of deviations from permit requirements shall be clearly identified in
such reports. All required reports shall be certified by a responsible official
consistent with Section 301.7 and Section 305.1(e) of this rule.
(2) Prompt reporting of deviations from permit requirements, including those
attributable to upset conditions as defined in the permit, the probable cause
of such deviations, and any corrective actions or preventive measures taken.
The Control Officer shall define "prompt" in relation to the degree and type
of deviation likely to occur and the applicable requirements.
f. A permit condition prohibiting emissions exceeding any allowances that the
source lawfully holds under Title IV of the Act or the regulations promulgated
thereunder and incorporated under Rule 371-Acid Rain of these rules.
(1) No permit revision shall be required for increases in emissions that are
authorized by allowances acquired under the acid rain program and
incorporated under Rule 371-Acid Rain of these rules, provided that such
increases do not require a permit revision under any other applicable
requirement.
(2) No limit shall be placed on the number of allowances held by the source.
The source may not, however, use allowances as a defense to non-
compliance with any other applicable requirement.
(3) Any such allowance shall be accounted for according to the procedures
established in regulations promulgated under Title IV of the Act.
(4) Any permit issued under the requirements of this rule and Title V of the Act
to a unit subject to the provisions of Title IV of the Act and incorporated
under Rule 371-Acid Rain of these rules shall include conditions prohibiting
all of the following:
(a) Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide in excess of the number of allowances
to emit sulfur dioxide held by the owners or operators of the unit or the
designated representative of the owners or operators.
(b) Exceedances of applicable emission rates.
(c) The use of any allowance prior to the year for which it was allocated.
(d) Violation of any other provision of the permit.
g. A severability clause to ensure the continued validity of the various permit
requirements in the event of a challenge to any portions of the permit.
h. Provisions stating the following:
(1) That the permittee shall comply with all conditions of the permit including all
applicable requirements of Arizona air quality statutes and the air quality
109

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
rules. Compliance with permit terms and conditions does not relieve, modify,
or otherwise affect the permittee’s duty to comply with all applicable
requirements of Arizona air quality statutes and the Maricopa County Air
Pollution Control Regulations. Any permit non-compliance is grounds for
enforcement action; for a permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or
revision; or for denial of a permit renewal application. Non-compliance with
any federally enforceable requirement in a permit constitutes a violation of
the Act.
(2) That the permittee shall halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to
maintain compliance with applicable requirements of Federal laws, Arizona
laws, these rules, or other conditions of the permit.
(3) That the permit may be revised, reopened, revoked and reissued, or
terminated for cause. The filing of a request by a permittee for a permit
revision, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or of a notification of
planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit
condition.
(4) That the permit does not convey any property rights nor exclusive privilege,
of any sort.
(5) That the permittee shall furnish to the Control Officer, within a reasonable
time, any information that the Control Officer may request in writing to
determine whether cause exists for revising, revoking and reissuing the
permit, or terminating the permit, or to determine compliance with the
permit. Upon request, the permittee shall also furnish to the Control Officer
copies of records required to be kept by the permit. For information claimed
to be confidential, the permittee shall furnish a copy of such records directly
to the Administrator along with a claim of confidentiality.
(6) For any major source operating in a nonattainment area for any pollutant(s)
for which the source is classified as a major source, the source shall comply
with reasonably available control technology (RACT) as defined in Rule 100-
General Provisions and Definitions of these rules.
(7) For any major source operating in a nonattainment area designated as serious
for PM10, for which the source is classified as a major source for PM10, the
source shall comply with the best available control technology (BACT), as
defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of these rules, for
PM10.
i. A provision to ensure that a source pays fees to the Control Officer under A.R.S.
§49-480(D) and Rule 280-Fees of these rules.
j. A provision stating that no permit revision shall be required under any approved
economic incentives, marketable permits, emissions trading and other similar
programs or processes for changes that are provided for in the permit.
110

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
k. Terms and conditions for reasonably anticipated operating scenarios identified by
the source in its application as approved by the Control Officer. Such terms and
conditions:
(1) Shall require the source, contemporaneously with making a change from one
operating scenario to another, to record in a log at the permitted source a
record of the scenario under which it is operating;
(2) Shall extend the permit shield described in Section 407 of this rule to all
terms and conditions under each such operating scenario; and
(3) Must ensure that the terms and conditions of each such alternative scenario
meet all applicable requirements and the requirements of this rule.
l. Terms and conditions, if the permit applicant requests them, as approved by the
Control Officer, for the trading of emissions increases and decreases in the
permitted source, to the extent that the applicable requirements provide for
trading increases and decreases without a case-by-case approval of each
emissions trade. Such terms and conditions:
(1) Shall include all terms required under Section 302.1 and Section 302.3 of this
rule to determine compliance;
(2) May extend the permit shield described in Section 302.4 of this rule to all
terms and conditions that allow such increases and decreases in emissions;
and
(3) Shall meet all applicable requirements and requirements of this rule.
m. Terms and conditions, if the permit applicant requests them and they are
approved by the Control Officer, setting forth intermittent operating scenarios
including potential periods of downtime. If such terms and conditions are
included, the county's emissions inventory shall not reflect the zero emissions
associated with the downtime.
n. If a permit applicant requests it, the Control Officer shall issue permits that
contain terms and conditions allowing for the trading of emission increases and
decreases in the permitted source solely for the purpose of complying with a
federally enforceable emission cap that is established in the permit independent
of otherwise applicable requirements. The permit applicant shall include in its
application proposed replicable procedures and permit terms that ensure the
emissions trades are quantifiable and enforceable. The Control Officer shall not
be required to include in the emissions trading provisions any emissions units for
which emissions are not quantifiable or for which there are no replicable
procedures to enforce the emissions trades. The permit shall also require
compliance with all applicable requirements. Changes made under this section of
this rule shall not include modifications under any provision of Title I of the Act
and may not exceed emissions allowable under the permit. The terms and
conditions shall include notice that (1) conforms to Section 403.4 and Section
111

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
403.5 of this rule and (2) describes how the increases or decreases in emissions
will comply with the terms and conditions of the permit.
o. Such terms and conditions as are consistent with the requirements of this rule, of
Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of these rules and of the Clean Air
Act, and are found by the Control Officer to be necessary.
302.2 Federally Enforceable Requirements: All terms and conditions in a Title V Permit
shall be enforceable by the Administrator and citizens under the Act, including any
provisions designed to limit a source’s potential to emit. However, the Control
Officer shall specifically designate as not being federally enforceable under the Act
any terms and conditions included in the Title V Permit that are not required under
the Act or under any of its applicable requirements.
302.3 All applications for a permit required by this rule shall include a compliance plan
meeting the requirements of Section 503 of the Act.
302.4 Each permit shall include the applicable permit shield provisions set forth in Section
407 of this rule.
302.5 A Title V permit issued to a major source shall require that revisions be made under
Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these rules to incorporate additional applicable
requirements adopted by the Administrator under the Act that become applicable to
a source with a permit with a remaining permit term of three or more years. No
revision shall be required if the effective date of the applicable requirements is after
the expiration of the permit. The revisions shall be made as expeditiously as
practicable, but not later than 18 months after the promulgation of such standards
and regulations. Any permit revision required under this section of this rule shall
comply with provisions in Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these rules for permit
renewal and shall reset the five year permit term.
303 PERMIT REVIEW BY THE EPA AND AFFECTED STATES:
303.1 Except as provided in Section 301.5 of this rule and as waived by the Administrator,
for each Title V permit, a copy of each of the following shall be provided to the
Administrator as follows:
a. The applicant shall provide a complete copy of the application, including any
attachments, compliance plans, and other information required by Section 301.4
of this rule at the time of submittal of the application to the Control Officer.
b. The Control Officer shall provide the proposed final permit after public and
affected State review.
c. The Control Officer shall provide the final permit at the time of issuance.
303.2 The Control Officer may require the application information to be submitted in a
computer-readable format compatible with the Administrator’s national database
management system.
112

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
303.3 The Control Officer shall keep all records associated with all permits including those
records containing the calculations and rationale supporting the Control Officer's
decision to issue a permit for a minimum of five years from permit issuance.
303.4 No permit for which an application is required to be submitted to the Administrator
under Section 303.1 of this rule shall be issued if the Administrator properly objects
to its issuance in writing within 45 days of receipt of the proposed final permit from
the Control Officer and all necessary supporting information.
303.5 Review by Affected States:
a. For each Title V permit, the Control Officer shall provide notice of each
proposed permit to any affected State on or before the time that the Control
Officer provides this notice to the public as required under Section 408 of this
rule except to the extent Section 405 of this rule requires the timing of the notice
to be different.
b. If the Control Officer refuses to accept a recommendation of any affected State
submitted during the public or affected State review period, the Control Officer
shall notify the Administrator and the affected State in writing. The notification
shall include the Control Officer's reasons for not accepting any such
recommendation and shall be provided to the Administrator as part of the
submittal of the proposed final permit. The Control Officer shall not be required
to accept recommendations that are not based on federal applicable requirements
or requirements of state law.
303.6 Any person who petitions the Administrator under 40 CFR 70.8(d) shall notify the
Control Officer by certified mail of such petition as soon as possible, but in no case
more than 10 days following such petition. Such notice shall include the grounds for
objection and whether such objections were raised during the public comment
period. A petition for review does not stay the effectiveness of a permit or its
requirements if the permit was issued after the end of the 45-day administrative
review period and prior to the Administrator’s objection.
303.7 If the Control Officer has issued a permit prior to receipt of the Administrator’s
objection under this rule, and the Administrator indicates that a permit should be
revised or revoked and reissued, the Control Officer shall respond consistent with
Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these rules and may thereafter issue only a revised
permit that satisfies the Administrator’s objection. In any case, the source shall not
be in violation of the requirement to have submitted a timely and complete
application.
303.8 Prohibition on Default Issuance:
a. No Title V permit including a permit renewal or revision shall be issued until
affected States and the Administrator have had an opportunity to review the
proposed final permit.
b. No permit or renewal shall be issued unless the Control Officer has acted on the
application.
113

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
304 EMISSION STANDARDS AND LIMITATIONS: Wherever applicable requirements
apply different standards or limitations to a source for the same item, all applicable
requirements shall be included in the permit.
305 COMPLIANCE PLAN; CERTIFICATION:
305.1 All permits shall contain the following elements with respect to compliance:
a. The following monitoring requirements sufficient to assure compliance with the
terms and conditions of the permit:
(1) Any emissions monitoring and analysis procedures or test methods required
under the applicable requirements, including any procedures and methods
promulgated under Section 114(a)(3) or 504(b) of the Act;
(2) Where the applicable requirement does not require periodic testing or
instrumental or non-instrumental monitoring (which may consist of
recordkeeping designed to serve as monitoring), periodic monitoring
sufficient to yield reliable data from the relevant time period that are
representative of the source's compliance with the permit, as reported under
Section 305.1(c) of this rule. Such monitoring requirements shall assure use
of terms, test methods, units, averaging periods, and other statistical
conventions consistent with the applicable requirements; and
(3) Requirements concerning the use, maintenance, and, where appropriate,
installation of monitoring equipment or methods.
b. All applicable recordkeeping requirements, as described in Section 302.1(d) of
this rule.
c. All applicable reporting requirements including the following:
(1) Submittal of reports of any required monitoring at least every six months. All
instances of deviations from permit requirements shall be clearly identified in
such reports. All required reports shall be certified by a responsible official
consistent with Section 305.1(e) of this rule.
(2) Reporting within two working days from knowledge of deviations from
permit requirements, including those attributable to upset conditions as
defined in the permit and the probable cause of such deviations. Reporting
within a reasonable time of any long-term corrective actions or preventative
measures taken.
d. Requirements for compliance certification with terms and conditions contained
in the permit, including emission limitations, standards, or work practices.
Permits shall include each of the following:
(1) The frequency for submissions of compliance certifications, which shall not
be less than annually;
(2) The means to monitor the compliance of the source with its emissions
limitations, standards, and work practices;
114

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(3) A requirement that the compliance certification include the following:
(a) The identification of each term or condition of the permit that is the
basis of the certification;
(b) The compliance status;
(c) Whether compliance was continuous or intermittent;
(d) The method(s) used for determining the compliance status of the source,
currently and over the reporting period; and
(e) Other facts the Control Officer may require to determine the compliance
status of the source.
(4) A requirement that all compliance certifications be submitted to the Control
Officer and to the Administrator;
(5) Additional requirements specified in Sections 114(a)(3) and 504(b) of the Act
or under Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit Provisions, Section 304-Permits
Containing Voluntarily Accepted Emissions Limitations, Controls, or Other
Requirements (Synthetic Minor) of these rules.
e. A requirement for any document required to be submitted by a permit, including
reports, to contain a certification by a responsible official of truth, accuracy, and
completeness. This certification and any other certification required under this
rule shall state that, based on information and belief formed after reasonable
inquiry, the statements and information in the document are true, accurate, and
complete.
f. Inspection and entry provisions which require the permittee to allow the Control
Officer, upon presentation of proper credentials, to:
(1) Enter upon the permittee's premises where a source is located or emissions-
related activity is conducted, or where records are required to be kept under
the conditions of the permit;
(2) Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that are required to
be kept under the conditions of the permit;
(3) Inspect, at reasonable times, any sources, equipment (including monitoring
and air pollution control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or
required under the permit;
(4) Sample or monitor, at reasonable times, substances or parameters for the
purpose of assuring compliance with the permit or other applicable
requirements; and
(5) To record any inspection by use of written, electronic, magnetic, and
photographic media.
g. A compliance plan that contains all of the following:
115

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(1) A description of the compliance status of the source with respect to all
applicable requirements.
(2) A description as follows:
(a) For applicable requirements with which the source is in compliance, a
statement that the source will continue to comply with such
requirements.
(b) For applicable requirements that will become effective during the permit
term, a statement that the source will meet such requirements on a timely
basis.
(c) For requirements with which the source is not in compliance at the time
of permit issuance, a narrative description of how the source will achieve
compliance with such requirements.
(3) A compliance schedule as follows:
(a) For applicable requirements with which the source is in compliance, a
statement that the source will continue to comply with such
requirements.
(b) For applicable requirements that will become effective during the permit
term, a statement that the source will meet such requirements on a timely
basis. A statement that the source will meet in a timely manner applicable
requirements that become effective during the permit term shall satisfy
this rule, unless a more detailed schedule is expressly required by the
applicable requirement.
(c) A schedule of compliance for sources that are not in compliance with all
applicable requirements at the time of permit issuance. Such a schedule
shall include a schedule of remedial measures, including an enforceable
sequence of actions with milestones, leading to compliance with any
applicable requirement for which the source will be in noncompliance at
the time of permit issuance. This compliance schedule shall resemble and
be at least as stringent as that contained in any judicial consent decree or
administrative order to which the source is subject. Any such schedule of
compliance shall be supplemental to, and shall not sanction
noncompliance with, the applicable requirements on which it is based.
(4) A schedule for submission of certified progress reports no less frequently
than every six months for sources required to have a schedule of compliance
to remedy a violation. Such schedule shall contain:
(a) Dates for achieving the activities, milestones, or compliance required in
the schedule of compliance, and dates when such activities, milestones or
compliance were achieved; and
(b) An explanation of why any dates in the schedule of compliance were not
or will not be met, and any preventive or corrective measures adopted.
116

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(5) The compliance plan content requirements specified in Section 305.1(g) of
this rule shall apply and be included in the acid rain portion of a compliance
plan for an affected source, except as specifically superseded by regulations
promulgated under Title IV of the Act and incorporated under Rule 371-
Acid Rain of these rules with regard to the schedule and method(s) the
source will use to achieve compliance with the acid rain emissions limitations.
h. If there is a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) applicable to the source, a
provision that compliance with the FIP is required.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 FEES REQUIRED: Persons subject to this rule shall pay the fees required, as set forth in
Rule 280-Fees of these rules.
402 PERMIT TERM: A Title V Permit shall remain in effect for no more than five years.,
except as provided in Section 301.9 of this rule.
403 SOURCE CHANGES ALLOWED WITHOUT PERMIT REVISIONS:
403.1 A source with a Title V permit may make changes that contravene an express permit
term without a permit revision if all of the following apply:
a. The changes are not modifications under any provision of Title I of the Act or
under A.R.S. §49-401.01(24) or as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions And
Definitions of these rules;
b. The changes do not result in emissions that exceed the emissions allowable
under the permit whether expressed therein as a rate of emissions or in terms of
total emissions;
c. The changes do not violate any applicable requirements or trigger any additional
applicable requirements;
d. The changes meet all requirements for processing as a minor permit revision
under Section 405 of this rule;
e. The changes do not violate federally enforceable permit terms and conditions
that are monitoring (including test methods), recordkeeping, reporting, or
compliance certification requirements; and
f. The changes do not constitute a minor NSR modification., as defined in Rule
100-General Provisions and Definitions of these rules.
403.2 The substitution of an item of process or pollution control equipment for an
identical or substantially similar item of process or pollution control equipment shall
qualify as a change that does not require a permit revision, if it meets all of the
requirements of Sections 403.1, 403.4, and 403.5 of this rule.
403.3 Except for sources with authority to operate under general permits, permitted
sources may trade increases and decreases in emissions within the permitted source,
117

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
as established in the permit under Section 302.1(l) of this rule, where an applicable
implementation plan provides for such emissions trades, without applying for a
permit revision and based on the seven working days notice prescribed in Section
403.4 of this rule. This provision is available in those cases where the permit does
not already provide for such emissions trading, and shall not include any emissions
units for which emissions are not quantifiable nor for which there are no replicable
procedures to enforce the emissions trades.
403.4 For each such change listed under Sections 403.1, 403.2 and or 403.3 of this rule, a
written notice shall be made either by email, certified mail or hand delivery and or by
certified mail shall be received by the Control Officer and the Administrator, a
minimum of seven working days in advance of the change. Notifications of changes
associated with emergency conditions, such as malfunctions necessitating the
replacement of equipment, may be provided less than seven working days in advance
of the change but must be provided as far in advance of the change, or if advance
notification is not practicable, as soon after the change as possible.
403.5 Each notification The written notice shall include:
a. When the proposed change will occur.
b. A description of each such change.
c. Any change in emissions of regulated air pollutants.
d. The pollutants emitted subject to the emissions trade, if any.
e. The provisions in the implementation plan that provide for the emissions trade
with which the source will comply and any other information as may be required
by the provisions in the implementation plan authorizing the trade.
f. If the emissions trading provisions of the implementation plan are invoked, then
the permit requirements with which the source will comply.
g. Any permit term or condition that is no longer applicable as a result of the
change.
403.6 The permit shield described in Section 407 of this rule shall not apply to any change
made under Section 403.1 through Section 403.3 of this rule. Compliance with the
permit requirements that the source will meet using the emissions trade shall be
determined according to requirements of the implementation plan authorizing the
emissions trade.
403.7 Except as otherwise provided for in the permit, making a change from one
alternative operating scenario to another, as provided in Section 302.1(k) of this rule,
shall not require any prior notice under this rule.
403.8 The Control Officer shall make available to the public monthly summaries of all
notices received under this rule.
404 ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT AMENDMENTS:
118

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
404.1 Except for provisions to Title IV of the Act, an administrative permit amendment is
a permit revision that does any of the following:
a. Corrects typographical errors;
b. Identifies a change in the name, address, or phone number of any person
identified in the permit or provides a similar minor administrative change at the
source;
c. Requires more frequent monitoring or reporting by the permittee; or
d. Allows for a change in ownership or operational control of a source under Rule
200-Permit Provisions of these rules, where the Control Officer determines that
no other change in the permit is necessary, provided that a written agreement
containing a specific date for transfer of permit responsibility coverage and
liability between the current and new permittee has been submitted to the
Control Officer.
404.2 Administrative permit amendments to Title IV provisions of the permit shall be
governed by regulations promulgated by the Administrator under Title IV of the Act
or incorporated under Rule 371-Acid Rain of these rules.
404.3 The Control Officer shall take no more than 60 days from receipt of a request for an
administrative permit amendment to take final action on such request. Title V
permits may incorporate such changes without providing notice to the public or
affected States provided that such permits designate that such permit revisions have
been made under this rule.
404.4 The Control Officer shall submit a copy of Title V permits revised under this rule to
the Administrator.
404.5 Source's Ability to Make a Change: Except for permit transfers described in Rule
200-Permit Provisions of these rules, the source may implement the changes
addressed in the request for an administrative permit amendment immediately upon
submittal of the request.
405 MINOR PERMIT REVISIONS:
405.1 Minor permit revision procedures may be used only for those changes at a Title V
source that satisfy all of the following:
a. Do not violate any applicable requirement;
b. Do not involve substantive changes to existing monitoring, reporting, or
recordkeeping requirements in the permit;
c. Do not require or change:
(1) A case-by-case determination of an emission limitation or other standard,
(2) A source specific determination of ambient impacts, or
(3) A visibility or increment analysis.
119

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
d. Do not seek to establish nor to change a Title V permit term or condition for
which there is no corresponding underlying applicable requirement and that the
Title V source has assumed in order to avoid an applicable requirement to which
the Title V source would otherwise be subject. Such terms and conditions
include:
(1) A federally enforceable emissions cap which the Title V source would
assume to avoid classification as a modification under any provision of Title I
of the Act; and
(2) An alternative emissions limit approved under regulations promulgated under
the Section 112(i)(5) of the Act.
e. Are not modifications under any provision of Title I of the Act.
f. Are not changes in fuels not represented in the permit application or provided
for in the Title V permit.
g. Are not minor NSR modifications for which public participation is required
under Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR) of these rules; and
h. Are not required to be processed as a significant permit revision under Section
406 of this rule.
405.2 As approved by the Control Officer, minor permit revision procedures may be used
for Title V permit revisions involving the use of economic incentives, marketable
permits, emissions trading, and other similar approaches, to the extent that such
minor permit revision procedures are explicitly provided for in an applicable
implementation plan or in applicable requirements promulgated by the
Administrator.
405.3 To request a minor permit revision, a source shall complete the “Standard Permit
Application Form” and shall include the following information:
a. A description of the change, the emissions resulting from the change, and any
new applicable requirements that will apply if the change occurs;
b. For any source that is making the change immediately after it files the
application, the Title V source's suggested draft permit; and
c. Certification by a responsible official that the proposed revision meets the
criteria for use of minor permit revision procedures and a request that such
procedures be used.
405.4 EPA and Affected State Notification: Within five working days of the Control
Officer’s receipt of an application for a minor permit revision, the Control Officer
shall notify the Administrator and affected States of the requested permit revision in
accordance with Section 303 of this rule.
405.5 The Control Officer shall not issue a final permit revision until after the
Administrator’s 45-day review period or until the Administrator has notified the
Control Officer that the Administrator will not object to issuance of the permit
120

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
revision, whichever is first, although the Control Officer may approve the permit
revision prior to that time. Within 90 days of the Control Officer's receipt of an a
complete application under minor permit revision procedures, or 15 days after the
end of the Administrator’s 45-day review period, whichever is later, the Control
Officer shall do one or more of the following:
a. Issue the permit revision as proposed;
b. Deny the permit revision application;
c. Determine that the proposed permit revision does not meet the minor permit
revision criteria and should be reviewed under the significant permit revision
procedures; and/or
d. Revise the proposed permit revision and transmit to the Administrator the new
proposed final permit revision as required in by Section 303 of this rule.
405.6 Source's Ability to Make Change: The source may make the change proposed in
its minor permit revision application immediately after it files the application, unless
the revision triggers minor New Source Review (NSR) under Rule 241 of these rules.
After a Title V source makes the change allowed by the preceding sentence, and until
the Control Officer takes any of the actions specified in Section 405.5 of this rule,
the source shall comply with both the applicable requirements governing the change
and the proposed revised permit terms and conditions. During this time period, the
Title V source need not comply with the existing permit terms and conditions it
seeks to modify. However, if the Title V source fails to comply with its proposed
permit terms and conditions during this time period, the Control Officer may
enforce existing permit terms and conditions, which the Title V source seeks to
revise.
405.7 Permit Shield: The permit shield under Section 407 of this rule shall not extend to
minor permit revisions.
405.8 Notwithstanding any other part of this rule, the Control Officer may require a permit
to be revised under Section 406 of this rule for any change that, when considered
together with any other changes submitted by the same source under this rule or
under Section 404 of this rule over the life of the permit, do not satisfy Section 405.1
of this rule.
405.9 The Control Officer shall make available to the public monthly summaries of all
applications for minor permit revisions.
406 SIGNIFICANT PERMIT REVISIONS:
406.1 A significant permit revision shall be used for an application requesting a permit
revision that does not qualify as a minor permit revision nor as an administrative
permit amendment.
406.2 A significant permit revision that is only required because of a change described in
Section 405.1(f) or Section 405.1(g) of this rule shall not be considered a significant
permit revision under Part 70 for the purposes of 40 CFR 64.5(a)(2). Every
121

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
significant change in existing monitoring permit terms or conditions and every
relaxation of reporting or recordkeeping permit terms or conditions shall follow
significant permit revision procedures.
406.3 Any modification to a major source of federally listed hazardous air pollutants, and
any reconstruction of a source, or a process or production unit, under Section 112(g)
of the Act and regulations promulgated thereunder, shall follow significant permit
revision procedures.
406.4 Significant permit revisions shall meet all requirements of this rule for applications,
public participation, review by affected States, and review by the Administrator, that
apply to permit issuance and renewal.
407 PERMIT SHIELDS:
407.1 Each Title V permit issued under this rule shall specifically identify all federal, state,
and local air pollution control requirements applicable to the Title V source at the
time the Title V permit is issued. The Title V permit shall state that compliance with
the conditions of the Title V permit shall be deemed compliance with any applicable
requirement as of the date of Title V permit issuance, provided that such applicable
requirements are included and expressly identified in the Title V permit. The Control
Officer may include in a Title V permit determination that other requirements
specifically identified are not applicable. Any Title V permit issued under this rule
that does not expressly state that a permit shield exists shall not provide such a
shield.
407.2 Nothing in this rule or in any permit shall alter or affect the following:
a. The provisions of Section 303 of the Act-Emergency Orders, including the
authority of the Administrator under that section.
b. The liability of an owner or operator of a source for any violation of applicable
requirements prior to or at the time of permit issuance.
c. The applicable requirements of the acid rain program, consistent with Section
408(a) of the Act.
d. The ability of the Administrator or of the Control Officer to obtain information
from a source under Section 114 of the Act, or any provision of State law.
e. The authority of the Control Officer to require compliance with new applicable
requirements adopted after the permit is issued.
407.3 In addition to the provisions of Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these rules, a
permit shall be reopened by the Control Officer and the permit shield revised, when
it is determined that standards or conditions in the permit are based on incorrect
information provided by the applicant.
408 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
122

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
408.1 The Control Officer shall provide public notice, an opportunity for public comment,
and an opportunity for a hearing before taking any of the following actions for a
source required to obtain a permit under Title V of the Clean Air Act:
a. Issuing, denying, or renewing a permit.
b. Issuing or denying a significant permit revision.
c. Revoking and reissuing or reopening a permit.
d. Issuing a conditional order under Rule 120-Conditional Orders of these rules.
e. Granting a variance from a general permit under Rule 230-General Permits of
these rules.
408.2 The Control Officer shall provide public notice of receipt of complete applications
for permits or permit revisions subject to Rule 240 of these rules by publishing a
notice in a newspaper of general circulation in Maricopa County.
408.3 The Control Officer shall provide the notice required under Section 408.1 of this
rule as follows:
a. The Control Officer shall publish the notice once each week for two consecutive
weeks in two newspapers of general circulation in the county where the source is
or will be located.
b. The Control Officer shall mail a copy of the notice to persons on a mailing list
developed by the Control Officer consisting of those persons who have
requested in writing to be placed on such a mailing list.
c. The Control Officer shall give notice by other means if necessary to assure
adequate notice to the affected public.
408.4 The notice required by Section 408.3 of this rule shall include the following:
a. Identification of the affected facility;
b. Name and address of the permittee or applicant;
c. Name and address of the permitting authority processing the permit action;
d. The activity or activities involved in the permit action;
e. The emissions change involved in any permit revision;
f. The air contaminants to be emitted;
g. A statement that any person may submit written comments, or a written request
for a public hearing, or both, on the proposed permit action along with the
deadline for such requests or comments;
h. The name, address, and telephone number of a person from the Department
from whom additional information may be obtained;
i. Locations where copies of the permit or permit revision application, the
proposed permit, and all other materials available to the Control Officer that are
123

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
relevant to the permit decision may be reviewed, including the closest
Department office, and the times at which such materials shall be available for
public inspection;
j. A summary of any notice of confidentiality filed under Rule 100-General
Provisions and Definitions of these rules;
k. A statement in the public record if the permit or permit revision would result in
the generation of emission reduction credits under A.A.C. R18-2-1204-Title 18,
Chapter 2, Article 12 or the utilization of emission reduction credits under
A.A.C. R18-2-1206-Title 18, Chapter 2, Article 12; and
l. The Control Officer’s preliminary determination whether the application for a
permit or permit revision should be approved or disapproved.
408.5 The Control Officer shall hold a public hearing to receive comments on petitions for
conditional orders, which would vary from requirements of the applicable
implementation plan. For all other actions involving a proposed permit, the Control
Officer shall hold a public hearing only upon written request. If a public hearing is
requested, the Control Officer shall schedule the hearing and publish notice as
described in A.R.S. §49-498 and in Section 408.4 of this rule. The Control Officer
shall give notice of any public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the hearing.
408.6 At the time the Control Officer publishes the first notice under Section 408.3(a) of
this rule, the applicant shall post a notice containing the information required in
Section 408.4 of this rule at the site where the source is or may be located.
Consistent with federal, State, and local law, the posting shall be prominently placed
at a location under the applicant's legal control, adjacent to the nearest public
roadway, and visible to the public using the public roadway. If a public hearing is to
be held, the applicant shall place an additional posting providing notice of the
hearing. Any posting shall be maintained until the public comment period is closed.
408.7 The Control Officer shall provide at least 30 days from the date of the first notice
for public comment to receive comments and requests for a hearing. The Control
Officer shall keep a record of the commenters and of the issues raised during the
public participation process and shall prepare written responses to all comments
received. At the time a final proposed final permit is submitted to the EPA
Administrator, the record and copies of the Control Officer's responses shall be
made available to the applicant, the Administrator and to all commenters.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
124

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 220
NON-TITLE V PERMIT PROVISIONS
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESSING PROCEDURES
302 PERMIT CONTENTS
303 COMPLIANCE PLANS
304 PERMITS CONTAINING VOLUNTARILY ACCEPTED EMISSIONS
LIMITATIONS, CONTROLS, OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS (SYNTHETIC
MINOR)
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 FEES REQUIRED
402 PERMIT TERM
403 SOURCE CHANGES THAT REQUIRE NON-TITLE V PERMIT REVISIONS
404 PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN CHANGES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE A
NON-TITLE V PERMIT REVISION
405 PERMIT REVISIONS
406 PERMIT REVISIONS PROCEDURES
407 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
408 AMENDMENTS TO A PERMIT
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 LOG RETENTION REQUIREMENT
502 LOG FORMAT SPECIFICATIONS
503 LOG FILING
125

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Revised 07/13/1988; Repealed and Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 02/15/1995; Revised
06/19/1996; Revised 03/04/1998; Revised 07/26/2000; Revised 05/07/2003; Revised
06/06/2007; Revised 02/03/2016; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 220
NON-TITLE V PERMIT PROVISIONS
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To provide an orderly procedure for the review of Non-Title V sources of air
pollution through the issuance of Non-Title V permits.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to each source requiring a Non-Title V permit or
permit revision and notifications of certain changes at Non-Title V permit sources.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: (NOT APPLICABLE) See Rule 100-General Provisions and
Definitions of these rules for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined in this
rule.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESSING PROCEDURES:
301.1 Standard Application Form and Required Information: To apply for a permit or
permit revision under this rule, applicants shall complete a permit application filed in
the manner and form prescribed by the Control Officer. The Control Officer, either
upon the Control Officer's own initiative or upon the request of a permit applicant,
may waive the requirement that specific information or data for a particular source
or category of sources be submitted in the Non-Title V permit application. However,
the Control Officer must determine that the information or data would be
unnecessary to determine all of the following:
a. The applicable requirements to which the source may be subject;
b. The design and control of the air pollution control equipment such that the
source may be expected to operate without emitting or without causing to be
emitted air contaminants in violation of these rules;
c. The fees to which the source may be subject under Rule 280-Fees of these rules;
and
d. A proposed emission limitation, control, or other requirement that meets the
requirements of Section 304 of this rule.
301.2 Permit Application and a Compliance Plan:
126

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. A permit application, required by this rule, shall include a compliance plan, if
applicable, which meets the requirements of Section 303 of this rule when a
notice of violation has been issued an enforcement action has been taken and not
resolved at the time the permit application is filed.
b. A permit application, required by this rule, can may include a compliance plan, if
applicable, which meets the requirements of Section 303 of this rule when the
following circumstances occur: under other circumstances determined by the
Control Officer.
(1) When a source is not in compliance with these rules but has not been issued
a notice of violation,
(2) Under other circumstances determined by the Control Officer.
301.3 A Timely Permit Application:
a. For a source, that becomes subject to the permit program as a result of a change
in a regulation and not as a result of construction or a physical or operational
change, one that is submitted within 12 months after the source becomes subject
to the permit program.
b. For purposes of permit renewal, a timely application is one that is submitted at
least six months, but not more than 18 months 12 months, prior to the date of
permit expiration.
c. Unless otherwise required by Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these rules and
for any existing source which becomes subject to a standard promulgated by the
Administrator under Section 112(d) of the Act-Hazardous Air Pollutants-
Emission Standards, a timely application is a permit revision application that is
submitted within 12 months of the date on which the standard is promulgated. If
such standard requires the source to obtain a Title V permit, then the permit
revision application shall be subject to the requirements of Rule 210-Title V
Permit Provisions of these rules.
301.4 A complete application is one that satisfies all of the following:
a. To be complete, an An application shall provide all information required under
Section 301.1 of this rule., except that notifications of An application for permit
revision need only supply such information only if it is related to the proposed
change. A responsible official shall certify the submitted information, consistent
with as required by Section 301.6 of this rule.
b. To be complete, an An application for a new permit or a notification of a permit
revision shall contain an assessment of the applicability of the requirements of
Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR) of these rules and shall comply with
all applicable requirements of Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR) of
these rules. If the applicant determines that the proposed new source is subject
this to Rule 241 of these rules, or the proposed permit revision constitutes a
minor NSR modification, then the application applicant shall comply
127

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
demonstrate compliance with all applicable requirements of Rule 241 of these
rules.
c. An application for a new permit, a notification of a permit revision, or a permit
renewal shall be deemed to be complete unless the Control Officer notifies the
applicant by certified mail within 60 days of receipt of the application that the
application is not complete and specifies what additional information is necessary
for the application to be deemed complete.
d. If, while processing an application that has been determined or deemed to be
complete, the Control Officer determines that additional information is
necessary to evaluate or to take final action on that application, the Control
Officer may request such information in writing and may set a reasonable
deadline for a response. Except for applications using the minor permit revisions
revision procedures as set forth in Section 406 of this rule, a source's ability to
continue operating the existing source without a permit, as set forth in this rule
Section 301.6 (Action on Application) of this rule, shall be in effect from the date
the application is determined or deemed to be complete until the final permit is
issued, provided that the applicant submits any requested additional information
by the deadline specified by the Control Officer. The Control Officer may, after
one submittal by the applicant of one application under this rule, reject an
application that is still determined to be incomplete and shall notify the applicant
of the decision by certified mail.
e. The completeness determination shall not apply to revisions processed through
the minor permit revision process procedures as set forth in Section 406 of this
rule.
f. The Control Officer agrees with the any notice of confidentiality submitted
under A.R.S. §49-487.
g. Any emission source, or equipment item or activity listed in the definition of
“insignificant activity” in Rule 100 of these rules shall be included listed in the
application. The application need not provide emissions data regarding the
insignificant activities listed in the definition of “insignificant activity” as defined
in Rule 100 of these rules. If the Control Officer determines that a source or an
activity listed on the application does not meet the requirements of the definition
of “insignificant activity” in Rule 100 of these rules or that emissions data for the
source or activity is required to complete the assessment required by Section
301.4 of this rule , the Control Officer shall notify the applicant in writing and
specify the additional information required, which may include emissions data
and supporting documents.
h. If a source wishes to voluntarily enter into an emissions limitation, control, or
other requirement pursuant to Section 304 of this rule, a source shall describe
that the emissions limitation, control, or other requirement in its application,
along with proposed associated monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements necessary to demonstrate that the emissions limitation, control, or
128

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
other requirement is permanent, quantifiable, and otherwise enforceable as a
practical matter.
301.5 Duty to Supplement or Correct Application: Any applicant who fails to submit
any relevant facts or who has submitted incorrect information in a permit application
shall, upon becoming aware of such failure or incorrect submittal, promptly submit
such supplementary facts or corrected information. In addition, an applicant shall
provide additional information as necessary to address any requirements that become
applicable to the source after the date it filed a complete application but prior to
release of a proposed permit.
301.6 Action on Application:
a. The Except as provided in Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR) of these
rules, Control Officer may issue a permit with a compliance schedule for a
source that is not in compliance with all applicable requirements at the time of
permit issuance.
b. For Non-Title V permits that contain voluntary emission limits, controls, or
other requirements established under Section 304 of this rule, the Control
Officer shall have complied with the requirement of Section 304.4 of this rule to
provide the Administrator with a copy of each such the proposed permit. In
addition, the Control Officer may issue, revise, or renew a permit only if all of
the following conditions have been met:
(1) The permit application received by the Control Officer must be complete
according to Section 301.4 of this rule.
(2) Except for administrative or minor permit revisions qualifying as
administrative or minor under defined in Sections 405.1 and 405.2 of this
rule, all of the requirements for public notice and participation under Section
407 of this rule must have been met.
(3) The conditions of the permit shall require compliance with all applicable
requirements.
(4) For permits for which a proposed final permit is required to be submitted to
the Administrator under Section 304 of this rule, and to which the
Administrator has properly objected to its issuance in writing within 45 30
days of receipt of the proposed final permit and all necessary supporting
information from the Control Officer, the Control Officer has revised and
submitted a proposed final permit in response to the objection and the
Administrator has not objected to this proposed final permit within 45 30
days of receipt.
c. The Control Officer may issue a notice of revocation of a permit issued under
this rule if:
(1) The Control Officer has reasonable cause to believe that the permit was
obtained by fraud or misrepresentation.
129

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) The person applying for the permit failed to disclose a material fact required
by the permit application form or the regulation applicable to the permit, of
which the applicant had or should have had knowledge at the time the
application was submitted.
(3) The terms and conditions of the permit have been or are being violated and
the violation has not been corrected within a reasonable period of time as
specified by the Control Officer.
d. If the Control Officer issues a notice of denial or revocation of a permit under
this rule, the notice shall be served on the applicant or permittee by certified
mail, return receipt requested. The notice shall include a statement detailing the
grounds for the denial or revocation and explaining that the permit applicant or
permittee is entitled to a hearing.
e. Except as provided in Rule 200-Permit Requirements of these rules, the Control
Officer shall take final action on each permit application (and request application
for revision or renewal) within 90 days of receipt of a complete application,
unless a finding is made that more time is needed, but in no case longer than
nine months after receiving a complete application.
301.7 Except as noted allowed under the provisions in Section 404 of this rule, no source
may operate after the time that it is required to submit a timely and complete
application, except in compliance with a permit issued under this rule. However, if a
source submits a timely and complete application for initial permit issuance, revision,
or renewal, the source's failure to have a permit is not a violation of these rules until
the Control Officer takes final action on the application. This protection shall cease
to apply if, subsequent to the completeness determination, the applicant fails to
submit, by the deadline specified in writing by the Control Officer, any additional
information identified as being needed to process the application. If a source submits
a timely and complete application for a permit renewal, but the Control Officer fails
to issue or deny the renewal permit before the end of the term of the previous
permit, then the permit shall not expire until the permit renewal has been issued or
denied. This section of this rule does not affect a source’s obligation to obtain a
permit revision before making a modification to the source.
302 PERMIT CONTENTS: Each permit issued under this rule shall include the following
elements:
302.1 The date of issuance, and the permit term, and the deadline by which the permittee
must renew the permit.
302.2 Enforceable emission limitations and standards, including those operational
requirements and limitations that ensure compliance with all applicable requirements
at the time of issuance, and operational requirements and limitations that have been
voluntarily accepted under Section 304 of this rule, or that have been voluntarily
accepted under Rule 201-Emissions Caps of these rules. Whenever more than one
standard in this rule applies to any source, or whenever a standard in this rule and a
standard in the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations Regulation III-
130

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Control of Air Contaminants applies to any source, the rule or combination of rules
resulting in the lowest rate or lowest concentration of regulated air pollutants
released to the atmosphere shall apply, unless otherwise specifically exempted or
designated.
302.3 A compliance plan, if applicable, which meets the requirements of Section 303 of
this rule.
302.4 As necessary, requirements concerning the use, maintenance, and if applicable,
installation of monitoring equipment or methods.
302.5 Periodic monitoring sufficient to yield reliable data from the relevant time period
that are representative of the source’s compliance with the permit, if the applicable
requirement does not require periodic testing or instrumental or non-instrumental
monitoring (which may consist of recordkeeping designed to serve as monitoring).
The monitoring requirements shall ensure use of terms, test methods, units,
averaging periods, and other statistical conventions consistent with the applicable
requirement and as otherwise required under Section 304 of this rule. Recordkeeping
provisions may be sufficient to meet the requirements of this rule.
302.6 All emissions monitoring and analysis procedures or test methods required under the
applicable requirements, including any procedures and methods promulgated under
Section 114(a)(3) of the Act and including any monitoring and analysis procedures or
test methods required under Section 304 of this rule.
302.7 All recordkeeping requirements, including recordkeeping requirements established
under Section 304 of this rule, if applicable, for the retention of records of all
required monitoring data and support information for a period of at least five years
from the date of the monitoring sample, measurement, report, or application.
Support information includes all calibration and maintenance records, all strip-chart
recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, and copies of all reports
required by the permit.
302.8 All applicable reporting requirements, including submittal of any required monitoring
reports at least annually and prompt reporting of deviations from permit
requirements, including those deviations attributable to upset conditions, as defined
in the permit. Reports of deviations shall include the probable cause of the
deviations and any corrective actions or preventative measures taken. For the
purposes of this Section, reporting shall be considered prompt when such reporting
is made in accordance with Rule 130-Emergency Provisions of these rules.
302.9 A severability clause to ensure the continued validity of the various permit
requirements in the event of a challenge to any portion of the permit.
302.10 Provisions stating that it shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement
action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in
order to maintain compliance with the conditions of the permit.
302.11 Provisions stating that the permit may be revised, reopened, revoked and reissued, or
terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit revision,
131

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
revocation and reissuance, or termination, or of a notification of planned changes or
anticipated non-compliance does not stay any permit condition.
302.12 Provisions stating that the permit does not convey any property rights nor does it
convey exclusive privileges of any sort.
302.13 Provisions stating that the permittee shall furnish to the Control Officer, within a
reasonable time, any information that the Control Officer may request in writing to
determine whether cause exists for revising, revoking and reissuing the permit, or
terminating the permit, or to determine compliance with the permit. Upon request,
the permittee shall also furnish, to the Control Officer copies of records required to
be kept by the permit.
302.14 Provisions stating that any document required to be submitted by a permit, including
reports, shall contain certification by a responsible official of truth, accuracy, and
completeness under Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of these rules.
302.15 A provision to ensure that a source pays fees to the Control Officer under A.R.S.
§49-480(D) and Rule 280-Fees of these rules.
302.16 Terms and conditions for reasonably anticipated operating scenarios identified by the
source in its application as approved by the Control Officer. Such terms and
conditions shall require the source, contemporaneously with making a change from
one operating scenario to another, to record in a log at the permitted source a record
of the scenario under which it is operating. The terms and conditions of each such
alternative scenario must meet all applicable requirements and the requirements of
this rule.
302.17 Inspection and entry provisions which require the permittee to allow the Control
Officer, upon presentation of proper credentials, to enter upon the permittee’s
premises, where a source is located or where emission-related activity is conducted,
or where records are required to be kept, under the conditions of the permit.
302.18 Inspection and entry provisions which require the permittee to allow the Control
Officer, upon presentation of proper credentials, to have access to and to copy, at
reasonable times, any records that are required to be kept under the conditions of the
permit.
302.19 Inspection and entry provisions which require the permittee to allow the Control
Officer, upon presentation of proper credentials, to inspect, at reasonable times, any
source’s equipment (including monitoring and air pollution control equipment),
practices, or operations regulated or required under the permit.
302.20 Inspection and entry provisions which require the permittee to allow the Control
Officer, upon presentation of proper credentials, to sample or monitor, at reasonable
times, substances or parameters for the purpose of assuring compliance with the
permit or other applicable requirements.
302.21 Inspection and entry provisions which require the permittee to allow the Control
Officer, upon presentation of proper credentials, to record any inspection by use of
written, electronic, magnetic, and photographic media.
132

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
302.22 Provisions specifying the conditions under which the permit will be reopened prior
to the expiration date of the permit.
302.23 Federally Enforceable Requirements: Designated terms and conditions contained in
Non-Title V permits issued under Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit Provisions of these
rules will be considered federally enforceable, provided that the County's Permit
Program is approved by the Administrator and incorporated into the applicable State
Implementation Plan (SIP) under Section 110 of the Act, and the permit meets the
requirements set forth in Section 304 of this rule:
a. Terms or conditions designated as federally enforceable in a Non-Title V permit,
including but not limited to those that are entered into voluntarily under Section
304 of this rule and which have been submitted to the Administrator for review,
include:
(1) Emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements; and
(2) Monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements associated with the
emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements.
b. The Control Officer shall specifically designate as not being federally enforceable
under the Act any terms and conditions included in a Non-Title V permit that
are not required under the Act, or under any such applicable requirements, or
that are not entered into voluntarily under Section 304 of this rule.
302.24 Provisions stating that the permittee shall comply with all conditions of the permit
including all applicable requirements of Arizona air quality statutes and the air quality
rules. Compliance with permit terms and conditions does not relieve, modify, or
otherwise affect the permittee’s duty to comply with all applicable requirements of
Arizona air quality statutes and the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations. Any permit non-compliance is grounds for enforcement action; for a
permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or revision; or for denial of a permit
renewal application. Non-compliance with any federally enforceable requirement in a
permit constitutes a violation of the Act.
303 COMPLIANCE PLANS: Each compliance plan shall contain the following elements:
303.1 A description of the compliance status of the source with respect to applicable
requirements that will become effective during the permit term or for which the
source is not in compliance at the time of permit issuance.
303.2 A description as follows:
a. For applicable requirements that will become effective during the permit term, a
statement that the source will meet such requirements on a timely basis.
b. For requirements with which the source is not in compliance at the time of
permit issuance, a narrative description of how the source will achieve
compliance with such requirements.
133

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
c. For any additional requirements, as may be specified under Section 304 of this
rule.
303.3 A compliance schedule as follows:
a. For applicable requirements that will become effective during the permit term, a
statement that the source will meet such requirements on a timely basis. A
statement that the source will meet in a timely manner applicable requirements
that become effective during the permit term shall satisfy this rule, unless a more
detailed schedule is expressly required by the applicable requirement.
b. A schedule of compliance for any existing sources that are not in compliance
with all applicable requirements at the time of permit issuance. Such a schedule
shall include a schedule of remedial measures, including an enforceable sequence
of actions with milestones, leading to compliance with any applicable
requirement for which the source will be in non-compliance at the time of permit
issuance. This compliance schedule shall resemble and be at least as stringent as
that contained in any judicial consent decree or administrative order to which the
source is subject. Any such schedule of compliance shall be supplemental to, and
shall not sanction non-compliance with, the applicable requirements on which it
is based.
303.4 A schedule for submission of certified progress reports no less frequently than every
six months for sources required to have a schedule of compliance to remedy a
violation. Such schedule shall contain:
a. Dates for achieving the activities, milestones, or compliance required in the
schedule of compliance, and dates when such activities, milestones, or
compliance were achieved; and
b. An explanation of why any dates in the schedule of compliance were not or will
not be met, and any preventive or corrective measures adopted.
303.5 If there is a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) applicable to the source, a provision
that compliance with the FIP is required.
303.6 The Control Officer may develop special guidance documents and forms to assist
certain sources in completing the compliance plan.
304 PERMITS CONTAINING VOLUNTARILY ACCEPTED EMISSIONS
LIMITATIONS, CONTROLS, OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS (SYNTHETIC
MINOR):
304.1 A source may voluntarily propose in its application, and accept in its permit,
emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements that are permanent,
quantifiable, and otherwise enforceable as a practical matter in order to avoid
classification as a source that requires a Title V permit, or to avoid one or more other
applicable requirements. For the purposes of this rule, "enforceable as a practical
matter" means that specific means to assess compliance with an emissions limitation,
control, or other requirement are provided for in the permit in a manner that allows
134

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
compliance with the limit standard or trade provision to be readily determined by an
inspection of the source records or reports. In addition, for the purposes of this rule,
“enforceable as a practical matter” shall include the following criteria:
a. The permit conditions are permanent and quantifiable;
b. The permit includes a legally enforceable obligation to comply;
c. The permit limits impose an objective and quantifiable operational or production
limit, or require the use of in-place air pollution control equipment;
d. The permit limits have short-term averaging times consistent with the averaging
times of the applicable requirement;
e. The permit conditions are enforceable and are independent of any other
applicable limitations; and
f. The permit conditions for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements are sufficient to comply with Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit
Provisions, Sections 302.3, 302.4, 302.5, 302.6, and 302.7 of these rules.
304.2 In order for a source to obtain a permit containing voluntarily accepted emissions
limitations, controls, or other requirements, the source shall demonstrate all of the
following in its permit application:
a. The emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements to be imposed for the
purpose of avoiding an applicable requirement are at least as stringent as the
emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements that would otherwise be
applicable to that source, including those that originate in an applicable
implementation plan; and
b. All voluntarily accepted emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements
will be permanent, quantifiable, and otherwise enforceable as a practical matter.
304.3 The Control Officer shall not issue a permit that waives nor makes less stringent any
limitations or requirements contained in or issued under an applicable
implementation plan or that are otherwise federally enforceable.
304.4 At the same time as notice of proposed issuance is first published under A.R.S. §49-
426(D), the Control Officer shall send a copy of any Non-Title V permit proposed
to be issued under Section 304 this section of this rule to the Administrator for
review during the comment period described in the notice under Section 407 of this
rule.
304.5 The Control Officer shall send a copy of each final permit issued under Section 304
of this rule to the Administrator.
304.6 For all permits containing voluntarily accepted emission limitations, controls, or
other requirements established under this section of this rule, the Control Officer
shall provide an opportunity for public participation as provided for in Section 407
of this rule.
135

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 FEES REQUIRED: Persons subject to this rule shall pay the fees required, as set forth in
Rule 280-Fees of these rules.
402 PERMIT TERM: A Non-Title V permit shall remain in effect for no more than five years.
403 SOURCE CHANGES THAT REQUIRE NON-TITLE V PERMIT REVISIONS:
403.1 A source with a Non-Title V permit may make any physical change or change in the
method of operation without revising the source's permit, unless (1) the change is
specifically prohibited in the source's permit or (2) is a change described in the
following subsections. A change that does not require a permit revision may still be
subject to requirements in Section 404 of this rule.
403.2 The following changes at a source with a Non-Title V permit shall require a permit
revision:
a. A change that would trigger a new applicable requirement or violate an existing
applicable requirement;
b. Establishment of, or change in, an emissions cap;
c. A change that will require a case-by-case determination of an emissions limitation
or other standard, or a source specific determination of ambient impacts, or a
visibility or increment analysis;
d. A change that results in emissions which are subject to monitoring,
recordkeeping, or reporting under Sections 302.6, 302.7, and or 302.8 of this
rule, if the emissions cannot be measured or otherwise adequately quantified by
monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements already in the permit;
e. A change that will authorize the burning of used oil, used oil fuel, hazardous
waste or hazardous waste fuel, or any other fuel not currently authorized by the
permit;
f. A change that requires the source to obtain a Title V permit under Rule 210-Title
V Permit Provisions of these rules;
g. Replacement of an item of air pollution control equipment listed in the permit
with one that does not have the same or better pollutant removal efficiency;
h. Establishment or revision of an emissions limit under Section 304 of this rule;
i. Increasing operating hours or rates of production above the permitted level;
j. Making a change that relaxes monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting
requirements, except when the change results:
(1) From removing equipment that results in a permanent decrease in actual
emissions, if the source keeps on-site records of the change in a log that
satisfies Section 500 of this rule and if the requirements that are relaxed are
present in the permit solely for the equipment that was removed; or
136

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) From a change in an applicable requirement; and
k. A minor NSR modification as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions and
Definitions of these rules.
404 PROCEDURES FOR CERTAIN CHANGES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE A NON-
TITLE V PERMIT REVISION:
404.1 Except for a physical change or change in the method of operation at a Non-Title V
source requiring a permit revision under Section 403 of this rule or a change subject
to logging or written notice requirements in Section 404.2 of this rule or Section
404.3 of this rule, a change at a Non-Title V source shall not be subject to revision,
notice, or logging requirements under these rules.
404.2 Except as otherwise provided in the conditions applicable to an emissions cap
created under Rule 201-Emissions Caps of these rules, the following changes may be
made if the source keeps on-site records of the changes according to Section 500 of
this rule:
a. Implementing an alternative operating scenario, including raw material changes;
b. Changing process equipment, operating procedures, or making any other
physical change if required by the permit requires the change to be logged;
c. Engaging in any new exempted activity listed in Rule 200-Permit Requirements,
Section 303.3(c) insignificant activity as defined in Rule 100-General Provisions
and Definitions of these rules, but not listed in the permit;
d. Replacing an item of air pollution control equipment listed in the permit with an
identical (same model, different serial number) item. The Control Officer may
require verification of efficiency of the new equipment by performance tests; and
e. Making a change that results in a decrease in actual emissions, if the source wants
to claim credit for the decrease in determining whether the source has a net
emissions increase for any purpose. The logged information shall include a
description of the change that will produce the decrease in actual emissions. A
decrease that has not been logged is creditable only if the decrease is quantifiable,
enforceable, and otherwise qualifies as a creditable decrease.
404.3 Except as otherwise provided in the conditions applicable to an emissions cap
created under Rule 201-Emissions Caps of these rules, the following changes may be
made if (1) the change does not require a permit revision pursuant to Section 403.2
of this rule and (2) if the source provides written notice to the Control Officer in
advance of the change as provided below:
a. Replacing an item of air pollution control equipment listed in the permit with
one that is not identical but that is substantially similar and has the same or better
pollutant removal efficiency: 7 days after the written notice is received by the
Control Officer. The Control Officer may require verification of efficiency of the
new equipment by performance tests;
137

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Making a physical change or change in the method of operation that increases
actual emissions more than less than 10% of the major source threshold for any
conventional air pollutant but does not require a permit revision: 7 days after the
written notice is received by the Control Officer;
c. Replacing an item of air pollution control equipment listed in the permit with
one that is not substantially similar but that has the same or better efficiency: 30
days after the written notice is received by the Control Officer. The Control
Officer may require verification of efficiency of the new equipment by
performance tests;
d. Making any change that would trigger an applicable requirement that already
exists in the permit: 30 days after the written notice is received by the Control
Officer, unless otherwise required by the applicable requirement; and
e. Making a change that amounts to reconstruction of the source or an affected
facility: 7 days. For purposes of this section reconstruction of a source or an
affected facility shall be presumed if the fixed capital cost of the new
components exceed 50% of the fixed capital cost of a comparable entirely new
source or affected facility and the changes to the components have occurred over
the 12 consecutive months beginning with commencement of construction; and
f. e. Making a change that will result in the emissions of a new regulated air pollutant
above an applicable regulatory threshold at a rate that is less than 10% of the
applicable major source threshold for that pollutant, but that does not trigger a
new applicable requirement for that source category: 30 days after the date of
receipt of the written notice by the Control Officer. For purposes of this
requirement, an applicable regulatory threshold for a conventional air pollutant
shall be 10% of the applicable major source threshold for that pollutant.
404.4 For each change listed under Section 404.3 of this rule, the written notice shall be
made by email, certified mail or hand delivery and shall be received by the Control
Officer prior to the minimum amount of time required in advance of the change.
Notifications of changes associated with emergency conditions, such as malfunctions
necessitating the replacement of equipment, may be provided with less than required
notice, but must be provided as far in advance of the change, or if advance
notification is not practicable, as soon after the change, as possible.
404.5 The written notice shall include:
a. When the proposed change will occur;
b. A description of the change;
c. Any change in emissions of regulated air pollutants; and
d. Any permit term or condition that is no longer applicable as a result of the
change.
404.6 Notwithstanding any other part of this section Section 404 of this rule, the Control
Officer may require a permit to be revised for any change that, when considered
138

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
together with any other changes submitted by the same source under this section of
this rule over the term of the permit, constitutes a change under Section 403.2 of this
rule.
404.7 If a source change is described under both Section 404.2 of this rule and Section
404.3 of this rule, the source shall comply with Section 404.3 of this rule.
404.8 If a source change is described under both Section 404.3 of this rule and Section
403.1 of this rule, the source shall comply with Section 403.1 of this rule.
404.9 A source may implement any change under Section 404.3 of this rule without the
required written notice by applying for a minor permit revision under Section 405.2
of this rule and complying with Section 406.1 of this rule.
405 PERMIT REVISIONS:
405.1 Administrative Permit Revisions:
a. An administrative permit revision is required to correct typographical errors in a
Non-Title V Permit permit.
b. An administrative permit revision is required to change the name, address, or
phone number of any person identified in the Non-Title V permit permit.
c. An administrative permit revision is required to change ownership or operational
control of a source with a Non-Title V permit, where the Control Officer
determines that no other change in the permit is necessary, provided that a
written agreement containing a specific date for the change of permit
responsibility and liability between the current and new permittee has been
submitted to the Control Officer.
d. Incorporates An administrative permit revision is required to incorporate any
other type of change which the Control Officer has determined to be similar to
those changes described in this subsection.
405.2 Minor Permit Revisions:
a. Minor A minor permit revision procedures shall be used is required for a change
that triggers a new applicable requirement, if all of the following apply:
(1) The change is not a minor NSR modification for which public participation
is required under Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR) of these rules;
(2) A case-by-case determination of an emissions limitation or other standard is
not required; and
(3) The change does not require the source to obtain a Title V permit under Rule
210-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules.
b. Minor A minor permit revision procedures shall be used is required for a change
that increases emissions above the permitted level, unless the increase otherwise
creates a condition that requires triggers the requirement for a non-minor permit
revision in Section 405.3 of this rule;
139

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
c. Minor A minor permit revision procedures shall be used is required for a change
in fuel from fuel oil or coal to natural gas or propane, if not authorized in the
permit;
d. Minor A minor permit revision procedures shall be used is required for a change
that results in emissions subject to monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting under
Sections 302.6, 302.7, or 302.8 of this rule and that cannot be measured or
otherwise adequately quantified by monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting
requirements already in the permit;
e. Minor A minor permit revision procedures shall be used is required for a change
that decreases emissions permitted under an emissions cap under Rule 201-
Emissions Caps of these rules, unless the decrease requires a change in the
conditions required to enforce the emissions cap or to ensure that emissions
trades conducted under the emissions cap are quantifiable and enforceable; and
f. Minor A minor permit revision procedures shall be used is required for a change
that replaces an item of air pollution control equipment listed in the permit with
one that does not have the same or better efficiency.
405.3 Non-Minor Permit Revisions: A source with a Non-Title V permit shall may make
the following changes only after its permit is revised following the public
participation requirements of Section 407 of this rule:
a. Establishing or revising a voluntarily accepted emission limitation or standard
described in Section 304 of this rule, or an emissions cap described in Rule 201-
Emissions Caps of these rules, except a decrease in the limitation authorized by
Section 405.2(e) of this rule;
b. Making any change in fuel not authorized by the Non-Title V permit and that is
not fuel oil or coal to natural gas or propane;
c. A change that is a minor NSR modification for which public participation is
required under Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR) of these rules.
d. A change that relaxes monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements,
except when the change results:
(1) From removing equipment that results in a permanent decrease in actual
emissions, if the source keeps on-site records of the change in a log that
satisfies Section 500 of this rule and if the requirements that are relaxed are
present in the permit solely for the equipment that was removed; or
(2) From a change in an applicable requirement.
e. A change that will cause the source to violate an existing applicable requirement,
including the conditions establishing an emissions cap;
f. A change that will require any of the following:
(1) A case-by-case determination of an emission limitation or other standard;
140

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
(2) A source-specific determination of ambient impacts or a visibility or
increment analysis; or
(3) A case-by-case determination of a monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirement.
g. A change that requires the source to obtain a Title V permit under Rule 210-Title
V Permit Provisions of these rules.
406 PERMIT REVISIONS PROCEDURES:
406.1 The Source’s Responsibility for a Notification of an Application for a Permit
Revision: A source shall submit to the Control Officer a notification of a an
application for a Non-Title V permit revision, in a form and manner as prescribed by
the Control Officer, with the appropriate fee as required by Rule 280-Fees of these
rules. In a notification of a Non-Title V permit revision, a source The application
must supply information that is related to the proposed change. If the source’s
proposed Non-Title V permit revision will revise its Non-Title V permit from a
Non-Title V permit to a Title V permit, then the source must submit a Title V
permit application in accordance with Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these
rules. The Control Officer shall issue the entire Title V permit, and not just the
portion of the Non-Title V permit being revised, in accordance with Title V permit
content and issuance requirements, including requirements for public, affected state,
and EPA review contained in Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules.
406.2 The Control Officer’s Responsibility for Action on a Notification of an
Application for a Permit Revision:
a. Administrative Permit Revision: The Control Officer shall take final action
within 60 days of receipt of a notification of a complete application for an
administrative permit revision.
b. Minor Permit Revision: The Control Officer shall do one or more of the
following within 60 days of receipt of a notification of a complete application for
a minor permit revision:
(1) Issue the minor permit revision as proposed;
(2) Deny the minor permit revision application; or
(3) Determine that the minor permit revision does not meet the minor permit
revision criteria and should be reviewed under the non-minor permit revision
procedures.
c. Non-Minor Permit Revision: The Control Officer shall take final action on the
majority of the notifications of complete applications for non-minor permit
revisions within 90 days of receipt. In no case shall the final action take longer
than nine months.
406.3 The Source’s Ability to Make Changes Requested in a Notification of an
Application for a Permit Revision:
141

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. Administrative Permit Revision or Minor Permit Revision:
(1) A source may implement the changes addressed in the administrative permit
revision application or in a minor permit revision application after it files the
application, unless the revision triggers minor New Source Review (NSR) a
minor NSR modification under Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR)
of these rules.
(2) A source shall still comply with any Federal laws, Arizona laws, or these
rules, and a source shall comply with the “new” permit conditions that the
source proposes in its notification of application for a minor permit revision.
The Control Officer may enforce the existing permit conditions if the
Control Officer determines that the source is not complying with the “new”
permit conditions.
b. Non-Minor Permit Revision: A source may implement the changes addressed
in the notification for a non-minor permit revision upon the Control Officer’s
revising the permit. A source shall not implement the changes addressed in the
application for a non-minor permit revision until the Control Officer issues a
revised permit.
407 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
407.1 Provide Public Notice Before Taking Action on a Permit: The Control Officer
shall provide public notice and an opportunity for public comment before taking any
of the following actions:
a. Issuing, denying, or renewing a permit to a Non-Title V source with emissions of
a regulated air pollutant that exceeds the public notice threshold as defined in
Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of these rules;
b. Issuing or denying a non-minor permit revision to a Non-Title V source with
emissions of a regulated air pollutant that exceeds the public notice threshold as
defined in Rule 100 of these rules;
c. Revoking and reissuing or reopening a permit to a Non-Title V source with
emissions of a regulated air pollutant that exceeds the public notice threshold as
defined in Rule 100 of these rules; or
d. Issuing a conditional permit under Rule 120-Conditional Orders of these rules to
a Non-Title V source with emissions of a regulated air pollutant that exceeds the
public notice threshold as defined in Rule 100 of these rules.
407.2 Provide Information in Public Notice and Publish in Newspapers Before
Taking Action on a Permit: The Control Officer shall include the following in the
notice required pursuant to Section 407.1 of this rule and shall publish such notice
once each week for two consecutive weeks in two newspapers of general circulation
in the county where the source is or will be located and by other means if necessary
to assure adequate notice to the affected public. The Control Officer shall give notice
of any public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the public hearing.
142

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. Name and address of the affected facility(ies).
b. The activity(ies) involved in each permit action.
c. A statement that any person may submit written comments on a proposed
permit action no later than the deadline for submitting such comments.
d. The deadline for submitting written comments.
e. Name, address, and phone number of a person from the Department from
whom additional information may be obtained.
f. The location where copies of the permit or permit revision application, the
proposed permit, the analysis in support of the preliminary determination
whether the application for a permit or permit revision should be approved or
disapproved, and all other materials available to the Control Officer that are
relevant to the permit decision may be reviewed and the times during which such
materials will be available for public inspection.
g. A statement if the permit or permit revision would result in the generation of
emission reduction credits under A.A.C. R18-2-1204-Title 18, Chapter 2, Article
12 or the utilization of emission reduction credits under A.A.C. R18-2-1206 Title
18, Chapter 2, Article 12.
h. The Control Officer’s preliminary determination whether the application for a
permit or permit revision should be approved or disapproved.
407.3 Publish List of Permit Applications Received: The Control Officer shall publish,
once each week, a list of all permit applications received. The list will be available to
the public at the Department’s main office and on the Department’s website.
407.4 Publish List of Permits Issued: The Control Officer shall publish in a newspaper
or post on the Department’s website, once each month, a list of all permits issued.
407.5 Public Hearing: The Control Officer shall hold a public hearing to receive
comments on petitions for conditional orders, which would vary from requirements
of the applicable implementation plan. For all other actions involving a proposed
permit, the Control Officer shall hold a public hearing only upon written request. If a
public hearing is requested, the Control Officer shall schedule the public hearing and
publish a notice once each week for two consecutive weeks in two newspapers of
general circulation in the county where the source is or will be located and by other
means if necessary to assure adequate notice to the affected public. The Control
Officer shall give notice of any public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the
public hearing.
407.6 Public Notice to be Posted by the Permit Applicant: At the time the Control
Officer publishes the first notice under Section 407.1 of this rule, the applicant shall
post a notice containing the information required in Section 407.2 of this rule at the
site where the source is or may be located. Consistent with Federal, State, and local
law, the posting shall be prominently placed at a location under the applicant’s legal
control, adjacent to the nearest public roadway, and visible to the public using the
143

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
public roadway. If a public hearing is to be held, the applicant shall place an
additional posting providing notice of the public hearing. Any posting shall be
maintained until the public comment period is closed.
407.7 Receipt of Comments and Requests for Public Hearing: The Control Officer
shall provide at least 30 days from the date of its first notice for public comment to
receive comments and requests for a hearing. The Control Officer shall keep a
record of the commenters and the issues raised during the public participation
process and shall prepare written responses to all comments received. At the time a
final decision is made, the record and copies of the Control Officer’s responses shall
be made available to the applicant and to all commenters.
408 AMENDMENTS TO A PERMIT: The Control Officer may amend any Non-Title V
permit annually without following the Rule 200-Permit Requirements, Section 402-Permit
Reopenings; Revocation and Reissuance; Termination provisions of these rules in order to
incorporate changes reflected in logs maintained pursuant to Section 404.2 of this rule or
written notices filed under Section 404 Section 404.3 of this rule. The amendment shall be
effective to the anniversary renewal date of the permit. The Control Officer shall make
available to the public for any source:
408.1 A complete record of logs and notices sent to the Control Officer under Section 404
of this rule; and
408.2 Any amendments or revisions to the source's permit made under this rule.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 LOG RETENTION REQUIREMENT: If a source makes a change that requires
logging, then the source shall keep such log for five years from the date the source creates
such log.
502 LOG FORMAT SPECIFICATIONS: If a source makes a change that requires logging,
then the source shall perform such logging in indelible ink in a bound log book with
sequentially numbered pages, or in any other form, including electronic format, if approved
by the Control Officer. Each log entry shall include at least the following information:
502.1 A description of the change including:
a. A description of any process change.
b. A description of any equipment change, including both old and new equipment
descriptions, model numbers, and serial numbers, or any other unique equipment
number.
c. A description of any process material change.
502.2 The date and time that the change occurred.
502.3 The provision of Section 404.2 of this rule that authorizes the change to be made
with logging.
144

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Superviros’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
502.4 The date the log entry was made and the first and last name of the person making
the log entry.
503 LOG FILING: A copy of all logs required under Section 404.2 of this rule shall be filed
with the Control Officer within 30 days after each anniversary of the permit issue date. If no
changes were made at the source requiring logging, a statement to that effect shall be filed
instead.
145

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 230
GENERAL PERMITS
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 SIMILAR IN NATURE
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 RULES APPLICABLE TO A GENERAL PERMIT
302 GENERAL PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
303 APPLICATION FOR COVERAGE AUTHORITY TO OPERATE UNDER
GENERAL PERMIT
304 PUBLIC NOTICE
305 SOURCES FOR WHICH A GENERAL PERMIT MAY NOT BE ISSUED
306 GENERAL PERMIT RENEWAL
307 RELATIONSHIP TO INDIVIDUAL PERMITS
308 GENERAL PERMIT VARIANCE FOR ANY NON-FEDERALLY
ENFORCEABLE REQUIREMENT OF A PERMIT
309 GENERAL PERMIT SHIELD
310 309 GENERAL PERMIT APPEALS
311 310 REVOCATIONS OF AUTHORITY TO OPERATE
312 311 CHANGES TO FACILITIES GRANTED COVERAGE AUTHORITY TO
OPERATE UNDER GENERAL PERMIT
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
146

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 02/15/1995; Revised 06/06/2007; Revised 02/03/2016; Revised
MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 230
GENERAL PERMITS
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To allow for the issuance of general General permits for a facility class that
contains a large number of sources that are similar in nature, have substantially similar
emissions, and would be subject to the same or substantially similar requirements governing
operations, emissions, monitoring, reporting, or recordkeeping.
102 APPLICABILITY: A general permit shall not be issued for affected sources except as
provided in regulations promulgated by the Administrator under Title IV of the Act.
102.1 A General permit may only be issued to a stationary source in a facility class.
102.2 This rule provides the authority and requirements the Control Officer must meet to
issue General permits for a facility class.
102.3 The Control Officer may issue a General permit for any facility class that is determined
to be appropriate for a General permit, in accordance with the requirements of this rule.
102.4 This rule provides the requirements a stationary source must meet to obtain authority
to operate under a General permit issued by the Control Officer.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definition shall apply,
in addition to those definitions found in Rule 100-General Provisions and Definitions of these rules.
In the event of any inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control rules
Regulations, the definitions in this rule take precedence.
201 SIMILAR IN NATURE: Refers to facility size, processes and operating conditions.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 RULES APPLICABLE TO A GENERAL PERMIT: Unless otherwise stated, the
provisions of Rule 200-Permit Requirements, Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 220-
Non-Title V Permit Provisions, Rule 241-Minor New Source Review (NSR), Rule 245 -
Continuous Source Emission Monitoring, Rule 270-Performance Tests, and Rule 400-
Procedure Before the Hearing Board shall apply to general General permits.
302 GENERAL PERMIT DEVELOPMENT:
147

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
302.1 The Control Officer may issue a general General permit on his own initiative or in
response to a petition. At the time the Control Officer issues a general General permit,
the Control Officer may also establish a specific application with filing instructions for
sources in the category facility class covered by the general General permit.
302.2 Any person may submit a petition to the Control Officer requesting the issuance of a
general General permit for a defined class of facilities. The petition shall propose a
particular facility class of facilities, shall list the approximate number of facilities in the
proposed class along with their size, processes and operating conditions, and shall
demonstrate how the facility class meets the criteria for a general General permit as
specified in Sections 100 and 301 through 303 of this rule and in A.R.S. § 49-426(H).
The Control Officer shall provide a written response to the petition within 120 days of
receipt.
302.3 A general General permit shall be issued for classes of facilities a facility class using the
same engineering technical review process that applies to permits for individual sources
and following the public notice requirements of Section 304 of this rule.
302.4 A general General permit shall include all of the following:
a. General permits issued for Title V major sources shall contain all elements in Rule
210-Title V Permit Provisions, Section 302.1-Permit Contents of these rules except
Sections 302.1(b)(2) and 302.1(f).
b. General permits issued for Non-Title V sources shall contain all elements in Rule
220-Non-Title V Permit Provisions, Section 302-Permit Contents of these rules.
c. The process for individual sources to apply for coverage authority to operate under
the general General permit.
302.5 A source applying for authority to operate under a general General permit shall not
propose nor accept pursuant to Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules
emissions limitations, controls, or other requirements that are not included in the
specific general General permit.
302.6 Of sources that are covered under the general permit, general General permits
developed by the Control Officer shall require both of the following:
a. Installation and operation of reasonably available control technology (RACT) as
determined by Rule 241, Section 302 307.1 of these rules.
b. Compliance with standards/requirements promulgated pursuant to Sections 111
or 112 of the Act as applicable.
303 APPLICATION FOR COVERAGE AUTHORITY TO OPERATE UNDER
GENERAL PERMIT:
303.1 Once the Control Officer has issued a general General permit, any source which is a
member of the class of facilities covered by the general General permit may apply to the
Control Officer for authority to operate under the general General permit. Applicants
shall complete the specific application form, or if none has been adopted, the standard
148

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
application form. The specific application form shall, at a minimum, require the
applicant to submit the following information: information identifying and describing
the source, its processes and operating conditions in sufficient detail to allow the
Control Officer to determine qualification for and to assure compliance with the
General permit.
a. Information identifying and describing the source, its processes, and operating
conditions in sufficient detail to allow the Control Officer to determine qualification
for and to assure compliance with the general permit.
b. For general permits issued for Title V major sources, compliance plan that meets
the requirements of Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions, Section 305-Compliance
Plan; Certification of these rules.
c. For general permits issued for Non-Title V sources, compliance plan that meets the
requirements of Rule 220-Non-Title V Permit Provisions, Section 303-Compliance
Plans of these rules.
303.2 For sources required to obtain a permit under Title V of the Act, the Control Officer
shall provide the Administrator with a permit application summary form and any
relevant portion of the permit application and compliance plan. To the extent possible,
this information shall be provided in computer readable format compatible with the
Administrator's national database management system.
303.3 The Control Officer shall act on the application for coverage authority to operate under
a general General permit as expeditiously as possible . The source may operate under
the terms of the applicable general General permit during that time 7 days after the
application is submitted, if the application shows that the source qualifies for and is in
compliance with the specific General permit. The Control Officer may defer acting on
an application under this rule, if the Control Officer has provided notice of intent to
renew or not to renew the permit for the facility class.
303.4 The Control Officer shall make available to the public a monthly summary of all
applications received under this rule for authority to operate under a General permit.
304 PUBLIC NOTICE:
304.1 The Control Officer shall provide public notice for any proposed general General
permit, for any revision of an existing general General permit, and for renewal of an
existing general General permit.
304.2 The Control Officer shall publish notice of the proposed general General permit once
each week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation within
Maricopa County. The notice shall describe the following:
a. The proposed general General permit.
b. The category of sources that would be affected.
c. The air contaminants which the Control Officer expects to be emitted by a typical
facility source in the facility class and by facility class as a whole.
149

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
d. The Control Officer's proposed actions and effective date for the actions.
e. Locations where documents relevant to the proposed general General permit will
be available during normal business hours.
f. The name, address, and telephone number of a person within the Department who
may be contacted for further information.
g. The address where any person may submit comments and/or request a public
hearing and the date and time by which comments or public hearing request are
required to be received.
h. The process by which sources may obtain authorization to operate under the
general General permit.
304.3 For general General permits under which operation may be authorized in lieu of
individual source permits issued under Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these
rules, the Control Officer shall give notice of the proposed general General permit to
each affected state at the same time that the proposed general permit goes out for
public notice Control Officer publishes notice of the proposed General permit in a
newspaper as specified in Section 304.2 of this rule. The Control Officer shall provide
the proposed final permit to the Administrator after public and affected state review.
No Title V permit shall be issued if the Administrator properly objects to its issuance in
writing within 45 days from receipt of the proposed final permit and any necessary
supporting information from the Control Officer.
304.4 The Control Officer shall provide at least 30 days from the date of the first notice
described in Section 304.3 of this rule for public comment.
304.5 Written comments to the Control Officer shall include the name of the person and the
person's agent or attorney and shall clearly set forth reasons why the general General
permit should or should not be issued.
304.6 At the time a general General permit is issued, the Control Officer shall make available
a response to all relevant comments on the proposed permit raised during the public
comment period and during any requested public hearing. The response shall specify
which provisions, if any, of the proposed permit have been changed and the reason for
the changes. The Control Officer shall also notify in writing any petitioner and each
person who has submitted written comments on the proposed permit or requested
notice of the final permit decision.
305 SOURCES FOR WHICH A GENERAL PERMIT MAY NOT BE ISSUED: A general
permit shall not be issued to sources that are subject to case-by-case standards or requirements.
A General permit shall not be issued to a facility class if that facility class has been issued a
General permit by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality for
sources in Maricopa County pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes § 49-426(H).
306 GENERAL PERMIT RENEWAL:
150

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
306.1 The Control Officer shall review and may renew general General permits every five
years or sooner, if warranted. When renewing a General permit, the Control Officer
shall ensure that the General permit meets all of the applicable requirements in
accordance with this rule.
306.2 A source's authorization to operate under a general General permit shall expire when
the general General permit expires regardless of when the authorization began during
the five year period, except as provided in Section 311.3 of this rule.
306.3 At the time a general General permit is renewed, the Control Officer shall notify in
writing all sources that were granted coverage authority to operate under the
previous General permit and shall require them such sources to submit a timely
renewal application. For purposes of general General permits, a timely application is
one that is submitted within the time-frame specified by the Control Officer in the
written notification. Failure to submit a timely application terminates the source’s
right to operate. If a source submits a timely and complete application for a permit
renewal, but the Control Officer has failed to issue or deny the renewal General
permit before the end of the term of the previous General permit, then the General
permit shall not expire until the General permit renewal has been issued or denied.
307 RELATIONSHIP TO INDIVIDUAL PERMITS: Any source covered with authority to
operate under a general General permit may request to be excluded from coverage such
authority to operate by applying for an individual source permit. Coverage Authority to operate
under the general General permit shall terminate on the date the individual source permit is
issued.
308 GENERAL PERMIT VARIANCE FOR ANY NON-FEDERALLY
ENFORCEABLE REQUIREMENT OF A PERMIT:
308.1 Except as modified by the variance, the source shall comply with all conditions of the
general General permit.
308.2 Applications and approvals of general General permit variances shall be subject to the
public notice requirements of Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules.
309 GENERAL PERMIT SHIELD: Each general permit issued under this rule shall specifically
identify all federal, state, and local air pollution control requirements applicable to the source at
the time the general permit is issued. The general permit shall state that compliance with the
conditions of the general permit shall be deemed in compliance with any applicable requirement
as of the date of general permit issuance. Any permit under this rule that does not expressly
state that a permit shield exists shall be presumed not to provide such a shield. Notwithstanding
the above provisions, the source shall be subject to enforcement action for operation without a
permit if the source is later determined not to qualify for the conditions and terms of the
general permit. A permit shield provided for a general permit shall meet all the requirements of
Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules.
310 309 GENERAL PERMIT APPEALS: Any person who filed a comment on a proposed general
General permit as provided in Section 304 of this rule may appeal the terms and conditions of a
151

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
general General permit, as they apply to the facility class covered under a general General
permit, by filing an appeal with the hearing board within ten days of issuance of the general
General permit.
311 310 REVOCATIONS OF AUTHORITY TO OPERATE:
311.1 310.1 The Control Officer may require a source authorized to operate under a general
General permit to apply for and to obtain an individual source permit at any time if:
a. The Control Officer has determined that the source is not in compliance with the
terms and conditions of the general General permit; or
b. The Control Officer has determined that the emissions from the source or facility
class are significant contributors to ambient air quality standard violations which are
not adequately addressed by the requirements in the general General permit; or
c. The Control Officer has information which indicates that the effects on human
health and the environment from the sources covered under the general General
permit are unacceptable.
311.2 310.2 The Control Officer shall provide written notice to all sources operating under a general
permit prior to cancellation of a general permit. Such notice shall include an explanation
of the basis for the proposed action. Within six months of receipt of the notice of the
expiration, termination or cancellation of any general permit, sources notified shall
submit an application to the Control Officer for an individual permit. The Control
Officer shall provide a written explanation to all sources operating under a General
permit at least 12 months prior to termination or cancellation of a General permit. At
least six months prior to the date of termination or cancellation of a General permit,
sources operating under such General permit shall submit an application for an
individual source permit to the Control Officer. Each source previously authorized to
operate under such General permit may operate under the terms of such General
permit, until the individual source permit is approved by the Control Officer.
311.3 A source previously authorized to operate under a general permit may operate under
the terms of the general permit until the earlier of the date it submits a complete
application for an individual permit, or 180 days after receipt of the notice of expiration,
termination or cancellation of any general permit.
312 311 CHANGES TO FACILITIES GRANTED COVERAGE AUTHORITY TO
OPERATE UNDER GENERAL PERMIT:
312.1 311.1 An owner or operator of a source that has been granted coverage authority to
operate under a general General permit may make the following changes at the
source only after the owner or operator provides written notification to the Control
Officer and only if such changes do not require the owner or operator to obtain a
Title V or a Non-Title V permit:
a. Adding new emissions units of the same type operating under a General permit
issued to the source.
152

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Installing a replacement emissions unit operating under a General permit issued
to the source.
c. Adding or replacing air pollution control equipment operating under a General
permit issued to the source.
312.2 311.2 Notification Required: The written notification required by Section 312.1 311.1 of
this rule shall include:
a. When the proposed change will occur;
b. A description of the change; and
c. Any change in potential emissions of regulated air pollutants.
312.3 311.3 An owner or operator of a source that has been granted coverage authority to
operate under a general General permit shall keep a record of any physical change or
change in the method of operation that could affect emissions. The record shall
include a description of the change and the date the change occurred.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
153

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 240
FEDERAL MAJOR NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR)
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT OR PERMIT REVISION REQUIRED
302 APPLICATION COMPLETENESS
303 ACTION ON APPLICATION AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
304 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW MAJOR SOURCES OR MAJOR
MODIFICATIONS LOCATED IN NONATTAINMENT AREAS
305 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW MAJOR SOURCES OR MAJOR
MODIFICATIONS LOCATED IN ATTAINMENT OR UNCLASSIFIABLE
AREAS
306 STACK HEIGHT AND DISPERSION TECHNIQUES
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
154

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 02/15/1995; Revised 02/07/2001; Revised 05/07/2003;
Revised 06/06/2007; Repealed and Adopted 02/03/2016; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 240
FEDERAL MAJOR NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR)
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To implement the federal new source review requirements, including
nonattainment area new source review requirements of sections 172(c)(5) and 173 of the
Clean Air Act for any area designated nonattainment for any national ambient air quality
standard under 40 CFR 81.303 and attainment area prevention of significant deterioration
requirements of section 165 of the Clean Air Act for any area designated attainment or
unclassifiable under sections 107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Clean Air Act. This is a
preconstruction review and permitting program applicable to new or modified major
stationary sources in areas designated nonattainment, attainment or unclassifiable.
102 APPLICABILITY: The provisions of this rule apply to any new major stationary source or
major modification to an existing major stationary source of regulated NSR pollutants.
103 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE: Except at as otherwise provided in this rule,
the CFR sections adopted as of July 1, 2015 July 1, 2019, as cited in this rule, are adopted
and incorporated by reference in into this rule and made part of the Maricopa County Air
Pollution Control Regulations. This incorporation by reference includes no future editions
or amendments.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: The definitions applicable throughout this rule are
incorporated by reference into Sections 304 and 305 of this rule. In the event of any inconsistency
between any of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control rules Regulations, the definitions in this
rule take precedence. for this rule. See Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules
for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined in this rule.
201 The definitions contained in 40 CFR 51.100 and 40 CFR 51.103 are applicable to all portions
of this rule.
202 The definitions contained in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) are applicable to Section 304 of this rule.
202.1 The following incorporated definitions in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) are revised as follows:
a. In the definition of “net emissions increase”, the term “reasonable period” shall
be replaced with “Between the dates five years before a complete application for
a permit or permit revision authorizing the particular change is submitted or
155

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
actual construction of the particular change begins, whichever occurs earlier, and
the date that the increase from the particular change occurs.”
b. The definition of the term “projected actual emissions” as defined in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxviii) (B)(1) shall be revised to include “Maricopa County” and read
as “…the company’s filings with Maricopa County, the State or Federal
regulatory authorities…”
c. The term “reviewing authority” shall be replaced with “Control Officer”.
202.2 The following definitions of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) are excluded: (xliii), (xliv), (xlv),
and (xlvi).
203 The definitions contained in 40 CFR 52.21(b) are applicable to Section 305 of this rule.
203.1 The following incorporated definitions in 40 CFR 52.21(b) are revised as follows:
a. In the definition of “net emissions increase”, paragraph 40 CFR 52.21(b)(3)(ii)(a)
shall read as “The date five years before a complete application for a permit or
permit revision authorizing the particular change is submitted or actual
construction of the particular change begins, whichever occurs earlier; and”.
204 The definitions of the terms “major source” and “major modification” as used throughout
this rule have the meanings as defined in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) when referring to
nonattainment pollutants and as defined in 40 CFR 52.21(b) for all other pollutants.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT OR PERMIT REVISION REQUIRED: No person shall begin actual
construction of a new major source or a major modification subject to the requirements of
this rule without first obtaining a proposed final permit from the Control Officer. , pursuant
to Rule 210 Section 303.1(b) of these rules, stating that the major source or major
modification shall meet the requirements of this rule.
302 APPLICATION COMPLETENESS: An application for a permit or a permit revision
under this rule, other than a PAL permit issued pursuant to Sections 304 and/or 305 of this
rule, shall not be considered complete unless the applicant demonstrates that:
302.1 The impact analyses requirements in Section 304.16 and Section 305 of this rule are
met and demonstrate that the new major source or major modification will not
interfere with the attainment or maintenance of any applicable NAAQS.
302.2 The more stringent of the applicable new source performance standards (NSPS) in
Section 111 of the Clean Air Act or the existing source performance standards in
Regulation III-Control of Air Contaminants of these rules are applied to the
proposed new major source or major modification of a major source. The proposed
major source or major modification of a major source will comply with any
applicable new source performance standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR Part 60.
156

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
302.3 The new major source or major modification will not have an adverse impact on
visibility in any Federal Class I area or mandatory Class I Federal area, as determined
by Sections 304 and/or 305 of this rule and the applicant will satisfy all the
applicable visibility requirements contained in Sections 304 and/or 305 of this rule.
A If required by Sections 304 or 305 of this rule, a demonstration of the impact on
visibility shall be made according to the requirements of 40 CFR 51.307(a), 40 CFR
52.21(o), and (p)(1) through (p)(4) as incorporated by reference and shall be included
with the application.
302.4 All applicable requirements of the SIP are will be met, including but not limited to
the requirements contained in Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Rule 210 (Title V
Permit Provisions), Rule 240 (Federal Major New Source Review (NSR)), Rule 241
(Minor New Source Review (NSR)), Rule 245 (Continuous Source Emission
Monitoring), and Rule 270 (Performance Tests) of these rules.
302.5 The new major source or major modification will be in compliance with whatever
emission limitation, design, equipment, work practice or operational standard, or
combination thereof is applicable to the source or modification to satisfy BACT or
LAER as applicable. The degree of emission limitation required for control of any
pollutant under this rule shall not be affected in any manner by:
a. Stack height in excess of GEP stack height except as provided in Section 306 of
this rule; or
b. Any other dispersion technique, unless implemented prior to December 31,
1970.
302.6 The new major source or major modification will the applicable standards for
hazardous air pollutants contained in Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.
302.7 The new major source or major modification will comply with all applicable
requirements of Regulation III-Control of Air Contaminants of these rules.
303 ACTION ON APPLICATION AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS: Unless
the specific requirement has already been satisfied under Rule 210 of these rules, the Control
Officer shall comply with the following requirements:
303.1 Within 60 days after receipt of an application for a permit, or a permit revision
subject to this rule, or of any addition to such application, the Control Officer shall
advise the applicant of any deficiency in the application. The date of receipt of the
application shall be, for the purpose of this rule, the date on which the Control
Officer received all required information and deemed the application complete. The
permit application shall not be deemed complete solely because the Control Officer
failed to meet the requirements of this section.
303.2 Permit Issuance: Prior to issuing a permit or permit revision pursuant to this rule,
the Control Officer shall:
a. Make a preliminary determination whether the permit or permit revision or
should be approved with conditions or disapproved.
157

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. Make available in at least one location, including the closest Department office, a
copy of all materials the applicant submitted, a copy of the preliminary
determination, a copy of the proposed permit and a copy or summary of other
materials, if any, considered in making the preliminary determination. Permits or
permit revisions subject to the provisions in Section 305 of this rule, shall also
make available the degree of increment consumption that is expected from the
source or modification.
c. Publish in at least one newspaper of general circulation in Maricopa County a
notice stating the preliminary determination of the Control Officer, noting how
pertinent information can be obtained, and inviting written public comment for a
30-day period following the date of publication. The notice shall include the time
and place of any hearing that may be held, including a statement of procedure to
request a hearing (unless a hearing has already been scheduled). Notify the public
of the application, the preliminary determination and the opportunity for a public
hearing and to submit written comments in accordance with the public
participation requirements in Rule 210 of these rules. In case of an application
subject to Section 305 of this rule, the notice shall include the degree of
consumption of the maximum allowable increases allowed under limitation of
pollutants in classified attainment and unclassified areas that is expected to occur
as a result of emissions from the proposed source or modification.
d. Send a copy of the notice requesting public comment to the permit applicant, the
Administrator, and the following officials and agencies having cognizance of the
location where the proposed major source or major modification would occur:
(1) The Board of Supervisors for the county wherein the proposed or existing
source that is the subject of the permit or permit revision application is
located;
(2) The city or town managers of the city or town which contains, and any city
or town the boundaries of which are within five miles of the location of the
proposed or existing source that is the subject of the permit or permit
revision application;
(3) Any regional land use planning agency with authority for land use planning in
the area where the proposed or existing source that is the subject of the
permit or permit revision application is located; and
(4) Any State, Federal Land Manager, or Indian governing body whose lands
may be affected by emissions from the proposed source or modification.
e. The Control Officer shall consult Consult with the Federal Land Manager on a
proposed major stationary source or major modification that may impact
visibility in any Class I Area, in accordance with 40 CFR 51.307, as incorporated
by reference.
f. Provide opportunity for a public hearing for persons to appear and submit
written or oral comments on the air quality impact of the source, alternatives to
it, the control technology required, and other appropriate considerations, if in the
158

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Control Officer’s judgment such a hearing is warranted. The Control Officer
shall give notice of any public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the hearing.
g. Consider all written comments that were submitted within the 30 day public
comment period and all comments received at any public hearing in making a
final determination on the approvability of the application and make all
comments available, including the Control Officer’s response to the comments,
for public inspection in the same location where the Control Officer made
available preconstruction information relating to the proposed source or
modification.
h. Make a final determination whether the permit or permit revision should be
approved with conditions or denied within one year of the proper filing of the
complete application. The Control Officer shall notify the applicant in writing of
his approval or of his denial.
303.3 The authority to construct and operate a new major source or major modification
under a permit or permit revision issued under this rule shall terminate if the owner
or operator does not commence the proposed construction within 18 months of
issuance, or if during the construction, the owner or operator suspends work for
more than 18 months. The Control Officer may extend the 18-month period upon a
satisfactory showing that an extension is justified. This provision does not apply to
the time period between construction of approved phases of a phased construction
project; each phase must commence construction within 18 months of the projected
and approved commencement date.
303.4 Within 30 days of the issuance of any permit under this rule, the Control Officer
shall submit control technology information from the permit to the Administrator
for the purposes listed in Section 173(d) of the Clean Air Act.
303.5 Prior to issuance of a preliminary decision to issue a permit or permit revision for a
new major stationary source or major modification, the Control Officer shall make
each of the following determinations:
a. That the new or modified source will not violate applicable state implementation
plan (SIP) requirements.
b. That the new or modified source will not interfere with the attainment or
maintenance of any applicable NAAQS.
c. For applications subject to Section 305, that the new or modified source will not
cause or contribute to a violation of a prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) increment identified in Section 305 of this rule.
d. That the new or modified source has met the BACT or LAER control
technology requirements as applicable in Sections 304 and/or 305 of this rule.
304 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW MAJOR SOURCES OR MAJOR
MODIFICATIONS LOCATED IN NONATTAINMENT AREAS: The provisions of
this section apply to new major stationary sources and major modifications to existing major
stationary sources located in areas designated as nonattainment under in 40 CFR 81.303 and
159

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
which would be major for the nonattainment regulated NSR pollutant. Such sources are
subject to nonattainment new source review.
304.1 Definitions: The definitions contained in 40 CFR 51.100, 40 CFR 51.301, and 40
CFR 51.165(a)(1) are incorporated by reference, except as provided below:
a. The following incorporated provisions of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) are revised as
follows:
(1) The term “reviewing authority” shall be replaced with “Control Officer”.
(2) In the definition of “net emissions increase”, the term “reasonable period”
shall be replaced with “Between the date five years before a complete
application for a permit or permit revision authorizing the particular change
is submitted or actual construction of the particular change begins, whichever
occurs earlier, and the date that the increase from the particular change
occurs.”
(3) The definition of the term “Projected actual emissions” as defined in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxviii) (B)(1)shall be revised to include “Maricopa County” and
to read as: “…, the company’s filings with Maricopa County, the State or
Federal regulatory authorities,….”
b. The following definitions of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) are excluded: (xliii), (xliv), (xlv),
and (xlvi).
c. The following definitions in 40 CFR 51.301 are included: “Adverse impact on
visibility”; “Natural conditions”; and “Visibility impairment”.
304.2 304.1 Emission Calculation Requirements to Determine NSR Applicability: Except
for an application for a PAL permit subject to Section 304.9 Section 304.8 of this
rule, the provisions contained in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(2)(ii)(A) through (F) as
incorporated by reference shall be used to determine if a proposed project will result
in a new major stationary source or a major modification to an existing stationary
source. These provisions shall not be used to determine the quantity of offsets
required for a project subject the to the requirements of Section 304 of this rule.
304.3 304.2 Emission Offsets: Increased emissions, calculated pursuant to Section 304.5(d)
304.4(d) of this rule, from a major source or major modification subject to Section
304 of this rule shall be offset by reductions in the emissions of each pollutant for
which the area has been designated as nonattainment and for which the proposed
project will result in a new major stationary source or a major modification for that
nonattainment pollutant. Unless an offset ratio is provided for the applicable
nonattainment area pollutant in Section 304.6 304.5 of this rule, the offset ratio of
total actual emissions reductions to emission increases shall be at least 1 to 1.
304.4 304.3 Baseline for Determining Credit for Offsets: The baseline for determining credit
for emissions reductions shall be the actual emissions of the source from which
offset credit is obtained.
304.5 304.4 Offset and Emission Reduction Requirements:
160

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
a. All emission reductions claimed as offset credit shall meet the provisions
contained in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(A) through (D) as incorporated by reference
and 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(G) as incorporated by reference.
b. All emission reductions claimed as offset credits shall be federally enforceable by
the time a permit is issued to the owner or operator of the major source subject
to this Section rule and shall be in effect by the time the new or modified source
subject to the permit commences operations.
c. Location of offsetting emissions: The applicant of a major source or major
modification subject to this rule must obtain offset credits from the same source
or from other sources in the same nonattainment area, except that the Control
Officer may allow the applicant to obtain offset credits from another
nonattainment area if the provisions contained in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix S
(IV)(D) as incorporated by reference are satisfied.
d. The total tonnage of increased emissions, in tons per year, resulting from a major
modification that must be offset under this Section rule shall be determined by
summing the difference between the allowable emissions after the modification
and the actual emissions before the modification for each emissions unit.
e. Interpollutant offsetting:
(1) For the purposes of satisfying the offset requirements, the provisions
contained in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix S (IV)(G)(5) apply. the The Control
Officer may approve interpollutant emission offsets for precursor pollutants
on a case by case basis, except for PM10, which is subject to Section
304.5(e)(2) and PM2.5, which is are subject to Section 304.5(e)(5) Sections
304.4(e)(2) and 304.5(e)(2) of this rule. In such cases, the Control Officer
shall impose, based on an air quality analysis, emission offset ratios in
addition to the requirements of Sections 304.3 304.2 and 304.6 304.5 of this
rule. Interpollutant emission offsets used at a major stationary source must
receive written approval by the Administrator.
(2) Interpollutant offsets between PM10 and PM10 precursors are not allowed.
(3) PM10 emissions shall not be allowed to offset Nitrogen Oxides or Volatile
Organic Compound (VOC) emissions in ozone nonattainment areas.
(4) In no case shall the compounds excluded from the definition of VOC be
used as offsets for VOC.
(5) Interpollutant offsets between PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors are not allowed
unless modeling has been used to demonstrate appropriate PM2.5
interpollutant offset ratios as approved in a PM2.5 Attainment Plan.
304.6 304.5 Offset Ratios for Ozone Nonattainment Areas: In meeting the emissions offset
requirements of Section 304.3 304.2 of this rule for ozone nonattainment areas, the
offset ratio of total actual emissions reductions of VOC or nitrogen oxides to the
emissions increase of VOC or nitrogen oxides shall be as follows:
a. In any marginal nonattainment area for ozone − at least 1.1 to 1;
161

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. In any moderate nonattainment area for ozone-at least 1.15 to 1; or
c. In any serious, severe, or extreme nonattainment area for ozone the applicable
ratio as provided in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(ii)(C) through (E) and 40 CFR
51.165(a)(9)(iii) as incorporated by reference.
304.7 304.6 Source Obligations:
a. The issuance of a permit or permit revision under this rule in accordance with
this section shall not relieve the owner or operator of the responsibility to
comply fully with applicable provisions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
and any other requirements under local, State, or Federal law.
b. At such time that a particular source or modification becomes a major source or
major modification solely by virtue of a relaxation in any enforceable limitation
which was established after August 7, 1980, on the capacity of the source or
modification otherwise to emit a pollutant, such as a restriction on hours of
operation, then the requirements of this rule shall apply to the source or
modification as though construction had not yet commenced on the source or
modification.
c. Any owner or operator who constructs or operates a source or modification not
in accordance with the application submitted pursuant to this rule, any changes
to the application as required by the Control Officer, or with the terms of its
permit, shall be subject to enforcement action.
304.8 304.7 Non-Major Modifications that Result in Reasonable Possibility of Significant
Emissions Increase: The provisions of this section shall apply with respect to any
regulated NSR pollutant emitted from projects at existing emissions units at a major
stationary source, other than at a source with a PAL, in circumstances where there is
a reasonable possibility, within the meaning of 40 CFR 51.165(a)(6)(vi), that a project
that is not part of a major modification that may result in a signifant significant
emissions increase of such pollutant and the owner or operator elects to use the
method specified in the definition of projected actual emissions in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(xxviii)(B)(1)through(3) for calculating projected actual emissions. The
owner or operator shall meet the following requirements:
a. Comply with the procedures in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(6)(i) through (vi) as
incorporated by reference.
b. Make the information required to be documented and maintained pursuant to
this section available for review upon a request for inspection by the Control
Officer or the general public pursuant to the requirements contained in 40 CFR
70.4(b)(3)(viii) as incorporated by reference.
304.9 304.8 Plantwide Applicability Limits (PAL) Permit:
a. Any major stationary source with a PAL permit for a regulated NSR pollutant,
shall comply with provisions contained in 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1) through (15) as
incorporated by reference.
162

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
b. a. The Control Officer may shall issue a PAL permit for any existing major
stationary source according to the provisions contained in 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1)
through (15) if the PAL permit meets the requirments in 40 CFR 52.21(aa) as
incorporated by reference.
c. b. The term “PAL” shall mean “actuals PAL” throughout Section 304.9 as used in
Section 304.8 of this rule.
d. The following terms as used in 40 CFR 52.21 (aa) shall be replaced as follows:
(1) “The term “Administrator” shall be replaced by the term “Control Officer”
(2) “The term “PSD” shall be replaced by the term “NSR”
(3) “The term “BACT” shall be replaced by the term “LAER”
(4) “The term “Plan” shall be replaced by the term “SIP”
304.10 304.9 Additional Requirements Permit Issuance: Except as provided in Section 304.12
304.11 through Section 304.15 304.14 of this rule, the Control Officer shall not issue
any permit or permit revision under this rule to an applicant proposing to construct a
new major source or proposing to make a major modification for the pollutant for
which the area is designated nonattainment unless:
a. The Control Officer has determined that the new major source or the major
modification will meet an emission limitation which is the lowest achievable
emission rate (LAER) for that source for that regulated NSR pollutant.
b. The Control Officer has determined that all existing major sources owned or
operated by the applicant (or any entity controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with such person) in the State are in compliance with, or are on
a schedule of compliance for, all conditions contained in permits for each of the
sources and all other applicable emission limitations and standards under the Act
and in this rule.
c. The Control Officer has determined that emission reductions for the specific
pollutant(s) from of the new major source or major modification meet the offset
requirements of Section 304.3 Sections 304.2 through 304.6 304.5 of this rule.
d. The Administrator has not determined that the applicable implementation plan is
not being adequately implemented for the nonattainment area.
304.11 304.10 No permit or permit revision under this rule shall be issued for a new major source
or major modification to a major source located in a nonattainment area unless:
a. The applicant performs an analysis of alternative sites, sizes, production
processes and environmental control techniques for such new major source or
major modification; and
b. The Control Officer determines that the analysis demonstrates that the benefits
of the new major source or major modification significantly outweigh the
environmental and social costs imposed as a result of its location, construction,
or modification.
163

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
304.12 304.11 Secondary emissions shall not be considered in determining the potential to emit of a
new source or modification and therefore whether the new source or modification is
major. However, if a new source or modification is subject to this rule on the basis
of its direct emissions, a permit or a permit revision, under this rule to construct the
new source or modification, shall be denied, unless the requirements in Sections
304.10 Sections 304.9(a) and (b) of this rule are met, for reasonably quantifiable
secondary emissions caused by the new source or modification.
304.13 304.12 A Fugitive emissions shall not be considered in determining the potential to emit of
a new source or a modification that would be a major stationary source or a major
modification only if fugitive emissions, to the extent quantifiable, are considered in
calculating the potential emissions of the new source or modification, and if the
source does not belong to a source category listed in 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1)(iv)(c)(1)through(27).
304.14 304.13 The requirements of Section 304.10(c) Sections 304.4 and 304.9(c) of this rule shall
not apply to temporary emissions units, such as pilot plants or portable facilities that
will be relocated outside of the nonattainment area, and the construction phase of a
new source, if those units will operate for no more than 12 months in the
nonattainment area, are otherwise in compliance with the requirement to obtain a
permit under this rule, and are in compliance with the conditions of that their permit.
304.15 304.14 A decrease in actual emissions shall be considered in determining the net emission
increase of a new source or modification only to the extent that the Control Officer
has not relied on it in issuing any permit or permit revision under these rules
(including the issuance of any ERC (Emission Reduction Certificate), or the State has
not relied on it in demonstrating attainment or reasonable further progress (RFP).
304.16 304.15 Ambient Air Quality Standards Impact Analysis: The Control Officer may require
the use of an air quality model to estimate the effects of a new or modified stationary
source. The analysis shall estimate the effects of the new or modified stationary
source, and verify that the new or modified stationary source will not prevent or
interfere with the attainment or maintenance of any ambient air quality standard. In
making this determination the Control Officer shall take into account the mitigation
of emissions through offsets pursuant to this rule and the impacts of transported
pollutants on downwind pollutant concentrations. The Control Officer may impose,
based on an air quality analysis, offset ratios greater than the requirements of
Sections 304.3 and 304.6 304.2 and 304.5 of this rule.
304.17 304.16 All estimates of ambient concentrations required pursuant to this rule shall be based
on the applicable air quality models, data bases, and other requirements specified in
40 CFR 51, Appendix W (Guideline on Air Quality Models) as of July 1, 2019 (and
no future amendments or additions) as incorporated by reference and consistent
with the provisions in Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Section 407 of these rules.
304.18 304.17 The applicant of a proposed new major source or major modification that may affect
visibility of a Class I area shall provide the Control Officer with an analysis of
impairment to visibility that would occur as a result of the source or modification as
164

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
required by 40 CFR 51.307(b)(2) as incorporated by reference and in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.166(o) as incorporated by reference.
305 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW MAJOR SOURCES OR MAJOR
MODIFICATIONS LOCATED IN ATTAINMENT OR UNCLASSIFIABLE
AREAS: The provisions of this section apply to new major stationary sources and major
modifications to existing major stationary sources located in areas designated as attainment
or in areas that are unclassifiable for any NAAQS criteria air pollutant. Such sources are
subject to the federal prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program. The intent of
Section 305 of this rule is to incorporate implement the federal prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) rule program by incorporating the program requirements into this rule
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations by incorporating the federal
requirements by reference.
305.1 Incorporation by Reference Revisions. The following provisions of 40 CFR
52.21, which are incorporated by reference pursuant to Section 103 of this rule, are
revised as follows:
a. 40 CFR 51.100: Definitions.
b. a. 40 CFR 51.166(p): Sources impacting Federal Class I areas–additional
requirements. Paragraphs (a)(1), (b)(55-58), (f), (g), (p)(6-8), (q), (s), (t), (u), (v),
(x), (y), (z), and (cc) are excluded from the incorporation of 40 CFR 52.21.
c. The following definitions contained in 40 CFR 51.301: “Natural conditions”; and
“Visibility impairment”.
d. 40 CFR 52.21: Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality, except:
(1) The following paragraphs of 40 CFR 52.21 are excluded: (a)(1), (b)(55-58),
(f), (g), (p)(6-8), (q), (s), (t), (u), (w), (x), (y), (z), and (cc).
(2) The following incorporated provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 are revised as
follows:
(a) The term “administrator” shall read as follows:
(i) “EPA administrator” in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(17), (b)(37)(i), (b)(43),
(b)(48)(ii)(c), (b)(50)(i), (b)(51), (j)(2) and (p)(2); and
(ii) “Control Officer” elsewhere, as defined in Rule 100.
(b) The phrase “paragraph (q) of this section” in 40 CFR 52.21(1)(2) and
(p)(1) shall be revised to read as follows: the public participation
provisions of Rule 210 of these rules.
b. The term “administrator” shall read as follows:
(1) “EPA Administrator” in 40 CFR 52.21 (b)(3), (b)(17), (b)(37)(i), (b)(43),
(b)(48)(ii)(c), (b)(49), (b)(50)(i), (b)(51), (l)(2) and (p)(2); and
(2) “Control Officer” elsewhere, as defined in Rule 100 of these rules.
165

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
c. The phrase “paragraph (q) of this section” in 40 CFR 52.21(l)(2) and (p)(1) shall
read as follows: the public participation provisions of Rule 210 of these rules.
(3) d. The definition of the term “Subject to regulation” as defined in 40 CFR
52.21(b)(49) shall be revised to read as follows: “Subject to regulation means, for
any air pollutant, excluding greenhouse gases (GHGs), that the pollutant is
subject to either a provision in the Clean Air Act, or a nationally-applicable
regulation codified by the Administrator in subchapter C of this chapter, that
requires actual control of the quantity of emissions of that pollutant, and that
such a control requirement has taken effect and is operative to control, limit or
restrict the quantity of emissions of that pollutant released from the regulated
activity.”
(4) e. In the definition of “net emissions increase”, paragraph 40 CFR 52.21(b)(3)(ii)(a) shall
be revised to read as “The date five years before a complete application for a permit
or permit revision authorizing the particular change is submitted or actual
construction of the particular change begins, whichever occurs earlier; and”.
305.2 Notification Requirements: No permit or permit revision under this rule shall be
issued to a applicant proposing to construct a new major source or proposing to
make a major modification to a major source that would be constructed in an area
designated as attainment or unclassifiable for any regulated NSR pollutant, unless the
source or modification meets the provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 as incorporated by
reference and the following conditions: The Control Officer shall provide written
notice of any permit application for a proposed major stationary source or major
modification to the Administrator. Such notification shall include a copy of all
information relevant to the permit application and shall be given within 30 days of
receipt and at least 60 days prior to any public hearing on the application for a permit
to construct.
a. In addition to the air impact analysis and monitoring requirements under 40 CFR
52.21(k) and (m), the applicant for the permit or permit revision under this rule
shall also demonstrate that allowable emissions increases from the proposed
major source or major modification, in conjunction with all other applicable
emission increases or reductions, including secondary emissions, would not cause
nor contribute to a violation of a NAAQS for a pollutant in which primary or
secondary NAAQS for that pollutant are being violated.
b. A new major source or a major modification shall be presumed to cause or
contribute to a violation of the NAAQS when such source or modification
would, at a minimum, exceed the significance levels for any nonattainment
pollutant listed in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(2) as incorporated by reference, at any
locality that does not or would not meet the applicable NAAQS.
c. A new major source or major modification subject to Section 305.2(b) of this
rule may reduce the impact of its emissions upon air quality by obtaining
sufficient emission reductions to, at a minimum, compensate for its adverse
ambient impact where the major source or major modification would otherwise
cause or contribute to a violation of any NAAQS. In the absence of such
166

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
emission reductions, the Control Officer shall deny the proposed permit or
permit revision.
d. The presumption provision in Section 305.2(b) of this rule may be rebutted for a
new major source or major modification if it can be satisfactorily demonstrated
to the Control Officer that emissions with respect to a particular pollutant from
the new major source or major modification will not cause or contribute to
violations of the NAAQS in designated nonattainment areas under section 107
of the Clean Air Act.
e. The demonstration allowed by Section 305.2(d) of this rule shall include a
showing that topographical, meteorological or other physical factors in the
vicinity of the new major source or major modification are such that transport of
VOCs emitted from the source are not expected to contribute to violations of
the ozone standards in the adjacent nonattainment areas.
305.3 Permit Issuance: The Control Officer shall not issue any permit or permit revision
under this rule to an applicant proposing to construct a new major source or
proposing to make a major modification for the pollutant for which the area is
designated attainment or unclassifiable for any NAAQS, unless:
a. The Control Officer has determined that the proposed new major source or
major modification meets all applicable requirements of 40 CFR 52.21.
b. The applicant performs an air quality impact assessment (AQIA) which
demonstrates that allowable emissions increases from the proposed major source
or major modification, in conjunction with all other applicable emission increases
or reductions, including secondary emissions, would not contribute significantly
to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with
respect to any NAAQS, or interfere with any other State’s SIP provisions to
prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility.
(1) A new major source or major modification shall be presumed to cause or
contribute to a violation of the NAAQS when such source or modification
would, at a minimum, exceed the significance levels for any nonattainment
pollutant listed in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(2) at any locality that does not or would
not meet the applicable NAAQS.
(2) A new major source or major modification subject to Section 305.3(b)(1) of
this rule may reduce the impact of its emissions upon air quality by obtaining
significant emission reductions to, at a minimum, compensate for its adverse
ambient impact where the major source or major modification would
otherwise cause or contribute to a violation of any NAAQS. In the absence
of such emission reductions, the Control Officer shall deny the proposed
permit or permit revision.
(3) The presumption provision in Section 305.3(b)(1) of this rule may be
rebutted for a new major source or major modification if it can be
satisfactorily demonstrated to the Control Officer that emissions with respect
to a particular pollutant from the new major source or major modification
167

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
will not cause or contribute to violations of the NAAQS in designated
nonattainment areas under section 107 of the Clean Air Act.
(4) The demonstration allowed by Section 305.3(b)(1) of this rule may include a
showing that topographical, meteorological or other physical factors in the
vicinity of the new major source or major modification are such that
transport of the pollutants emitted from the source are not expected to
contribute to violations of a NAAQS in the adjacent nonattainment areas.
306 STACK HEIGHT AND DISPERSION TECHNIQUES: Criteria for good engineering
practice for stack heights and dispersion techniques is established as follows:
306.1 Incorporation by Reference: Except as provided below, the definitions contained in
40 CFR 51.100 (gg) “A stack in existence”, (hh) “Dispersion technique”, (ii) “Good
engineering practice (GEP)”, (jj) “Nearby” , and (kk) “Excessive concentration” are
incorporated by reference.
a. The term “authority administering the State implementation plan” shall be
replaced with “Control Officer”.
b. The term “EPA, State or local control agency” shall be replaced with “Control
Officer”.
c. The term “reviewing agency” shall be replaced with “Control Officer”.
306.2 The degree of emission limitation required of any source for control of any pollutant
shall not be affected by so much of any source's stack height that exceeds good
engineering practice as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 51.100 (ii) as
incorporated by reference or by any other dispersion technique as defined in 40 CFR
51.100 (hh) as incorporated by reference, except as provided in Section 306.3 of this
rule.
306.3 The provisions of Section 306 shall not apply to a stack in existence, or dispersion
techniques implemented on or before December 31, 1970, except where pollutants
are being emitted from such stacks or using such dispersion techniques by sources,
as defined in Section 111(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, which were constructed, or
reconstructed, or for which major modifications, as defined in this rule, were carried
out after December 31, 1970.
306.4 Before the Control Officer issues a permit or permit revision under this rule to a
source based on a good engineering practice (GEP) stack height that exceeds the
height allowed by 40 CFR 51.100(ii) as incorporated by reference, the Control
Officer shall notify the public of the availability of the demonstration study and
provide opportunity for a public hearing in accordance with the requirements of
Rule 210-Title V Permit Provisions of these rules.
306.5 Any field study or fluid model used to demonstrate GEP stack height under Section
306.2 of this rule and any determination of “excessive concentration” as defined in
40 CFR 51.100 (kk) must be approved by the EPA and the Control Officer prior to
any emission limit being established.
168

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
306.6 The provisions of Section 306 of this rule do not restrict, in any manner, the actual
stack height of any stationary source or facility.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
169

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
MARICOPA COUNTY Return to list of attachments
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 241
MINOR NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR)
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTION
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PERMIT OR PERMIT REVISION REQUIRED
302 BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BACT) OR REASONABLY
AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (RACT) REQUIRED CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS
303 DETERMINATION FOR AMBIENT AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
REQUIREMENTS
304 BACT REQUIRED
305 RACT REQUIRED
306 BACT DETERMINATIONS
307 RACT DETERMINATIONS
308 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENTS
309 APPLICATION DENIAL
310 PUBLIC NOTICE
311 NOTICE TO OTHER AGENCIES
312 MODELING REQUIRED
313 PERMIT CONDITIONS SPECIFIED PURSUANT TO THIS RULE
314 CIRCUMVENTION
315 SOURCE OBLIGATION
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
170

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
Adopted 11/15/1993; Revised 06/19/1996; Revised 02/03/2016; Revised 09/07/2016; Revised
MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION II – PERMITS AND FEES
RULE 241
MINOR NEW SOURCE REVIEW (NSR)
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To provide a procedure for the review of new sources and modifications to
existing sources of air pollution requiring permits or permit revisions for the protection of
the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
102 APPLICABILITY: Except as provided in Section 103 of this rule, the provisions of this
rule shall apply to the construction of any new or modified Title V or Non-Title V stationary
source, when:
102.1 A new source has the potential to emit a regulated minor NSR pollutant in an
amount equal to or greater than any of the permitting threshold thresholds specified
in Rule 100 of these rules; or
102.2 An existing source increases emissions of its potential to emit a regulated minor NSR
pollutant from a minor NSR modification by an amount equal to or greater than any
of the minor NSR modification threshold thresholds specified in Rule 100-General
Provisions and Definitions of these rules.
103 EXEMPTION: The provisions of this rule shall not apply to the emissions of a pollutant
from any of the activities any of the sources identified in Section 102 of this rule, if the
emissions of that pollutant are subject to major source requirements under Rule 240-Federal
Major New Source Review (NSR) of these rules.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: (NOT APPLICABLE) See Rule 100-General Provisions and
Definitions of these rules for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined in this
rule.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS:
301 PERMIT OR PERMIT REVISION REQUIRED: An owner or operator of a source
shall not begin actual construction:
301.1 Of a new stationary source, subject to this rule, without first obtaining a permit, a
permit revision, or a proposed final permit, or a proposed final permit revision from
the Control Officer in accordance with the requirements of Rule 210 or Rule 220 of
these rules.
171

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
301.2 Of a minor NSR modification, subject to this rule, without first obtaining a permit, a
permit revision, a proposed final permit, or a proposed final permit revision from the
Control Officer in accordance with the requirements of Rule 210 or Rule 220 of
these rules.
302 BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BACT) OR REASONABLY
AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (RACT) REQUIRED CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS: The Control Officer shall not issue a proposed
final Title V permit or permit revision or a Non-Title V permit or permit revision subject to
this rule permit or permit revision to an owner or operator of a source proposing to
construct a new source or make a minor NSR modification unless such owner or operator
implements Best Available Control Technology (BACT) or Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), as required by Sections 304 or 305 of this rule.
303 DETERMINATION FOR AMBIENT AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
REQUIREMENTS: Notwithstanding the implementation of RACT or BACT under this
rule, an applicant for a permit or permit revision subject to this rule shall conduct an
ambient air quality impact assessment under Section 308 of this rule upon the Control
Officer’s request. The Control Officer shall make such request, if there is reason to believe
that a new source or minor NSR modification could interfere with attainment or
maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard. In making the determination under
this section of this rule, the Control Officer shall take into consideration:
303.1 The source’s emission rates.
303.2 The location of emission units within the facility and their proximity to the ambient
air.
303.3 The terrain in which the source is or will be located.
303.4 The source type.
303.5 The location and emissions of nearby sources.
303.6 Background concentrations of regulated minor NSR pollutants.
304 BACT REQUIRED: An applicant for a permit or permit revision subject to Rules 210,
220, or 230 of these rules shall implement BACT for each pollutant emitted which exceeds
meets any of the emission threshold limits set forth in any one of the following criteria:
304.1 Any new stationary source which emits has the potential to emit:
a. 40 or more tons/yr of volatile organic compounds; or
b. 40 or more tons/yr of nitrogen oxides; or
c. 40 or more tons/yr of sulfur dioxide; or
d. 15 or more tons/yr of PM10; or
e. 100 or more tons/yr of carbon monoxide; or
f. 10 or more tons/yr of PM2.5; or
172

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
g. 0.3 or more tons/yr of lead.
304.2 Any modified existing stationary source if the modification causes an increase in the
source’s potential to emit in any one of the amounts listed in Sections 304.2(a)-(g) of
this rule. BACT is only required for the emission unit or group of emission units
being modified.
a. 40 or more tons/yr of volatile organic compounds; or
b. 40 or more tons/yr of nitrogen oxides; or
c. 40 or more tons/yr of sulfur dioxide; or
d. 15 or more tons/yr of PM10; or
e. 100 or more tons/yr of carbon monoxide; or
f. 10 or more tons/yr of PM2.5; or
g. 0.3 or more tons/yr of lead.
305 RACT REQUIRED: An applicant for a permit or permit revision for a new or modified
existing stationary source which emits or causes an increase in the source’s potential to emit
in any of the following amounts shall implement RACT for each pollutant emitted from said
new or modified existing stationary source: An applicant for a permit or permit revision
subject to Rules 210, 220, or 230 of these rules shall implement RACT for each pollutant
emitted for which the increase in potential to emit is less than the BACT thresholds set forth
in Section 304 of this rule.
305.1 Up to 40 tons/yr of volatile organic compounds; or
305.2 Up to 40 tons/yr of nitrogen oxides; or
305.3 Up to 40 tons/yr of sulfur dioxide; or
305.4 Up to 15 tons/yr of PM10; or
305.5 Up to 100 tons/yr of carbon monoxide; or
305.6 Up to 10 tons/yr of PM2.5; or
305.7 Up to 0.3 tons/yr of lead.
306 BACT DETERMINATIONS: The Control Officer shall determine BACT, as
appropriate, for each emission unit subject to the BACT requirements under Section 304 of
this rule. BACT shall be determined as follows:
306.1 An applicant for a permit or permit revision for a new or modified stationary source
shall present an emissions analysis to determine whether the future emissions
increase from the project will trigger BACT requirements.
306.2 The applicant shall conduct a BACT analysis for each pollutant which exceeds the
BACT requirement threshold. The applicant may conduct a case-by-case analysis.
173

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
306.3 The applicant may accept legally and practically enforceable limits on the operation
of their source in order to restrict emissions to below the BACT requirement
thresholds and avoid imposition of BACT in accordance with Rule 220, Section 304
of these rules. At such time as If the applicability of any requirement of this rule
would be triggered by an existing source solely by virtue of a relaxation of any
enforceable limitation on the capacity of the source to emit a pollutant, then the
requirements of this rule will apply to the source in the same way as they would
apply to a new or modified source otherwise subject to this rule.
306.4 In the case of a modification, the selection of BACT shall address the emission unit
or group of emission units being modified.
307 RACT DETERMINATIONS: The Control Officer shall determine RACT, as
appropriate, for each emission unit subject to the RACT requirements under Section 305 of
this rule. RACT shall be determined as follows:
307.1 For any facilities source subject to a source-specific rule under Regulation III-
Control of Air Contaminants of these rules, RACT is the emissions limitation of the
existing source performance standard limitations that are applicable to an emission
unit at the time the permit is issued.
307.2 For any facilities source not subject to a source-specific rule under Regulation III-
Control of Air Contaminants of these rules, RACT is the lowest emission limitation
that a particular source is capable of achieving by the application of control
technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility. and shall be determined by one of the following The following sources of
control technology shall be evaluated in making a RACT determination:
a. Technology that may previously have has been applied to a similar, but not
necessarily identical, source category. RACT for a particular facility source is
determined on a case-by-case basis, considering the technological feasibility and
cost-effectiveness of the application of the control technology to the source
category.
b. A control technique guideline issued by the Administrator under section
108(f)(1) of the Act.
c. An emissions standard established or revised by the Administrator for the same
type of source under Sections 111 or 112 of the Act after November 15, 1990.
307.3 In the case of a modification, the selection of RACT shall address the emission unit
or group of emission units being modified.
308 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENTS: An ambient air
quality impact assessment, if required by Section 303 of this rule, must demonstrate that
emissions from the new or modified source or minor NSR modification will not interfere
with attainment or maintenance of any national ambient air quality standard.
308.1 An owner or operator of a source may elect to have the Control Officer perform a
screening model of its emissions. If the results of the screening model indicate that
174

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
the new or modified source or minor NSR modification will interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any national ambient air quality standard, the owner or
operator may perform a more refined model to make the demonstration required by
this rule.
308.2 The requirements of this rule shall be satisfied, if the results of the screen or more
refined modeling conducted pursuant to Section 308.1 of this rule demonstrate either
of the following:
a. Ambient concentrations resulting from emissions from the new or modified
source or modification combined with existing concentrations of regulated minor
NSR pollutants will not cause or contribute to a violation of any national
ambient air quality standard.
b. Emissions from the new or modified source or minor modification will have an
ambient impact below the significance levels as defined in Rule 240-Federal
Major New Source Review (NSR) of these rules.
308.3 The ambient air quality impact assessment required by this rule shall take into
account any limitations, controls, or emissions decreases that are or will be
enforceable in the permit or permit revision for the source.
309 APPLICATION DENIAL: The Control Officer shall deny an application for a Title V
permit or permit revision or a Non-Title V any permit or permit revision subject to this rule,
if:
309.1 An The ambient air quality impact assessment conducted pursuant to Section 308 of
this rule demonstrates that the new or modified source or permit revision will
interfere with attainment or maintenance of any national ambient air quality
standard; or
309.2 The new or modified source will violate applicable State Implementation Plan (SIP)
requirements.
310 PUBLIC NOTICE: Public notice requirements pursuant to Rules 210 and or 220 of these
rules shall be required for a permit or permit revision if the emissions of any one pollutant
are is equal to or greater than the public notice threshold as defined in Rule 100-General
Provisions and Definitions of these rules. The Control Officer shall hold a public hearing
upon written request. If a public hearing is requested, the Control Officer shall schedule the
public hearing and publish a notice once each week for two consecutive weeks in two
newspapers of general circulation in the county where the source is or will be located and by
other means if necessary to assure adequate notice to the affected public. The Control
Officer shall give notice of any public hearing at least 30 days in advance of the public
hearing.
311 NOTICE TO OTHER AGENCIES: A copy of the notice required by Rule 210, Section
408 for permits or significant permit revisions or Rule 220, Section 407 Section 304.4 of
these rules for permits or non-minor permit revisions subject to this rule must also be sent
to the Administrator through the appropriate regional office. The notice also must be sent to
175

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Draft Rule for Board of Supervisors’ Public Hearing: Planning & Analysis Division
December 11, 2019 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Submit Comments on EROP Phoenix, AZ 85012
any other agency in the region having responsibility for implementing the procedures
required under this rule.
312 MODELING REQUIRED: All modeling required pursuant to this rule shall be
conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 51, Appendix W as of July 1, 2019 (and no future
amendments or additions).
313 PERMIT CONDITIONS SPECIFIED PURSUANT TO THIS RULE: The Control
Officer shall specify those conditions in the permit that are implemented pursuant to this
rule. The specified conditions shall be included in subsequent permit renewals unless the
conditions are modified pursuant to this rule or Rule 240-Federal Major New Source Review
(NSR) of these rules.
314 CIRCUMVENTION: The submission of applications for permits or permit revisions for
new or modified sources in phases so as to circumvent the requirements of this section is
prohibited. The burden of proof to show that an application for a permit or permit revision
is not being submitted as a phase of a larger project shall be upon the applicant. A person
shall not build, erect, install, or use any article, machine, equipment, condition, or any
contrivance, the use of which, without resulting in a reduction in the total release of air
contaminants to the atmosphere, conceals or dilutes an emission which would otherwise
constitute a violation of this section. A person shall not circumvent this section to dilute air
contaminants by using more emission openings than is considered normal practice by the
industry or by the activity in question.
315 SOURCE OBLIGATION: The issuance of a permit or permit revision under this rule shall
not relieve the owner or operator of the responsibility to comply fully with applicable
provisions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and any other requirements under local,
State, or Federal law.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS (NOT APPLICABLE)
176

MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, July 23, 2018 at 3:00 pm
205 W. Jefferson Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Auditorium
Return to list of attachments
Vice President Hughes called the meeting to order at 1:39 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Not Present:
Don Cassano Bill Gates
Henri Cournand
Kristen Acton (via phone)
Robert MacMillan
Nedra Halley (via phone)
Don Hughes
Debra Baldauff
Ex-Officio: Max Porter
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Vice President Hughes announced that we have speaker slips for anyone wishing to speak on any action items.
Speakers will be called after the item is heard. Each speaker will have 2 minutes to speak.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Approval of Minutes: Vice President Hughes asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH Meeting
held on April 23, 2018. Motion was made by Mr. Cassano to approve the BOH minutes as presented. Motion
was seconded by Mr. MacMillan and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
2. Election for Board of Health president/vice president
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by Mr.
Don Cassano and seconded by Mr. Cournand and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Robert MacMillan was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by Mr.
Don Cassano and seconded by Dr. Baldauff and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
3. Appointment for Finance Committee vacancies
Mr. Henri Cournand and Ms. Kristen Acton were appointed to the Finance Committee.
4. Fee Waiver Applications Ms. Jeannie Taylor
Ms. Jeannie Taylor presented thirty-eight (38) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A summary
sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the thirty-eight (38) fee waiver applications was made by Mr. Cassano, seconded by Mr.
Cournand and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
177

5. Approval of initiation of regulatory change for Rule 352 (Gasoline Cargo Tank Testing and Use)
and the New Source Review (NSR) rules Mr. Philip A. McNeely
Gregory Verkamp
AQ-2017-009-Rule 352 (Gasoline Cargo Tank Testing and Use): The Maricopa County Air Quality Department
(MCAQD) is proposing to revise Rule 352 to address Environmental Protection Agency comments to ensure the
revised rule meets Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements as required by the Clean Air
Act.
AQ-2017-010-NSR (New Source Review): The MCAQD is revising the NSR rules in order to secure their approval as
part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Federal Clean Air Act.
Mr. Philip A. McNeely director of Air Quality introduced Gregory Verkamp, supervisor of the rules division of the
department.
Mr. Verkamp presented on item number 5. He explained that this is air quality departments request for approval
of the initiation of the regulatory change. Rule 352 (Gasoline Cargo Tank testing and Use) rule and the New Source
Review (NSR) rules. Both rule makings have been before this board before and they’ve also been before the Board
of Supervisors. Both these rules have been submitted to the EPA for inclusion in the Arizona State implementation
plan. The EPA has reviewed the rules and they have some comments they would like us to address in the rules.
We are here today requesting the initiation of the rule makings so we can address the EPA comments so they can
be incorporated into the Arizona State implementation plan. They have had stake holder workshops previous to
this meeting today and they will have more in the future after this meeting, will have future stake holder
workshops and then they’ll come back later after they’ve gone through stakeholder workshops. This is just the
first step requesting these rule makings today.
President Hughes asked we’re just responding to the comments from the EPA and are those are the only changes?
Mr. Verkamp explain that yes they are responding to the EPA comments and there are some smaller changes from
our internal department, rule improvements, but the major changes are EPA. The changes will be going before
our stakeholders for review and comment and this just initiates the process.
Vice President MacMillan asked if as far as the purpose of the rule making is it because of trying to address RACT
for the EPA. Mr. Verkamp explained that is correct, with RACT there’s the control technique guidelines that we
use and the EPA uses to determine RACT. They also look at the GAP rules and the NESHAP rules and the NSPS
rules (New Source Performance Standard Rules) and then they also look at other air districts that have the same
non-attainment status as ourselves. The EPA will look at non-attainment, particularly in region nine, most of the
California districts, they’ll look at those districts and see what their rules look like for districts that are in moderate
non-attainment for ozone such as ours.
Motion was made by Mr. MacMillan for approval of the initiation of regulatory change for Rule 352 (Gasoline
Cargo Tank Testing and Use) and for approval of the New Source Review (NSR) rules. Motion was seconded by
Mr. Cournand and the motion passed unanimously.
6. Make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on the proposed revisions to Rule 316 (Nonmetallic Mineral
Processing) and Rule 320 (Odors and Gaseous Air Contaminants) Mr. Philip A. McNeely
Gregory Verkamp
AQ-2013-001-Rule 316 (Nonmetallic Mineral Processing): The MCAQD is proposing to revise Rule 316 to make the
rule more clear for the regulated community by incorporating alternative control measures and information from
department guidance documents and consolidating all applicable requirements for control of particulate matter
emissions from nonmetallic mineral processing and related operations in a single rule.
178

Mr. Philip A. McNeely presented on Rule 316. He explained that they put all the standards into one rule,
streamlining the rule to make it easier to understand for better compliance.
Mr. McNeely commented that he thinks we should take these rules, 316 and 320 separately. They are two
separate rules.
President Hughes asked what Rule 316 deals with exactly? Mr. McNeely replied sand and gravel, asphalt plants
and concrete plants. It’s a PM-10 Rule. 320 is an odor rule, hydrogen sulfide rule, stack height.
Mr. Cassano clarified that they can make a motion on these rules separately.
Rule 316
There was 1 request for public comment received.
- 1st speaker Linda Butler
Vice President MacMillan asked that you mentioned that 316 was not a loosening of the standard, it was just a
consolidation of different rules, right? Mr. McNeely replied yes, federal standards, 310 and 316 plus some safety
issues. Plus this is in the SIP so this will be approved by EPA, we’ll have to submit this to EPA for approval.
Motion to approve recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on the proposed revisions to Rule
316 (Nonmetallic Mineral Processing) was made by Mr. Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and all
were in favor. Roll call vote was requested.
Vice President MacMillan – AYE
Mr. Cassano – AYE
Ms. Halley – AYE
Ms. Acton – AYE
Mr. Cournand – AYE
Dr. Baldauff – AYE
President Hughes - AYE
Motion passed unanimously.
AQ-2016-004-Rule 320 (Odors and Gaseous Air Contaminants): The MCAQD is proposing to revise Rule 320 to
update and enhance the rule and to clarify MCAQD’s authority so that it is consistent with the intent of the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations and the general air pollution prohibition standard in Rule 100.
Mr. Philip A. McNeely presented on Rule 320.
He explained that they had an oral proceeding at the request of the residents and stakeholders on April 4th and
they’ve revised the rule and made some changes to it. The rule was about 40 years old so the intent was to
enhance it, to clarify the language and to bring it in line with intent of rule 100. There’s nothing in this rule that
prevents us from responding to odor complaints. We have that authority completely in rule 100. There’s nothing
in this rule that’s going to change the way we do our procedures. We’re trying to make it consistent with our
other rules.
Mr. McNeely reviewed the various changes and explained that with the changes they’ve tried to be responsive to
the stakeholder concerns.
 Added definition of odor tied to regulated air pollutant back in.
 Section 305 Titled Odors from Regulated Air Pollutants (Added the word Odor).
 Returned stack height, how high you can put stacks.
 Hydrogen sulfide standard.
179

 Adding in for reduction animal matter.
 Added a monitoring and record keeping section.
There were 18 request for public comment received.
- 1st speaker Jackie Avilla (deferred time to Dan Blackson)
- 2nd speaker Dan Blackson
- 3rd speaker Sonia Lopez
- 4th speaker Billie Fidlin
- 5th speaker Paul Burton
- 6th speaker Sandy Larson
- 7th speaker Carolyn Burton
- 8th speaker Rhonda Mack
- 9th speaker Dan Mack
- 10th speaker Scott Manka
- 11th speaker Timothy Avilla
- 12th speaker Linda Butler
- 13th speaker Lorna Proper
- 14th speaker Steve Love
- 15th speaker Tom Martinez
- 16th speaker Leslie Saunders
- 17th speaker Brent Backus
- 18th speaker Linda Kinman
After all the discussion and all the public comments Mr. President stated that he’s concerned about a number of
things that were discussed today. The fact that you’ve made some major changes in the rule and the community
doesn’t seem to have had the opportunity to review those rule to see if they address the concerns that they have.
I’m bothered by a number of other things and at this point I would like to either deny or table this for further
study.
Mr. Cournand stated that he thinks there’s a lot of questions still within the community that need to be answered.
He doesn’t think there’s a major driving need to try to force this through either way. At this point I think further
study and review make the most sense.
Motion to table the initiation of the rulemaking for proposed revisions to Rule 320 was made by
Mr. Cournand seconded by Dr. Baldauff. Roll call vote was requested.
Vice President MacMillan – AYE
Mr. Cassano – AYE
Ms. Halley – AYE
Ms. Acton – AYE
Mr. Cournand – AYE
Dr. Baldauff – AYE
President Hughes - AYE
180

Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report Max Porter and Dr. Rebecca Sunenshine
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Max Porter stated that as far as the Director’s report we have several initiative, several grants that are new, but I
think we can cover all of that in our next meeting. There’s two issues that have a medical bearing that I’d like you
to hear about from Dr. Sunenshine. They have to do with us. We are critically pushing our herd immunity with
childhood immunization. It’s something that you’ll hear about in the news, especially as we hit our back to
school rush.
Dr. Sunenshine presented on the following (Review attached handouts for details):
 Immunizations
o Maricopa County immunization rates in Kindergarteners have dropped below the threshold for
herd immunity
o We just got our numbers back from Arizona Department of Health Services from 2017.
From 2016 to 2017, the nonmedical immunization exemption rates have risen from five
point four percent to five point nine percent. The reason why that's important is because
94 to 95 percent of the population being immunized is that critical threshold for Herd
Immunity to measles. Measles is the most contagious disease. While we worry about all
the vaccine preventable diseases, Measles is the one we use as a marker. And so right
now if we've got almost six percent of our population who are exempted from receiving
vaccines, we have now crossed the 95 percent threshold. Combined with medical
exemptions, we are just below 94 percent. And this has shown a downward trend for the
last several years.
o There are already six countries in Europe that have lost herd immunity to measles and these are
not developing countries. Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Romania have already lost
herd immunity. If we lose that threshold for herd immunity, it means that the measles will spread
rapidly through our population. Whereas when we're above that threshold, it exposes a couple of
people but then stops. So because we're at this critical point, we are going to work with Maricopa
County and try to do an educational campaign within Maricopa County employees and all the
different departments as well as with the public.
o We're working closely with Arizona Department of Health Services who developed an educational
module, which is an evidence based intervention. Basically anyone who wants to exempt their
child from vaccines would be required to take a five minute educational course online for each
vaccine they want to exempt, and then obtain a certificate so that they could exempt their child.
And what this has been shown to do is make it less convenient to exempt your child. So it's equally
as challenging to go get an appointment at the doctor's office as it is to exempt their children from
vaccines. Whereas now all they have to do is take a form, sign it and fill it out. We have reason to
believe that some folks are actually being handed the form and think that it's their only option for
their children to continue to go to school. We're working with schools to let them know, to give
parents some lead time that they need to go get their kids immunized and not tell them the day
before it's due. So we're trying to get at these convenience exemptions with this module. This
module was developed two years ago. We piloted it in Maricopa County at about 10 schools. It was
really successful. But they have not implemented it yet. They're doing another pilot this year and
our understanding is that there is some push back from certain folks in implementing the module
and we know it's effective, it worked in 181 Michigan and in several other states, so we want you to be

aware of this. If you're hearing about pushback, please know that this module could be the
difference between having these diseases spreading again in our community or not.
Mr. President commented that losing herd immunity is pretty scary. To have measles and some of
these other diseases that really have not been a threat for since I was a kid or before and to have
them come back is just pretty scary.
Dr. Sunenshine commented that Max pointed out that Pima County already has a similar system in
place and they have one of the highest rates of immunizations in the State and we are one of the
lower.
Max commented that one reason Dr. Sunenshine is bringing that to your intention is we're getting
a little bit of pushback and it's not from the individual schools were also getting pushback from the
Department of Education who doesn’t want to add another item for their schools to do. This is of
vital importance and we need you to be aware of the situation as it develops.
Mr. President commented would the Department of Education prefer schools dealing with a big
outbreak of measles.
Max replied No, they are worried about education and the piece and health aspect is not foremost
on their plate. We try to put it foremost on their plate. That’s our job and that’s what we’re trying
to do. So as Dr. Sunenshine goes through these things, we’re doing our best to do that, but if
we're not successful you need to understand that, that might be something that we will have to
bring back before you in order to take action that will get them on board with us. But right now
we're trying to work with them so they see the importance as you do.
Mr. President stated Thank you, I don't want to belabor this, but I would simply point out for the
record that a kid who has measles is not getting educated because he’s at home.
Mr. Cournand asked just a quick question you mentioned, 95 percent is kind of the threshold for
herd immunity. If you were to break apart that five percent, that's not getting the vaccine, could
you either separate between, a tourist coming in from even developed countries that haven't been
vaccinated, that can be an issue. How much of it is really in the schools versus some of the other
ways that I'm anti vaccinated folks can come in. Is it, if we get there, if we got the school situated,
we're at 98. If we got the school situated, we're at 99 or if we got the school situated, it's at 96 and
they're still 4 percent out there for tourists and what have you.
Dr. Sunenshine replied if we're above that threshold of 95 percent, then if someone in a school is
exposed, what we would do is we would remove everyone who is unvaccinated who is exempt
from school so that they couldn't spread it and they would have to stay home for a minimum of 21
days, but then it would not spread efficiently in the school. If we drop below that threshold of 94
and 95 percent, then there's nothing we can do. It will just spread through the population
regardless of who we keep on. We keep them home anyway, but it would spread efficiently.
Mr. Cournand responded Thanks. For what it's worth, the sooner that we can help you in any way
please let us know. Not having Herd Immunity is a non-option, that can't happen.
Dr. Sunenshine continued with her remaining items.
 STDs going up nationwide. Specifically syphilis.
 Maricopa County is the third highest rate of syphilis and gonorrhea in the entire nation. And one of the
tragic pieces of having one of the highest rates of syphilis is that we also have one of the highest rates of
182

congenital syphilis or babies born with syphilis or born deceased, (still birth). The numbers went from 16
babies with syphilis in 2016 and it nearly doubled in 2017 to 30. Nineteen of those were in Maricopa
County. Of the 16 babies with congenital syphilis in 2018, 12 of them are in Maricopa County. What are
we doing about that? Jeanene Fowler can talk to you more about an ad campaign that was rolled out in
the last couple of weeks. We’ve already seen a near doubling of users on our STD site which is a good
thing. We still have some other things to do with Provider Education. They are required to test pregnant
women twice during pregnancy rather than the standard recommendation of just once because of our
high congenital syphilis rates. So we have some education to do with our healthcare providers.
 Those are the two things that we're working right now with the state. We also have some issues in our
tribal areas across the state and we need to be focused on a comprehensive approach.
Max stated we tried to keep it brief. We’re very busy in public health, so we have a lot of things that we
could tell you. We, we're tired just like you so if you do have questions, we're not trying to avoid the
questions, so if you have anything you would like to know, we'll be glad to answer anything.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is October 22, 2018
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Ms. Halley, seconded
by Mr. MacMillan and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 3:56p.m.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Ms. Halley, seconded
by Mr. MacMillan and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 5:23p.m.
183

MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, February 25, 2019 at 1:00 pm
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor, Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Hughes called the meeting to order at 1:02 p.m. Return to list of attachments
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Not Present:
Don Cassano Kristen Acton
Henri Cournand (via phone)
Robert MacMillan
Andrew Rascón
Nedra Halley
Don Hughes
Debra Baldauff
Bill Gates
Ex-Officio: Max Porter
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
President Hughes announced that we have speaker slips for anyone wishing to speak on any action items. Speakers will
be called after the item is heard. Each speaker will have 2 minutes to speak.
No speaker slips were received.
President Hughes introduced our newest member to the Board of Health. Mr. Andrew Rascón, District 5 Board of
Supervisor Appointment. Mr. Rascón works for Southwest Center for HIV/AIDS and runs his own non-profit as well.
Welcome and congratulations Mr. Rascón on your appointment as our newest member.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Approval of Minutes: President Hughes asked for a motion to approve the BOH finance committee minutes from
the BOH Meeting held on July 23, 2018. Motion was made by Mr. MacMillan to approve the BOH finance committee
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Cassano and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
Approval of Minutes: President Hughes asked for a motion to approve the BOH minutes from the BOH Meeting held
on July 23, 2018. Motion was made by Mr. Cassano to approve the BOH minutes as presented. Motion was seconded
by Ms. Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
2. Approval of FY20 OMB budget request Mr. Scot Pitcairn
Mr. Scot Pitcairn presented Department of Public Health’s budget request for FY2020.
For Fiscal Year 2020 Public Health Department’s total base budget request for this year is $58,150,751, a decrease of 6.2%
from the FY19 Revised budget. This consists of no increase to the General Fund budget, this fund remaining flat and on
target, a 9.8% decrease in the Grant Fund budget, and 1% increase in the Special Revenue Fund budget.
184

A summary of our base budget request is as follows:
General Fund $ 12,868,622
Grants Fund 36,271,166
Special Revenue (Fee) Fund 9,010,963
TOTAL $ 58,150,751
Operating Budget
General Fund
The general fund request is shown at target baseline level. No increases are being requested at this time. This is not
intended to imply that all service levels are being adequately met. In order to remain at baseline targets we have budgeted
100% vacancy savings for one division administrator position and our PIO position and have eliminated one program
coordinator position.
Fee Fund
The Fee Fund operating budget is submitted $322,248 below the FY19 Revised budget, reflecting a reduction in the
Childhood Immunization budget that keeps expenditures within anticipated revenues. (This budget will be supplemented
by non-recurring funding).
Grant Fund
The decrease of $4,159,112 in the Grant Fund results from the loss and reduction in several grants, including cuts to WIC,
moving the Ryan White Dental Program to the Ryan White Office, reductions to Healthy Start, and various other grant
losses or reductions.
Non-Recurring Budget
General Fund
The $237,775 in one-time funding in the FY19 budget for the replacement X-Ray equipment at our TB Clinic was removed
from the FY20 budget.
Grant Fund
For FY20 the grant carryover/non-recurring budget is $500,000, an increase of $215,000 over the FY19 budget. This
increase reflects additional carry forward from the Smoke Free Grant and the HPHC (Healthy People Healthy Communities)
integrated IGA grants.
Fee Fund
Following the model used last budget year, we have budgeted funds from our fee fund balance, increasing it from
$593,300 in the current year to $1,000,000 in FY20. Of this amount, $200,000 is budgeted for our policy group. This group
will use these funds for childhood vaccination advocacy and in addressing the opioid epidemic in our county. In addition,
Vital Registration is budgeted $125,000 for expanding the east valley office. The Refugee Medical Assistance Program is
budgeted to use $125,000 since they have run short in funding as a result of the current administration reducing the
number of refugees admitted to the country. The remaining $550,000 is being allocated to address needs in the STD
Control program, Childhood Immunization and other mandated areas.
CSCA and ISF
Last year we requested a review above baseline from the Board of Supervisors due to large deficiencies in our funding.
We are not requesting a review this year but there is a funding gap that the Budget Office and county management are
aware of due to the CSCA and ISF charges placed on the Department. Last year in order to balance our budget, $913,296
was used from our Fee Fund balance and $547,457 was designated from non-departmental funds in the event our indirect
collections were insufficient to cover expenses.
Due to two factors, first the reduction of grant receipts and second the increase over the last several years in CSCA and
Internal Service Charges, our indirect collections are not sufficient to cover our administrative costs, ISF charges and CSCA
185

charges combined. Over the past ten years we have internally reduced our administrative staff by 10 positions, saving
over $850,000. However, these reductions have increased the workload on existing staff to the point that we cannot
reduce internally further and still function properly. Our rent is a sizable part of our internal charges but we cannot reduce
that amount unless we are allowed to purchase a facility. Our current lease runs through 2023 and we are not certain
whether we will be able to legally get out of the lease obligation before the lease expires. This shortfall is projected in our
budget at $685,549. The solution to fill this gap is left open for further discussion before our budget recommendation is
finalized.
For this current fiscal year’s budget, the County Budget Office obligated $547,457 for this projected shortfall. We have
held positions and generated vacancy savings with our director’s position to help reduce the use of this commitment, but
those options will probably not exist in the next budget cycle. We also could tap further into our fee fund balance.
Regardless of the solution for this problem, both of these options are only a Band-Aid and will not solve the problem of
uncontrolled escalations of CSCA and ISF charges being pushed into limited grant funds. Further increases in our indirect
rates will only further decrease the delivery of services for mandated and other services that public health is expected to
provide to our community. Therefore, a more viable, longer-term solution needs to be researched.
We should also note with this budget submission that the base-level operating budget is likely unable to handle an
outbreak or emergency should one occur. The two items we see as likely are: 1) measles epidemiology responses and; 2)
the treatment of MDR or XDR Tuberculosis cases.
During this last year our community, along with large parts of the world, have dropped below the required vaccination
rates in our schools to accomplish the herd immunity effect for disease prevention of vaccine preventable diseases. The
most contagious of these is Measles. Measles outbreaks have occurred throughout Europe and other parts of the world
and have occurred in 26 states during 2018. Europe has been fighting this previously contained disease spread for over a
year. During last year, with a 93% vaccination rate (we are just under 95%) European nations had 64,000 cases of the
disease. The main cost of our response will be in the epidemiological tracking of the outbreak; the cost of these can range
from $50,000 to hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is why we have been so active in the work with the state to
decrease the personal exemptions being given out to parents who do not vaccinate their children with the school-required
immunizations. While the financial costs of these outbreaks are staggering, the risk of blindness, hearing impairment,
pneumonia and death (1-2 deaths out of every 1,000 cases) can have drastic consequences for children and families.
The second concern is one that we have seen during the last few budget years but the frequency seems to be escalating.
This is the occurrence of multi-drug resistant (MDR) and extreme drug resistant (XDR) Tuberculosis (TB). This strain of TB
is immune to the normal cost-effective drugs that we use to treat standard cases and requires two other types of drugs
that are extremely expensive. A single case can easily cost between $100,000 and $150,000 over the course of their 18-
month to 24-month treatment, and this does not include any surgically required responses. Non-compliant patients also
incur court costs and isolation costs. We cannot predict the number of cases we will have, but if they do occur we will
need to request additional funds as we have in the past.
186

Motion to approve the FY20 OMB budget request for Public Health was made by Ms. Halley, seconded by Mr. Cassano
and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously
3. Approval of FY20 OMB budget request Mr. Gus Martinez
Mr. Gus Martinez presented Department of Environmental Services’ budget request for FY2020.
FUND 100 (County General Fund)
Requested budget for Fund 100 operating is $247,221 in revenues and $9,459,591 in expenditures.
Revenues
Agency 880 is funded by the County General Fund subsidy. Environmental Services collects enforcement revenue from
non-permitted activities. These fines are associated with violations of the Environmental Health Code by persons and
organizations not subject to obtaining a permit. Requested budgeted revenues remain at $247,221 with no change
between FY2019 adopted and FY2020 requested.
In FY2019 Environmental Services acquired the waste resources department which is tasked with operating the counties
six transfer stations. These transfer stations collects approximately 220K in transfer station fees annually.
187

Expenditures
Environmental Services General Fund Agency recommended operating budget expenditures are $9,459,591 or .73%
increase from FY19 adopted.
Requested budget includes a slight increase in the amount of supplies and services by 2% or $103,140 for increased costs
in equipment repairs.
Non-Reoccurring Expenditures
The Departments recommended budget includes non-reoccurring expenses in Fund 100 in the amount of $100,003 for
the following:
 IT Recommendations – $100,003
FUND 505 (County Grant Fund)
Requested budget for Fund 505 operating is $67,198 in revenues and $67,198 in expenditures.
Grant Funds
Agency 881 is a grant from the Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services. Environmental
Services was awarded the grant on September 10, 2015 in the amount of $67,198 for FY2020. The grant was approved by
the Board of Supervisors on October 21, 2015. The purpose of the grant is to advance conformance with the voluntary
national retail food regulatory program standards. The purpose of the grant is to advance conformance with the voluntary
national retail food regulatory program standards. This grant will serve in assessing foodborne illness risk factors in
Maricopa County and also provide permitted food operations with educational strategies to reduce the occurrence of
foodborne illness risk factors. In Year 2, Environmental Services is providing education to all Environmental Health staff
for implementing Active Managerial Control (AMC) principles during their inspections and train the operators to do the
same (Train the Trainer). This training is based on the results of the survey conducted in Year 1. Also, MCESD will develop
an AMC Toolbox, consisting of guidance documents, templates, logs, videos, and handouts on policies, training, and
verification. These materials will emphasize the shift to a population that learns through the oral and visual delivery of
information. Access to these materials will be streamlined via inspection reports, website design, and other mobile
platforms. AMC will be further incentivized by increasing public awareness of the Department’s voluntary AMC program:
the “Cutting Edge Food Safety Partnership.” Our Department will develop media to showcase Cutting Edge Program
participants.
Revenues
Revenues remain unchanged from FY2019 to FY2020 requested and are mandated by the terms of the grant.
Expenditures
Expenditures remain unchanged from FY2019 to FY2020 recommended and are mandated by the terms of the grant.
FUND 290 (Waste Tire Fund)
Requested budget for Fund 290 operating are $5,825,000 in revenues and $5,825,000 in expenditures.
Revenues
Revenues are received from the State of Arizona to fully cover the expenses to the county. These fees are not directly
collected by the county; they are collected through the purchase of a tire.
Expenditures
The Tire Fund expense budget has increased 14.97% from FY2019 to FY2020 to accommodate the increase tires received
at the tire recycling facility. Year over year, the fund has seen increased costs based on the number of registered vehicles
in Maricopa County.
FUND 506 (Environmental Fee Fund)
Requested budget for Fund 506 operating are $21,012,670 188 in revenues and $21,001,478 in expenditures.

Revenues
Requested budgeted revenues for Fund 506 are $21,012,670 or $540,701 (3%) above FY2019 adopted.
Pool, food permitting, and environmental plan review are all experiencing a higher than average permit and plan review
submittals resulting in above budgeted revenue. This is primarily due to an uptick in construction projects as the economy
improves.
As plan review in both the Water and Waste and Environmental Health division’s continue to rise, so do the number of
permits being added. Environmental Services expects these trends to continue through FY2020.
Expenditures
Requested budgeted expenses at $21,001,478 or $599,204 (2.85%) above FY19 adopted. Requested budget includes
overall increase in personnel services by $348,968 or 2% with reductions to personal savings to accommodate the
increased workloads. Supplies and services have been increased by $250,236 due to an increase in central services cost
allocations.
Non-Reoccurring Expenditures
The Departments recommended budget includes non-reoccurring expenses in Fund 506 in the amount of $2,117,426 for
the following:
 Vehicles - $750,000
 Overtime – $125,000
 Rent – $93,954
 Contracting Services - $350,000
 IT Recommendations – $798,472
Motion to approve the FY20 OMB budget request for Environment Health was made by Mr. MacMillan, seconded by
Mr. Cassano and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously
4. Fee Waiver Applications Ms. Jeannie Taylor
Ms. Jeannie Taylor presented 60 fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A summary sheet document was
provided.
Motion to approve the 60 fee waivers applications was made by Ms. Halley, seconded by Mr. Cassano and all were in
favor. The motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of initiation of regulatory change for the following rules: Gregory Verkamp
Kimberly Butler
Gregory Verkamp and Kimberly Butler presented 9 Rules for approval of initiation of regulatory changes. Gregory
explained that all rules are the beginning/initiation process. 8 lf the 9 rules EPA is behind them and will ultimately have
to be approved by the EPA.
A. AQ-2017-002
Rule 321 (Municipal Solid Waste Landfills)
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) is proposing to revise Rule 321 to reflect the federal municipal
solid waste landfill emission guidelines as promulgated August 29, 2016 and codified at Title 40 (Protection of
Environment) of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 60 (Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources),
Subpart Cf (Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills). In addition, the MCAQD is
proposing to incorporate changes recommended by stakeholders, and to make other changes to improve and clarify the
rule. 189

Motion to approve Rule 321 (Municipal Solid Waste Landfills) was made by Ms. Halley, seconded by Mr. MacMillan
and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
B. AQ-2017-007
Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations)
Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources)
Rule 324 (Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines)
The MCAQD is proposing to revise Rules 322, 323, and 324 to address rule approvability comments provided by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These changes are required in order for the EPA to approve these rules as
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for control of nitrogen oxides, which are precursors to ozone formation.
The MCAQD is also proposing changes to address rule improvement comments provided by the EPA, to incorporate
changes recommended by stakeholders, and to make other changes to improve and clarify the rules.
Motion to approve Rule 322 (Power Plan Operations), Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment from
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources) and Rule 324 (Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines) was
made by Mr. Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley, and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
C. AQ-2017-009
Rule 350 (Storage and Transfer of Organic Liquids (Non-Gasoline) at an Organic Liquid Distribution Facility)
Rule 351 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Bulk Gasoline Plants and Bulk Gasoline Terminals)
Rule 353 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities)
MCAQD is proposing to revise Rules 350, 351, and 353 to address rule approvability comments provided by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These changes are required in order for the EPA to approve these rules as
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) to reduce volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. The MCAQD is
also proposing changes to address rule improvement comments provided by the EPA, to incorporate changes
recommended by stakeholders, and to make other changes to improve and clarify the rules.
Motion to approve Rule 350 (Storage and Transfer of Organic Liquids (Non-Gasoline) at an Organic Liquid Distribution
Facility), Rule 351 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Bulk Gasoline Plants and Bulk Gasoline Terminals) and Rule 353
(Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities) was made by Mr. MacMillan, seconded by Mr.
Cassano and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
D. AQ-2017-010
Rule 210 (Title V Permit Provisions)
The MCAQD is proposing to revise the MCAQD’s NSR rules in order to secure their approval as part of the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) under the federal Clean Air Act. The MCAQD’s NSR rulemaking is comprised of seven (7) rules,
including Rule 210. All of the NSR rules, with the exception of Rule 210, were approved for the initiation of regulatory
change by the Board of Health at the July 23, 2018 meeting. Rule 210 was not initiated at that time because revisions to
the rule were not anticipated. However, upon review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s)
recommendations, the MCAQD is requesting approval for the initiation of regulatory change in order to revise Rule 210.
Motion to approve Rule 210 (Title V Permit Provisions) was made by Mr. Cassano, seconded by Dr. Baldauff and all
were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
E. AQ-2017-011
Rule 204 (Emission Reduction Credits for Use with the Arizona Emissions Bank)
The MCAQD is proposing to revise Rule 204 to add provisions for nontraditional sources of emission reduction credits.
Currently, the rule only allows for the generation, certification and utilization of emission reduction credits from permitted
190

sources. Proposed revisions include new provisions for the generation, certification, and utilization of emission reduction
credits from nontraditional sources that use truck stop electrification, electric standby equipped transport refrigeration
units, and electric onsite equipment. Revising the rule will provide additional sources of emission reduction credits that
will allow Maricopa County to move towards attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards while still allowing
industrial growth.
Motion to approve Rule 204 (Emission Reduction Credits for Use with the Arizona Emissions Bank) was made by Mr.
Cassano, seconded by Dr. Baldauff and all were in favor. The motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report Max Porter
I. Human Resources
II. Communication
III. Infrastructure
IV. Strategic Planning
V. Programs
VI. Disease Update
VII. Future Topics
Max Porter presented the Director’s Public Health Report.
The budget isn’t quite as depressing as the picture that was presented to you. Yes we have some concerns when it comes
to our indirect balance, the central service cots, the ISF funds (administrative costs) that we’re hit with. This isn’t just a
concern for us, it’s a concern for all grant funded departments or any department that has a grant. Budget office is looking
into it and is looking for a solution. They understand that it’s not sustainable the way it’s going. We are working with
them. We have sufficient funds for this year to get through. We have a year to work through this and get to a solution.
Our department (Public Health) and Human Services are both heavily, heavily grant funded. We are both under the same
Assistant County Manager Lee Ann Bohn. She is dedicated to working through this year to try to find a solution for that
problem. We will get through this year. We will do what we always do and we will have a successful year. I do want you
to be aware that it’s not quite as bleak as the picture would look on paper. We are a viable department and we are doing
some wonderful things.
We are part of the Big Cities Health Coalition. We’re not a city, we’re a county but we are the 3rd largest Health jurisdiction
in the Country behind New York and LA. Majority of Health departments are run through the City organizations
throughout the Country, your large metropolis areas. Back in the 50’s it was consolidated that all to the Counties because
we could consolidate better across city borders if we did it all in one. We’re the 3rd largest. Part of being a part of this Big
Cities Health Coalition it allowed us to go back to the meetings this year and we meet with the head of the CDC. We
explained to them that part of the problem we are seeing in our Health Departments is that you’re (the CDC) is sending
funding from the federal government, majority of our funding comes from the federal government, to the State. The State
dictates how they will meet deliverables which often don’t work for an urban area like we are and rural areas. So the
funding they are sending down is going through another massaging at the State level. The State is taking out administrative
expenses and then it goes down to the County department level and fewer and fewer services after each one of these
things happen are reaching the people. The CDC heard us. So in three months from that meeting we received our first
notice from the CDC that they are sending out instead of a grant a cooperative agreement. It’s a guaranteed receipt of
funds. We will be getting a new addition of 2.5 million dollars directly from the CDC for OPIOID control. The OPIOID
Cooperative Agreement guaranteed funding will hit us in August. We are hoping that this will be a beginning of the way
grant funding will flow to us. It gives us a lot better ability to change direction when a new problem hits us. Rather than
waiting for the State to determine that it is a problem this will give us the ability to change a grant deliverable directly.
We’re hoping that, that will be a good change for the future of the way our funding comes in.
191

As part of the director’s report here, the big question that if you don’t have you should have is when are we going to get
a new director? We are moving towards that direction. We have some very viable candidates that are in, we have some
good resumes and we’re doing interviews now. So we are hopeful that by your next meeting you will have a real director
that will be giving you this report. We’re hopeful that someone will be here and if they’re not here we will at least have
the name and date of when they will be here.
Childhood Vaccinations
You’re seeing reports almost daily in the news about childhood vaccinations. There is a huge debate with a large amount
of anti-vaxxers, I shouldn’t say large, there is a loud contingency of anti-vaxxers that are in the community. You have to
remember that we lost our herd immunity with our childhood immunizations.
 The majority of the population understand the importance of immunizations. They understand that they have to
participate if we’re going to protect the entire populous.
 There are also 2-3% can’t get vaccinations, they are people that are under treatment for cancer or they are
immune suppressed.
 The anti-vaxxers make up about 3% and they are extremely loud and they’re campaigning against vaccinations.
 6 bills in legislature
o 3 of the bills could really damage our vaccinations
o The anti-vaxxers are pushing harder and harder to give people personal exemptions for whatever reason.
o With legislation we can’t lobby, all we can do is educate.
o The Arizona Partnership for Immunization (TAPI),
Right now should be our peak of flu season
 H1N1 is hitting again
Congenital Syphilis
 Maricopa County Congenital Syphilis rates have doubled in the last 2 years.
 We have been said to be #1 in the nation, we are actually #5
 By statute – 1st trimester tested, 3rd trimester tested
o While it’s horrible the fix is simple
 Tested at delivery
 AHCCCS is on board
 Physicians reminded to test for syphilis in pregnant women
Community Health Survey
 MaricopaHealthMatters.org
 Why the Health Survey Matters
o Every three years, Maricopa County Department of Public Health, in collaboration with health care
and community partners, conducts a Community Health Survey to develop a deeper understanding
from residents about issues that relate to quality of life, availability of services, physical and mental
health, and more.
o The survey is part of a larger review of community health. This goes beyond individual health to look
at what is affecting the community overall, what health issues are affecting some communities more
than others, and what other factors contribute to those issues.
o This research is supported by Synapse, a collaboration of healthcare partners, and the Health
Improvement Partnership of Maricopa County (HIPMC).
o It is part of a broader review of the community’s health conducted in collaboration with seven
healthcare partners and over one hundred community organizations.
o MCDPH needs this to remain an accredited health department.
o Questions come from the National Association of County and City Health Organizations (NACCHO),
the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) and MCDPH staff, and are finalized for 2019.
o Data from this survey and the countywide health review are used to target programs, funds, and
attention to health needs with the greatest 192 potential for impact and improvement.

 How the Survey is Being Conducted
o Goal is 15,000 surveys countywide with representation from all cities and towns
o Responses will be collected from March 1-May 31, 2019
o Robust outreach plan developed with partner organizations assisting in data collection
 What You Get and How You Can Help
 What you can get
o Access to de-identified data
o More responses will allow for more segmentation in data analysis
 How you can help
o Take the survey as a county resident
o Utilize MCDPH outreach toolkit to share the survey with your personal and professional networks
o Possible partnership with MCDPH epidemiologists to clean and analyze data
Community Health Improvement Plan – Grant Opportunity
 Shared Use - https://www.maricopa.gov/4386/Shared-Use
 Opening doors to physical activity and healthy eating.
 Opportunities for physical activity and access to healthy food are essential for health at all ages and stages
of life.
 Many neighborhoods throughout Maricopa County have limited access to spaces for children, youth, adults,
and seniors to easily choose to be active and to eat more nutritious food.
 By opening doors and expanding access to existing facilities, we can improve health and well-being across the
community.
 Maricopa County Department of Public Health (MCDPH) is offering grant funding up to $5000, per site, to
increase the number of spaces in under-served areas, so those community residents can: play exercise and
take part in recreational activities, grow healthy food and participate in nutrition related activities.
 Goal 100 schools opened
 $100,000 ($1500 - $5000 increments)
 School, Church or any public access
 Grant open until June 30th or until funding is gone
 Interested candidates must submit their response either by mail or email no later than May 31, 2019. For full
details, a copy of the request for quote (RFQ), or to submit a response, please visit: bit.ly/opendoorsgrant
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next Meeting – April 22, 2019
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Ms. Halley, seconded by
Mr. Cassano and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned.
193

Copies of All Written and Electronic Stakeholder Input
Return to list of attachments
From: noreply@civicplus.com [mailto:noreply@civicplus.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2018 10:00 AM
To: Brent Comon ‐ OETX <comonb@mail.maricopa.gov>; Regulatory <regulations@mail.maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Other
First Name David
Last Name Thorley
Organization Waste Management
City Houston
Zip 77002
Email dthorley@wm.com
Phone Number 713-201-3752
Phone Type Mobile
Would you like someone No
to contact you?
Comments My comment is regarding the change in the definition of
particulate matter (PM) to include "gaseous" emissions.
Gaseous emissions include condensables that are not included
in many historic PM emission factors that have been used to
permit PM emissions in the past and currently. Many of the PM
194

emission factors that are currently employed only include the
"filterable" portion of PM, so when the PM definition is
expanded to include the condensables that are part of the
gaseous emissions, if the source is tested, it may no longer be
able to comply since additional condensable PM was added to
the definition while they were not part of the obtained permit
limit. For landfills, the PM emission factor for combustion of
landfill gas is from AP-42, Section 2.4., in which, this emission
factor is only based on "filterable" emissions. If additional PM is
added to the definition that was never considered or
understood at the time of permitting, and then if the site is
required to test for all PM under the new definition, it then has a
chance to fail the test, even though the source continues to
operate in compliance based on the understanding of PM
emissions at the time of permitting. Furthermore, the EPA has
not updated any PM emission factors to include the
condensables for flares and still relies on the emission factor
for only the filterable portion. This scenario came to light at a
facility in NY that was required to test for all PM even though it
was only permitted for the filterable portion of the PM. The site
was below its PM limit if just filterable emissions were
considered, however, since the site had to also test for the
condensable portion of PM, it tested above its permitted limit
(that never included condesables in the first place). Therefore,
the concern is that if the definition of PM is expanded to include
"gaseous" emissions, many of the previous permits may be
based on only filterable PM emissions, and sites should not be
penalized for not changing any emissions when a definition is
expanded to beyond its original scope when permitted.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
195

July 25, 2018
Mr. Philip McNeely
Director
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 N. Central Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85004
RE: Draft Revisions to New Source Review Rules
I appreciate the opportunity to submit comments on the draft Minor New Source Review
(NSR) rule package dated July 23, 2018. Proposed changes to the draft rules are
provided below.
MCAQD Rule 100, Section 200.56, Paragraph e., Definition of Insignificant Activity,
Internal Combustion Equipment
Suggested Language: IC engine-driven compressors, IC engine-driven electrical
generator sets, and IC engine-driven water pumps used only for emergency replacement
or standby service (including testing of the same), if annual emissions do not exceed
4,000 pounds of NOx or CO and IC engines are each engine is operated less than 500
hours per year.
Explanation: The introductory paragraph of Rule 100, Section 200.57 provides thresholds
that apply to all insignificant activities. There is no need to repeat the language in this
paragraph. The operating hour threshold should apply to each unit. This change should
also be included in Rule 200, Section 305.7.
MCAQD Rule 100 Section 200.64, Paragraph c, Definition of Minor NSR Modification
Suggested Language: A change covered by Sections 200.6(a) or (b) of this rule
constitutes a minor NSR modification regardless of whether there will be a net decrease
in total source emissions or a net increase in total source emissions that is less than the
minor NSR modification threshold as a result of decreases in the potential to emit of other
emission units at the same stationary source. However, if an ambient air quality impact
assessment under Rule 241, Section 308, is required for the change, the assessment
196

Mr. Philip McNeely
July 25, 2018
Page 2
shall consider any proposed decreases in the potential to emit of other emission units at
the same stationary source, if the applicant requests such consideration.
Explanation: The purpose of Rule 241, is to provide a procedure for the review of minor
new sources and minor modifications for the protection of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). Allowing consideration of proposed emission decreases at the
source does not affect attainment or maintenance of NAAQS and encourages
replacement of out-dated equipment. For example, if an applicant proposes to install a
new gas-fired turbine and dismantle an old gas-fired boiler, the emissions decrease
associated with the old boiler should be considered in the ambient air quality impact of
the overall project.
MCAQD Rule 100 Section 200.64, Paragraph d(9), Definition of Minor NSR
Modification
Suggested Language: An increase in the hours of operation, fuel use, or in the production
rate, unless the change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable permit
condition established after December 12, 1976, under 40 CFR 52.21, or under Rules 210,
220, 240, or 241 of these rules. An increase in hours of operation, fuel use, production
rate or an emission limit that was accepted prior to February 3, 2016, to avoid
classification as a major source is not a physical change or a change in the method of
operation.
Explanation: There are a number of sources in Maricopa County that accepted permit
limits to avoid classification as a major source during a time that the major source
threshold was below the current values. The proposed change would allow those sources
to increase their operating rates and emission limits without being subject to BACT or an
ambient air quality assessment as long as the increase could have been accommodated
prior to the adoption of the thresholds in Rule 241.
MCAQD Rule 241, Section 103, Exemption
Suggested Language: The provisions of this rule shall not apply to the emissions of a
pollutant from any of the activities identified in Section 102 of this rule, if the emissions of
that pollutant are subject to major source requirements under Rule 240 (Federal Major
New Source Review (NSR)) of these rules. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to
equipment and operations considered insignificant or trivial under Rule 100, Section
197

Mr. Philip McNeely
July 25, 2018
Page 3
200.57, even if the group of equipment and operations is greater than applicable
thresholds. For example, each piece of natural gas-fired equipment rated at less than
300,000 Btu per hour is exempt from the provisions of this rule even if the combined rated
capacity of natural-gas fired equipment is over 2,000,000 Btu per hour.
Explanation: Insignificant and trivial activities are associated with very low emission rates.
The best available control technology (BACT) and dispersion modeling requirements of
Rule 241 are overly burdensome for activities with low emission rates.
MCAQD Rule 241, Section 303, Determination for Ambient Air Quality Impact
Assessment
Suggested Language: Notwithstanding the implementation of RACT or BACT under this
rule, an applicant for a permit subject to this rule shall conduct an ambient air quality
impact assessment under Section 308 of this rule upon the Control Officer’s request. The
Control Officer shall make such request, if there is reason to believe that a new source or
minor NSR modification could interfere with attainment or maintenance of a national
ambient air quality standard. The Control Officer shall not require an ambient air quality
impact assessment if the post-change site-wide potential to emit for the source will
decrease or remain unchanged.
Explanation: It is assumed that the Control Officer would not request dispersion modeling
if the overall source emissions will not increase. The proposed rule language would
provide clarification.
MCAQD Rule 241, Section 308.3, Ambient Air Quality Impact Assessment
Suggested Language: The assessment required by this rule shall take into account any
limitations, controls, or emissions decreases that are or will be enforceable in the permit
or permit revision for the source. The assessment shall not take into account particulate
matter emissions from natural-gas fired equipment or emissions from equipment or
operations considered insignificant or trivial under Rule 100, Section 200.57, even if the
group of equipment and operations is greater than the applicable thresholds of Rule 100,
Section 200.57.
Explanation: Natural gas combustion is associated with very low particulate matter
emissions and should be exempt from the ambient air quality impact assessment as
emissions are unlikely to interfere with attainment or maintenance of a national ambient
198

Mr. Philip McNeely
July 25, 2018
Page 4
air quality standard. Similarly, emissions from insignificant and trivial activities are unlikely
to interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS.
Thank you, in advance, for your consideration. If you have any questions or need any
additional information, please call me at 480-965-1893.
Sincerely,
Suzanne M. Kennedy
Associate Director
Environmental Compliance
199

From: noreply@civicplus.com [mailto:noreply@civicplus.com]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:16 AM
To: Regulatory <regulations@mail.maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Express support
First Name Jane
Last Name Magee
Organization Field not completed.
City Tonopah
Zip 85354
Email jmagee8822@gmail.com
Phone Number 4804669288
Phone Type Mobile
Would you like someone No
to contact you?
Comments Field not completed.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
200

From: noreply@civicplus.com [mailto:noreply@civicplus.com]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:19 AM
To: Regulatory <regulations@mail.maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Express support
First Name Dan
Last Name Mack
Organization Self
City Tonopah
Zip 85354
Email macks1985@gmail.com
Phone Number 9167594291
Phone Type Mobile
Would you like someone Yes
to contact you?
Comments I am in support of adding ammonia as a precursor and keeping
odors in the definitions. Thank you, Dan Mack.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
201

From: noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:23 AM
To: Regulatory <regulations@mail.maricopa.gov>
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Express support
First Name Rhonda
Last Name Mack
Organization Self
City Tonopah
Zip 85354
Email macks405@sbcglobal.net
Phone Number 9167594291
Phone Type Mobile
Would you like someone to No
contact you?
Comments Field not completed.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
202

From: noreply@civicplus.com
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:24 AM
To: Regulatory
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Express support
First Name Linda
Last Name Butler
Organization Field not completed.
City Tonopah
Zip 85354
Email fyremike@earthlink.net
Phone Number 8054525450
Phone Type Mobile
Would you like someone to No
contact you?
Comments I'm in favor of the proposed changes, and for recognizing
ammonia as a pollutant.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
203

From: noreply@civicplus.com
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:27 AM
To: Regulatory
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Express support
First Name sandy
Last Name larson
Organization Field not completed.
City tonopah
Zip 85354
Email sandylar46@gmail.com
Phone Number 602 885 1860
Phone Type Mobile
Would you like someone to No
contact you?
Comments Field not completed.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
204

205

From: noreply@civicplus.com [mailto:noreply@civicplus.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 7:59 AM
To: regulations@mail.maricopa.gov
Subject: Online Form Submittal: Citizen Comments
Citizen Comments
Each Regulatory Department is committed to providing opportunities for
stakeholder input regarding the adoption and amendment of all regulatory
requirements. Your input will be collected and forwarded to the appropriate
department. You will receive a written response from the applicable department
within two business days. We appreciate your comments and your time.
Case Number/Rule AQ-2017-010 New Source Review (NSR)
Department Air Quality
I would like to Express support
First Name Dan
Last Name Blackson
Organization Field not completed.
City Tonopah
Zip 85354
Email blackson.daniel@yahoo.co,
Phone Number 623-386-5160
Phone Type Home
Would you like someone Field not completed.
to contact you?
Comments Field not completed.
If applicable, attach Field not completed.
supporting documentation
associated with your
comment.
206

Return to list of attachments
AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR) Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Supporting Documentation: December 11, 2019 Planning & Analysis Division
Submit Comments on EROP 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Below are two deficiencies that were included in the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s (EPA’s) final conditional approval of the MCAQD’s NSR submittal (66 FR 13543,
April 5, 2019). Also, included below are the MCAQD’s demonstration and justification for
such deficiencies.
3. Rule 200, Section 305.1(c) (Exemptions for Agricultural Equipment Used in Normal
Farm Operations)
Deficiency: The MCAQD must provide a basis under 40 CFR 51.160(e) to demonstrate the
regulation of the equipment (i.e., agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations)
exempted in Rule 200, Section 305.1(c) is not needed for the MCAQD’s program to meet
federal NSR requirements for attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS or review for
compliance with the control strategy.
MCAQD’s Demonstration: 40 CFR 51.160(e) states each state implementation plan (SIP) must
“identify types and sizes of facilities, buildings, structures or installations which will be subject to
review under this section. The plan must discuss the basis for determining which facilities will be
subject to review.”
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations Rule 200 (Permit Requirements) provides
criteria for determining which facilities will be subject to review. Rule 200 provides that
emissions of regulated air pollutants from stationary sources used in normal farm operations are
subject to review; however, Rule 200 exempts agricultural equipment used in normal farm
operations from review and the basis for this is found in the Arizona Revised Statutes.
Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Section 305.1(c) exempts agricultural equipment used in
normal farm operations from requiring a permit and this reflects what is in Arizona Revised
Statutes: “The following sources shall not require a permit, unless the source is a major source or
unless operation without a permit would result in a violation of the Act…Agricultural equipment
used in normal farm operations. Agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations, for the
purposes of this rule, does not include equipment that would otherwise require a permit under
Title V of the Act or is subject to a standard under 40 CFR parts 60, 61 or 63.” Likewise, the
Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-302(C) (Applicability; Registration; Classes of Permits) has
the same exemption and is worded similarly. R18-2-302(C) has been approved by the EPA and
is in the Arizona SIP.
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (MCAQD) has authority to issue permits to
stationary sources but not to motor vehicles, agricultural vehicles or agricultural equipment used
in normal farm operations or fuel burning equipment rated at less than one million British
thermal units per hour if not located at a one or two family residence. This authority is granted
in Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-480(A) (Permits; fees) and A.R.S. § 49-426(B) (Permits;
duties of director; exceptions; applications; objections; fees):
A.R.S. § 49-480(A): The board of supervisors [Maricopa County] may adopt a program for the
review, issuance, revision, administration and enforcement of permits and for public review of
proposed permits for sources that are subject to section 49-426, subsection A, that are not under
the jurisdiction of the state pursuant to section 49-402 and that are not otherwise exempt
pursuant to section 49-426, subsection B and subsection K of this section.
207

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR) Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Supporting Documentation: December 11, 2019 Planning & Analysis Division
Submit Comments on EROP 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
A.R.S. § 49-426(B): The provisions of this section shall not apply to motor vehicles, to
agricultural vehicles or agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations, or to fuel burning
equipment which, at a location or property other than a one or two family residence, is rated at
less than one million British thermal units per hour.
A.R.S. does not provide a definition for “normal farm operations” but does identify “regulated
agricultural activities” in A.R.S. § 49-457(P)(5) (Agricultural best management practices
committee; members; powers; permits; enforcement; preemption; definitions): “For the
purposes of this section, unless the context otherwise requires…Regulated agricultural activities
means (a) Commercial farming practices that may produce PM-10 particulate emissions within
the regulated area, including activities of a dairy, a beef cattle feed lot, a poultry facility and a
swine facility; (b) Only in those regulated areas that are established after June 1, 2009, as
prescribed in paragraph 6, subdivision (c) of this subsection, activities on an irrigation district
that is governed by title 48, chapter 19.”
Fugitive dust (PM10) emissions from regulated agricultural activities are regulated by A.R.S. § 49-
457 (Agricultural Best Management Practices), which is in the Arizona SIP and which is codified
in Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-609 (Agricultural Practices) through 613.01; R18-2-610
(Definitions) through 612.01 (Agricultural PM General Permit for Crop Operations; Moderate
PM Nonattainment Areas, Designated After June 1, 2009) are in the Arizona SIP.
According the 2017 U.S. Department of Agriculture census, Maricopa County has 1,874 farms.
Approximately 1,144 farms (60%) are less than 10 acres in size and are not considered farms;
therefore, such farms are not regulated under A.R.S. § 49-457(P)(5) (Agricultural Best
Management Practices). Regulation of emissions from farms less than 10 acres in size is not
needed to attain or maintain any NAAQS in Maricopa County and it is not necessary to subject
such farms to review for compliance with the control strategy.
Approximately 430 farms (40%) in Maricopa County are regulated by A.R.S. § 49-457(P)(5)
(Agricultural Best Management Practices) and Arizona Administrative Code R18-2-609 through
613.01 but are not subject to New Source Review (NSR). The Arizona Governor’s Agricultural
Best Management Practices Committee evaluated potential measures to further reduce PM10
emissions from agriculture for consideration for the MAG 2007 Five Percent Plan For PM10 For
The Maricopa County Nonattainment Area. This Committee was established by law in 1998
(A.R.S. § 49-457) to develop an agricultural PM10 general permit that would address the need for
controls on agricultural operations.
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) enforces R18-2-609 through
613.01, which are general rules that require all agricultural operations across the state to take
reasonable precautions to minimize dust emissions. In addition to these rules, operations in
PM10 nonattainment areas are required to abide by more specific requirements, including
maintaining an Agricultural Best Management Practices Permit Record for an agricultural
operation or concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) if it is greater than 10 adjoining
acres in size and/or meets animal number thresholds. An Agricultural Best Management
Practices Permit Record must be kept up-to-date and made available within two business days of
notice to the operator.
208

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR) Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Supporting Documentation: December 11, 2019 Planning & Analysis Division
Submit Comments on EROP 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
The permit exemption in Rule 200 (Permit Requirements), Section 305.1(c) states agricultural
equipment used in normal farm operations does not require a permit, unless the equipment
would otherwise require a permit under Title V of the Act or unless the equipment is subject to
a standard under 40 CFR parts 60, 61 or 63. As written, the permit exemption appears to apply
to all emissions from agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations. ADEQ regulates
Agricultural Best Management Practices which regulate the emissions of fugitive dust. The
MCAQD regulates emissions of all other regulated air pollutants, i.e., PM2.5, carbon monoxide
(CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen dioxide (NOx), ozone and sulfur dioxide (SO2), in amounts greater
than the permitting thresholds from stationary sources in normal farm operations.
The MCAQD proposes to delete the permit exemption in Section 305.1(c) and replace it with a
revised exemption in new Section 305.2(i). The revised exemption will be limited to fugitive
emissions from agricultural equipment used in normal farm operations.
Because the MCAQD regulates emissions of regulated air pollutants from stationary sources
used in normal farm operations, because the agriculture equipment exemption only applies to
fugitive emissions from agriculture equipment used in normal farm operations, and because
ADEQ regulates fugitive dust (PM10) emissions from agriculture equipment used in normal farm
operations, the MCAQD believes its permitting program meets federal NSR requirements for
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
8. Definitions to be Retained in the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Deficiency: Certain definitions that the MCAQD proposed be removed from the approved State
Implementation Plan (SIP) are used in other SIP rules and therefore cannot be removed from
the SIP without further justification.
MCAQD’s Justification: See the table below.
Definition Current SIP Usage Justification
Begin Actual Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
Construction (AZ R9-3-101,
Section 20)  Revise definition in Rule 100 to match the
federal definition in 40 CFR § 51.166
(Prevention Of Significant Deterioration
Of Air Quality), which matches definition
in Rule 21
Dust Rule 2, Section 27  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100; the new
definition strengthens the SIP because it:
 Removes “fuel burning” and
“combustion” which generate
“particulate matter” instead of “dust”
209

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR) Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Supporting Documentation: December 11, 2019 Planning & Analysis Division
Submit Comments on EROP 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Definition Current SIP Usage Justification
 Removes the examples of what causes
dust; these are more accurately
included in the SIP definitions of
“dust-generating operation” in Rules
310, 310.01 and 316
Emission Rule 2, Section 29  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Existing Source Rule 2, Section 34  Remove from the SIP
Performance Standards
 Remove the phrase “existing source
performance standard” from:
 Rule 100, Definition of “RACT”
 Rule 240, Section 302.2 (Application
Completeness)
 Rule 241, Section 307.1 (RACT
Determinations)
Fly Ash Rule 2, Section 37  Remove from the SIP
 Add to the SIP Rule 316 as submitted on
November 19, 2018, which contains the
definition of “fly ash”
Fuel Rule 2, Section 39  Remove from the SIP
Rule 21, Section D.1  Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
(AZ R9-3-101, definition in SIP Rule 2
Section 68)
Fuel Burning Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
Equipment (AZ R9-3-101,
Section 69)  Add to the SIP Rules 322 and 323 when
submitted; Rules 322 and 323 apply to
specific types of equipment, which are
defined in Rules 322 and 323
Fume Rule 2, Section 42  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Modification Rule 2, Section 11  Remove from the SIP
210

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR) Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Supporting Documentation: December 11, 2019 Planning & Analysis Division
Submit Comments on EROP 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Definition Current SIP Usage Justification
 Remove the phrase “any relevant de
minimis amount from Rule 100,
Definition of “Modification”; Rules 210,
240, and 241 already explain the permitting
and compliance implications of
modifications, i.e. what modifications
trigger permit revision, logging,
notification, BACT, RACT
Motor Vehicle Rule 2, Section 55  Remove from the SIP
Rule 21, Section D.1  Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
(AZ R9-3-101, definition in SIP Rules 2 and 21
Section 96)
Non-Point Source Rule 2, Section 59  Remove from the SIP
 Do not add to the SIP; definition does
not support any SIP rules
Odors Rule 2, Section 60  Remove from the SIP
 Do not add to the SIP; dictionary
definition is sufficient
Organic Solvent Rule 2, Section 64  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Photochemically Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
Reactive Solvent (AZ R9-3-101,
Section 117)  Do not add to the SIP; definition does
not support any SIP rules
Plume Rule 2, Section 70  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Process Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
(AZ R9-3-101,
Section 124)  Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Process Source Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
(AZ R9-3-101,
Section 125)  Add to the SIP Rule 316 as submitted on
November 19, 2018, which contains the
definition of “process source”
211

AQ-2017-010-New Source Review (NSR) Maricopa County Air Quality Dept.
Supporting Documentation: December 11, 2019 Planning & Analysis Division
Submit Comments on EROP 3800 N. Central Ave. Ste. 1400
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Definition Current SIP Usage Justification
Significance Levels Rule 2, Section 79 Remove from the SIP; term is incorporated
by reference in Rule 240
Smoke Rule 2, Section 80  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Soot Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
(AZ R9-3-101,
Section 147)  Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Supplementary Control Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
System (SCS) (AZ R9-3-101,
Section 152)  Do not add to the SIP; definition does
not support any SIP rules
Vapor Rule 2, Section 91  Remove from the SIP
 Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
Vapor Pressure Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
(AZ R9-3-101,
Section 159)  Do not add to the SIP; definition does
not support any SIP rules
 Revise Rule 100, Definition of
“Insignificant Activity-Storage and
Distribution” by adding a method for
determining vapor pressure and specifying
which type of vapor pressure should be
used to determine if an activity is
insignificant
Visible Emissions Rule 21, Section D.1  Remove from the SIP
(AZ R9-3-101,
Section 160)  Add definition in Rule 100 identical to the
definition in SIP Rule 2
212