Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, 21697-21703 [2017-09387]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
The Office is removing the position/title
and address fields for the primary and
secondary account contacts from the
system; the Office has determined that
such information is not necessary for
Office communications. The
organization field and fields relating to
the secondary contact will remain, but
will be made optional, as certain service
providers might find it useful to include
this information. Nonetheless, the Office
still strongly encourages all service
providers to provide a secondary
contact as a backup to best ensure that
important communications from the
Office—especially renewal reminders—
reach the appropriate person.
Because the current regulation only
requires this information for
administrative purposes, this final rule
is a non-substantive, procedural change
not ‘‘alter[ing] the rights or interests of
parties,’’ and thus is not subject to the
notice and comment requirements of the
Administrative Procedure Act.3
Furthermore, the Office finds good
cause that permitting notice and
comment would be ‘‘contrary to the
public interest’’ in this instance.4
Because this final rule will make it even
easier and faster for service providers to
register an account with the new
system, and should reduce any
confusion or burden on smaller service
providers, it is in the public’s best
interest that it take effect without delay.
For these same reasons, the Office is
making this final rule effective on May
10, 2017, when updates to the electronic
system will be made to implement it.5
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Parts 201 and
202
Copyright.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Final Regulations
For the reasons set forth above, the
Copyright Office amends 37 CFR part
201 as follows:
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
1. The authority citation for part 201
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 702.
§ 201.1
2. Amend § 201.1 by removing
paragraph (c)(3) and redesignating
paragraphs (c)(4) through (8) as
paragraphs (c)(3) through (7),
respectively.
3. Amend § 201.2 in paragraph (b)(5)
by removing ‘‘201.1(c)(5)’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘201.1(c)’’.
3. Amend § 201.38 as follows:
■ a. In paragraph (b)(1)(ii), remove ‘‘an
email address and/or physical mail
address’’ and add in its place ‘‘an email
address’’; and
■ b. Revise paragraph (c)(1)(i).
The revision reads as follows:
■
§ 201.38 Designation of agent to receive
notification of claimed infringement.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) The first name, last name,
telephone number, and email address of
a representative of the service provider
who will serve as the primary point of
contact for communications with the
Office.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 202—PREREGISTRATION AND
REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO
COPYRIGHT
4. The authority citation for part 202
continues to read as follows:
Authority 17 U.S.C. 408(f), 702
[Amended]
4. Amend § 202.5 in paragraph (d) by
removing ‘‘201.1(c)(4)’’ and adding in its
place ‘‘201.1(c)’’.
■
Dated: April 19, 2017.
Karyn Temple Claggett,
Acting Register of Copyrights and Director
of the U.S. Copyright Office.
Carla D. Hayden,
Librarian of Congress.
[FR Doc. 2017–09395 Filed 5–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
In Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, parts 1 to 49, revised as of
July 1, 2016, on page 517, in § 35.6280,
paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 35.6280
[Amended]
■
§ 202.5
40 CFR Part 35
CFR Correction
[Amended]
■
§ 201.2
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
State and Local Assistance
■
3 See Nat’l Mining Ass’n v. McCarthy, 758 F.3d
243, 250 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (‘‘The critical feature of
a procedural rule is that it covers agency actions
that do not themselves alter the rights or interests
of parties, although it may alter the manner in
which the parties present themselves or their
viewpoints to the agency.’’) (internal quotation
marks omitted); 5 U.S.C. 553(b) (notice and
comment not required for ‘‘interpretative rules,
general statements of policy, or rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice’’).
4 See 5 U.S.C. 553(b) (notice and comment not
required ‘‘when the agency for good cause finds
. . . that notice and public procedure thereon are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest’’).
5 See id. § 553(d) (‘‘The required publication or
service of a substantive rule shall be made not less
than 30 days before its effective date, except—(1)
a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an
exemption or relieves a restriction; (2) interpretative
rules and statements of policy; or (3) as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause found and
published with the rule.’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
PART 201—GENERAL PROVISIONS
21697
Sfmt 4700
Payments.
(a) * * *
(2) Interest. The interest a recipient
earns on an advance of EPA funds is
subject to the requirements of 2 CFR
200.305.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–09486 Filed 5–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0308; FRL–9961–86–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor
Recovery Requirements for Gasoline
Dispensing Facilities
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The revision includes
regulatory amendments that allow
gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs)
located in Northern Virginia,
Fredericksburg, and Richmond that are
currently required to install and operate
vapor recovery equipment on gasoline
dispensers (otherwise referred to as
Stage II vapor recovery, or simply as
Stage II) to decommission that
equipment by January 2017. In prior
rulemaking actions, EPA already
approved Virginia’s demonstrations that
decommissioning Stage II is consistent
with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA
guidance. The intended effect of this
action is to approve Virginia’s revised
petroleum transfer and storage
regulation to allow for decommissioning
of Stage II equipment.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
June 9, 2017.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
21698
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0308. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Rehn, (215) 814–2176, or by email
at rehn.brian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
October 21, 2016, EPA published a
notice of direct final rulemaking (81 FR
72724) and an accompanying proposed
rulemaking (NPR) (81 FR 72757) for the
Commonwealth of Virginia. Therein,
EPA proposed approval of Virginia’s
revised 9 VAC 5, Chapter 40, Rule 4–37
(Rule 4–37), Emission Standards for
Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer
Operations. These regulations had been
amended to allow for the
decommissioning of Stage II vapor
recovery systems at GDFs in areas of the
Commonwealth subject to Stage II under
Virginia’s SIP. The SIP revision was
submitted by the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) on
October 15, 2015.
After receiving adverse comments
during the public comment period on its
proposed action, EPA withdrew the
October 21, 2016 direct final rule in a
notice published in the December 9,
2016 (81 FR 89007) Federal Register. As
indicated in the October 21, 2016 direct
final rule, EPA’s separate proposed rule
published at the same time serves as the
proposed rulemaking.
ADDRESSES:
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Background
Stage II vapor recovery is a means of
capturing volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) emitted as vapors displaced
from a vehicle’s gas tank during
refueling operations, via vapor controls
equipped on a gasoline pump at a GDF.
Stage II vapor recovery uses special
refueling nozzles and coaxial hoses on
the gasoline dispenser to capture these
vapors that might otherwise be emitted
to the atmosphere during vehicle
fueling. These gasoline vapors contain
air emissions and serve as precursors to
the formation of ground-level ozone—an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
ambient air pollutant regulated under
the CAA. Under section 182(b)(3) of the
CAA, areas classified as moderate or
worse ozone nonattainment were
required to adopt a Stage II vapor
recovery program. Areas in the Ozone
Transport Region (OTR) were required
under section 184(a) and (b)(2) to adopt
Stage II, or a comparable measure that
could achieve similar emission
reductions. Virginia currently has three
SIP-approved Stage II programs in the
Richmond, Fredericksburg, and the
Virginia portion of the Washington, DC
areas.
The Richmond Stage II program was
instituted as a result of the area being
designated nonattainment under the 1hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the CAA
of 1990. The Richmond Stage II area (the
Richmond Area) has since been
redesignated as attainment for both the
1-hour ozone NAAQS (November 17,
1997; 62 FR 61237) and for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS (June 1, 2007; 72
FR 30485). However, Virginia’s SIPapproved maintenance plans for the
1-hour and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
relied upon emissions reductions from
Stage II as a means to ensure continued
maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
Although the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was
revoked on June 15, 2005, EPA’s
implementation rule for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS retained Stage II as a required
measure to prevent backsliding under
the NAAQS.
The Virginia portion of the
Washington, DC-MD-VA ozone
nonattainment area (hereafter referred to
as the Washington Area) was subject to
Stage II not only because of its
designation as nonattainment for the
ozone NAAQS, but also because this
area lies in a CAA-established OTR. The
area was designated serious
nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. The Washington Area was later
designated moderate nonattainment
under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
as was the neighboring Fredericksburg
ozone nonattainment area (referred to
herein as Fredericksburg Area). On
November 13, 2002, EPA reclassified the
Virginia portion of the Washington, DCMD-VA area as severe nonattainment
under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 67 FR
68805. Virginia subsequently submitted
and EPA approved attainment plans for
the 1-hour and 1997 8-hour NAAQS for
the Washington Area, and EPA also
approved a redesignation and
maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg
Area. Although the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was revoked effective June
2005, EPA’s implementation rule for the
1997 ozone NAAQS retained Stage IIrelated requirements under CAA section
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
182(b)(3) for certain areas. Stage II
continued to apply in the Washington,
DC nonattainment area as an antibacksliding measure under the
implementation rules for the 1997 and
2008 ozone NAAQS. The 2008 ozone
implementation rule similarly required
that Stage II remain in the
Fredericksburg Area as a maintenance
measure pending EPA determination
that onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR) was in widespread use and
Virginia could demonstrate that Stage II
was no longer a necessary component of
its air quality plans.
Virginia adopted Stage II regulations
in the November 2, 1992 edition of the
Virginia Register of Regulations (Vol 9,
Issue 3), effective January 1, 1993.
Virginia submitted its Stage II regulation
to EPA as a SIP revision on November
5, 1992. EPA approved Virginia’s Stage
II SIP revision on June 23, 1993 (59 FR
32353).
ORVR is an emissions control system
equipped on new, gasoline-powered
vehicles (beginning with model year
1998 vehicles) for the purpose of
capturing refueling gasoline vapors
before they escape the vehicle gas tank
and to store them in an underhood
canister for later engine combustion.
Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA directed
that Stage II requirements under section
182(b)(3) would no longer apply to
moderate ozone nonattainment areas
upon promulgation of standards for
ORVR systems as part of the emission
control system on newly manufactured
vehicles. Section 202(a)(6) further
provides that EPA may, by rule, waive
the section 182(b)(3) Stage II
requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas designated serious or worse upon
EPA’s determination that ORVR
technology is in ‘‘widespread use.’’ EPA
issued its widespread use determination
on May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28772),
indicating that ORVR was in
widespread use throughout the U.S.
vehicle fleet, and that at that time ORVR
vehicles were essentially equal to and
would soon surpass the emissions
reductions achieved by Stage II alone.
Virginia has examined whether Stage
II vapor recovery continues to be
necessary for ozone control purposes,
given the prevalence of ORVR-equipped
gasoline-powered vehicles and the
redundancy between ORVR and Stage II
systems in reducing gasoline tank
displacement emissions associated with
refueling. Additionally, Virginia
analyzed the interference effect between
certain Stage II systems and ORVR
systems, which can result in VOC
emissions being greater where ORVR
and certain Stage II systems are
simultaneously used than they would be
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
if only Stage II or ORVR were used.
From these analyses, Virginia
determined that Stage II vapor recovery
is no longer necessary as a control
measure to address ambient ozone in
the Washington, Fredericksburg, and
Richmond areas.
On November 12, 2013 and March 18,
2014, Virginia submitted SIP revisions
to EPA that evaluated the emissions
impacts to each of the affected Virginia
Stage II areas associated with removal of
the program. Those SIP revisions
amended the ozone maintenance plan
for the Richmond Area and the
attainment plan for the Washington
Area to demonstrate that removal of the
Stage II programs would not interfere
with those areas’ ability to attain and
maintain any NAAQS. On May 26, 2015
(80 FR 29959), EPA approved the
Commonwealth’s March 18, 2014 SIP
revision amending the approved ozone
attainment plan for the Virginia portion
of Washington Area and the approved
ozone maintenance plan for the
Fredericksburg Area to remove the Stage
II program. On August 11, 2014, EPA
approved Virginia’s November 12, 2013
SIP revision amending the approved
ozone maintenance plan SIP for the
Richmond Area to remove the Stage II
program. 79 FR 46711. None of these
approvals were challenged in court by
any objecting party.
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
On October 15, 2015, the
Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a
formal revision to remove the
requirements for Stage II vapor recovery
controls in Virginia ozone
nonattainment areas from the approved
Virginia SIP (Revision C14). This
October 2015 SIP revision contains the
amended Stage II vapor recovery
regulatory provisions of Virginia Rule
4–37, entitled ‘‘Emission Standards for
Volatile Organic Compounds from
Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer
Operations.’’ The October 2015 SIP
revision includes Virginia’s regulatory
amendments listed at 9VAC5–20 and
9VAC5–40 that were adopted by
Virginia in June of 2014, and published
in the Virginia Register of Regulations
on June 15, 2015 which removed Stage
II vapor recovery requirements from
Virginia law governing petroleum liquid
storage and transfer operations. The
purpose of this SIP revision is to remove
Stage II vapor recovery requirements
from the Commonwealth’s SIP. Under
Virginia’s amended Rule 4–37, gasoline
stations in the Washington and
Fredericksburg Areas were no longer
required to employ Stage II systems as
of January 2014, and Richmond Area
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
stations were no longer required to
employ Stage II vapor recovery systems
as of January 2017. Facilities electing to
decommission Stage II are now required
under Rule 4–37 to meet established
decommissioning procedures, and
facilities electing to continue to operate
Stage II are required to continue to
operate properly and maintain their
Stage II systems.
As described in the Background
section of this action, EPA already
approved Virginia’s SIP revisions
submitted on November 12, 2013 and
March 18, 2014 demonstrating that
removal of Stage II as a control measure
from the SIP will not interfere with the
Washington, Fredericksburg, and
Richmond Areas’ ability to attain and
maintain any applicable NAAQS. VA
DEQ examined whether Stage II is
necessary as an ozone control measure
and determined this program is no
longer beneficial to air quality in the
Commonwealth, given the widespread
use of ORVR equipment in new vehicles
manufactured since 1998 and the
inherent redundancies between Stage II
vapor recovery equipment and vehiclebased ORVR systems, and in light of the
incompatibilities between some Stage II
vapor recovery equipment and vehiclebased, ORVR systems.
EPA has evaluated the regulatory
amendments adopted by Virginia to its
Rule 4–37 to rescind Stage II vapor
recovery requirements for new and
existing stations, to adopt
decommissioning procedures and
requirements for GDFs electing to no
longer operate existing Stage II systems,
and to require the continued operation
and maintenance of Stage II equipment
for stations that elect to continue
participation in the program. Virginia’s
regulatory changes meet EPA guidance
and the related requirements of sections
182 and 202 of the CAA with respect to
the applicability of Stage II
requirements after EPA’s issuance of its
ORVR widespread use determination in
2012, as described in the Background
section of this document. Virginia has
properly analyzed the impact of removal
of the Stage II program in adherence
with EPA’s ‘‘Guidance on Removing
Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation
Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures,’’ dated August 7, 2012 (EPA–
457/B–12–001), including applicability
of Stage II or comparable measures in
the OTR, per section 184 of the CAA. As
previously found by EPA, Virginia has
demonstrated that removal of the Stage
II requirement does not interfere with
any affected area’s ability to attain or
maintain any NAAQS, or with any other
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21699
applicable requirement of the CAA,
under section 110(l) of the CAA.
For further information on Virginia’s
analysis of the impacts of removal of the
Stage II programs in the Washington and
Fredericksburg Areas, please refer to
EPA’s May 26, 2015 approval of the SIP
demonstration applicable to those areas.
See 80 FR 29959. For further
information with respect to Virginia’s
analysis of the removal of Stage II in the
Richmond Area, please refer to EPA’s
August 11, 2014 approval of the
Commonwealth’s demonstration
applicable to Richmond. See 79 FR
46711.
III. Response to Comments
EPA received several anonymous
comments on the October 21, 2016
proposed rulemaking. These comments
are summarized below with EPA’s
response.
Comment: The commenter states that
Virginia should retain Stage II
requirements, as they will keep
Virginia’s standards for good air quality
at its highest when there is a legal
requirement that must be followed.
Response: EPA disagrees with the
commenter’s assertion that retaining
Stage II as a regulatory requirement will
maintain air quality in the regulated
Virginia areas in question. Virginia
demonstrated in two prior EPAapproved SIP revisions (80 FR 29959
(May 26, 2015) and 79 FR 46711
(August 11, 2014)) that retaining Stage
II in the presence of widespread use of
ORVR equipment not only does not
further reduce refueling emissions—it
actually increases emissions due to an
incompatibility between certain Stage II
equipment and ORVR. Removal of
Virginia Stage II regulatory requirements
will not interfere with any of the
Virginia areas’ ability to achieve or
maintain any NAAQS. Virginia’s Stage
II removal demonstration SIP revisions
which EPA approved clearly showed
removal of Stage II requirements would
not interfere with any applicable CAA
requirement concerning reasonable
further progress or attainment of a
NAAQS or any other CAA requirement,
per section 110(l) of the CAA. Virginia’s
SIP-approved demonstrations show that
ORVR systems alone will achieve
emission reductions equivalent to Stage
II and ORVR combined in all three
Virginia areas which were subject to
Stage II. Virginia’s noninterference
demonstrations were performed in
accordance with EPA’s final rule
determining that ORVR is now in
‘‘widespread use’’ in the national motor
vehicle fleet (May 16, 2012 (77 FR
28770)) and with EPA’s ‘‘Guidance on
Removing Stage II Vapor Control
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
21700
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Programs from State Implementation
Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures’’ (EPA–457/B–12–001, August
7, 2012), hereafter referred to as EPA’s
Stage II Removal Guidance. A copy of
this guidance has been placed in the
public docket for this action.
Virginia’s March 18, 2014 SIP revision
demonstrated that removal of Stage II in
the Washington and Fredericksburg
Areas would not increase emissions
under the approved ozone attainment
plan for the Northern Virginia portion of
the Washington, DC nonattainment area
or the approved ozone maintenance
plan for the Fredericksburg Area, and
would not interfere with these areas’
ability to attain and maintain the ozone
or any other NAAQS. EPA approved
Virginia’s March 18, 2014 SIP revision
on May 26, 2015 (80 FR 29959).
Virginia’s November 12, 2013 SIP
revision amended the approved
maintenance plan SIP for the Richmond
Area to demonstrate that removal of the
Stage II program would not interfere
with this area’s ability to attain the
ozone NAAQS. EPA approved Virginia’s
November 12, 2013 SIP revision on
August 11, 2014 (79 FR 46711).
These prior, approved Stage II
removal demonstration SIPs show that a
vast majority of Virginia vehicles being
refueled at GDFs are now equipped with
vehicle-based ORVR systems, and that
these ORVR systems will better control
the VOC refueling emissions previously
captured by station-based Stage II
equipment, making Stage II no longer
necessary. Given known
incompatibilities between certain types
of Stage II equipment used in Virginia
and ORVR systems, removal of Stage II
regulatory requirements and the
resultant decommissioning of Stage II
systems has been demonstrated by
Virginia (in its November 2013 and
March 2014 SIP revisions) to not
interfere with air quality in the
applicable areas of the Commonwealth.
The science and rationale behind
allowing Virginia to remove Stage II
equipment from these areas was fully
discussed in the SIP noninterference
demonstrations approved by EPA on
August 11, 2014 and May 26, 2015. This
action relies upon those demonstrations
and serves only to remove the Stage II
requirements, which Virginia has
already removed from its own
regulations, from the SIP.
Therefore, the commenter’s assertion
that keeping Stage II as a requirement
along with ORVR would better maintain
air quality than ORVR alone is contrary
to the prior air quality demonstration
SIPs submitted by Virginia (and
approved by EPA), which demonstrate
that air quality in affected areas of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
Virginia is not adversely impacted by
removal of the Stage II requirement.
Comment: The commenter generally
supports EPA’s action to approve
Virginia’s regulatory amendments to
remove Stage II, as use of ORVR and
Stage II is ‘‘terribly inefficient.’’
However, the commenter argues that the
term ‘‘widespread use’’ in reference to
ORVR is vague. The commenter wants
EPA to ensure that policies that require
ORVR be mandatory be implemented in
place of Stage II. The commenter asserts
that ORVR is better than Stage II as a
means of recovering refueling
emissions, but having neither in place
would be worse than having them
both—even if they are incompatible.
Response: Preliminarily, EPA
disagrees with the commenter’s
assertion that ORVR is not required or
that policies requiring ORVR are not in
place. EPA promulgated ORVR
standards on April 6, 1994 at 59 FR
16262, codified at 40 CFR parts 86
(including 86.098–8), 88, and 600.
Beginning model year 1998, ORVR was
phased-in as a required system on new
passenger vehicles, and has been
required on nearly all new highway
vehicles manufactured since model year
2006. Consequently, ORVR is used in
such vehicles and controls VOC
emissions throughout the United States,
no matter how any areas are designated
and classified with respect to the ozone
NAAQS.
Under CAA section 182 (b)(3), Stage
II is required to be used at GDFs located
in areas classified as serious or worse
ozone nonattainment areas, and
consequently controls VOC emissions
only in such areas and in areas covered
by a ‘‘comparable measures’’ SIP under
section 184. Originally, CAA section
182(b)(3) also required Stage II in
moderate ozone nonattainment areas;
however, section 202(a)(6) directed that
the moderate area requirement no longer
applied after EPA promulgated ORVR
standards in 1994. EPA issued a final
rule on May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28770)
determining that ORVR was then in
‘‘widespread use’’ in the national motor
vehicle fleet, under authority of section
202(a)(6). As a result, EPA waived Stage
II requirements under section 182 for
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
serious or above. States previously
required to implement Stage II under
section 182(b)(3) could take action to
remove their Stage II program
requirements via revisions to their SIPs.
EPA disagrees with the commenter’s
assertion that ‘‘widespread use’’ is
vaguely defined and that EPA does not
have clearly defined policies that
require ORVR in place of Stage II. EPA’s
May 2012 ‘‘widespread use’’
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
determination rule, which no one timely
challenged and cannot be challenged
now, clearly defined what constitutes
widespread use of ORVR, and sets forth
how EPA’s widespread use
determination relates to states with
Stage II programs in their SIPs.
Subsequent to issuance of the
‘‘widespread use’’ determination action,
EPA issued its Stage II removal
guidance document, for use by states in
developing SIP revisions to remove
Stage II while demonstrating that
interference with attainment or
maintenance of a NAAQS will not
occur. Virginia’s prior, EPA-approved,
Stage II removal demonstration SIP
revisions show not only that removal of
Stage II will not jeopardize air quality
goals for affected Washington,
Fredericksburg, and Richmond Areas,
but also that ORVR alone will achieve
greater emission reductions than ORVR
in combination with Stage II in those
Virginia Stage II program areas.
Finally, because EPA has stated that
ORVR is required, EPA disagrees with
the implication from the commenter
that our approval of the removal of
Stage II from the Virginia SIP would
leave no vapor recovery system in place.
ORVR provides for vapor recovery.
IV. Final Action
In accordance with section 110 of the
CAA, EPA is approving Virginia’s
revision to its SIP to amend its Stage II
vapor recovery regulatory provisions to
remove the requirement for Virginia
area GDFs to operate Stage II in areas
formerly subject to Stage II under CAA
sections 182 and 184, and to add
provisions to allow GDFs currently
operating Stage II equipment the option
to decommission those systems.
Specifically, EPA is approving and
incorporating by reference the Virginia
SIP revision that amended the
Commonwealth’s Rule 4–37 governing
petroleum liquid and transfer operations
applicable to existing stationary sources,
which includes modified requirements
for the Commonwealth’s Stage II vapor
recovery program in 9–VAC5–5220 and
9VAC5–5270, effective July 20, 2015.
EPA is approving this SIP revision
because Virginia has previously
demonstrated through its two prior
approved Stage II SIP noninterference
demonstrations that removal of the
Stage II program regulatory requirement
will not result in an increase in
emissions that could interfere with
Virginia’s attainment or maintenance of
the ozone NAAQS or any other
applicable CAA requirement.
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
V. General Information Pertaining to
SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation
that provides, subject to certain
conditions, for an environmental
assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for
voluntary compliance evaluations
performed by a regulated entity. The
legislation further addresses the relative
burden of proof for parties either
asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the
privilege is claimed. Virginia’s
legislation also provides, subject to
certain conditions, for a penalty waiver
for violations of environmental laws
when a regulated entity discovers such
violations pursuant to a voluntary
compliance evaluation and voluntarily
discloses such violations to the
Commonwealth and takes prompt and
appropriate measures to remedy the
violations. Virginia’s Voluntary
Environmental Assessment Privilege
Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides
a privilege that protects from disclosure
documents and information about the
content of those documents that are the
product of a voluntary environmental
assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information
that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a
voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the
assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger
to the public health or environment; or
(4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the
Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal
opinion that states that the Privilege
Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198,
precludes granting a privilege to
documents and information ‘‘required
by law,’’ including documents and
information ‘‘required by federal law to
maintain program delegation,
authorization or approval,’’ since
Virginia must ‘‘enforce federally
authorized environmental programs in a
manner that is no less stringent than
their federal counterparts. . . .’’ The
opinion concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding
§ 10.1–1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or
criminal enforcement under one of these
programs could not be privileged
because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing
enforcement in a manner required by
federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval.’’
Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code
Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the
extent consistent with requirements
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
imposed by federal law,’’ any person
making a voluntary disclosure of
information to a state agency regarding
a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative
order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The
Attorney General’s January 12, 1998
opinion states that the quoted language
renders this statute inapplicable to
enforcement of any federally authorized
programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be
afforded from administrative, civil, or
criminal penalties because granting
such immunity would not be consistent
with federal law, which is one of the
criteria for immunity.’’
Therefore, EPA has determined that
Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity
statutes will not preclude the
Commonwealth from enforcing its
revised Stage II program regulations
consistent with the relevant federal
requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state
audit privilege and immunity law can
affect only state enforcement and cannot
have any impact on federal enforcement
authorities, EPA may at any time invoke
its authority under the CAA, including,
for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211
or 213, to enforce the requirements or
prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement
effort. In addition, citizen enforcement
under section 304 of the CAA is
likewise unaffected by this, or any, state
audit privilege or immunity law.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation
by reference of Virginia’s amendments
to Article 37 of 9VAC5–40 and also
amendments to Virginia’s general
provisions at 9VAC5–20–21, reflecting
the addition of a new source of
documents incorporated by reference,
effective on July 20, 2015. Additionally,
EPA is approving Virginia’s amended
Rule 4–37 governing petroleum liquid
and transfer operations applicable to
existing stationary sources, specifically
9–VAC5–5220 and 9VAC5–5270,
effective July 20, 2015.
Therefore, these materials have been
approved by EPA for inclusion in the
SIP, have been incorporated by
reference by EPA into that plan, are
fully federally enforceable under
sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of
the effective date of the final rulemaking
of EPA’s approval, and will be
incorporated by reference by the
Director of the Federal Register in the
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21701
next update to the SIP compilation.1
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials generally
available through https://
www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA
Region III Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
1 62
FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
21702
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land as defined
in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area
where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by July 10, 2017. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator
of this final rule does not affect the
finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the
time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. This action to amend
Virginia’s Stage II regulatory provisions
may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: April 14, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420:
a. The table in paragraph (c) is
amended by revising the entry for
Section 5–40–5220 and by adding an
entry for Section 5–40–5270; and
■ b. The table in paragraph (e) is
amended by revising the entry for
‘‘Documents Incorporated by Reference
(9 VAC 5–20–21, Section B.)’’ and by
adding an entry for ‘‘Documents
Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5–
20–21, Section E.15.).’’
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 52.2420
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES
State citation
State
effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
*
9 VAC 5, Chapter 40
*
*
*
*
Article 37
*
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
5–40–5270 ........
*
*
Standard for Toxic Pollutants .......
07/30/2015
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
*
*
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations (Rule 4–37)
07/30/2015
*
*
*
*
*
Organic
*
*
Emissions Standards
*
Standard for Volatile
Compounds.
*
*
*
*
*
5–40–5220 ........
*
*
Existing Stationary Sources
*
Part II
Explanation
[former SIP citation]
EPA approval date
*
05/10/2017 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
*
*
*
*
13:27 May 09, 2017
*
*
05/10/2017 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
21703
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
State
submittal
date
Name of non-regulatory
SIP revision
Applicable geographic area
*
Documents Incorporated
by Reference (9 VAC
5–20–21, Section B.).
*
*
*
Northern Virginia (Metropolitan Washington)
Ozone Nonattainment Area, Fredericksburg
Ozone Maintenance Area, Richmond-Petersburg Ozone Maintenance Area.
*
Documents Incorporated
by Reference (9 VAC
5–20–21, Section
E.15.).
*
*
*
Northern Virginia (Metropolitan Washington)
Ozone Nonattainment Area, Fredericksburg
Ozone Maintenance Area, Richmond-Petersburg Ozone Maintenance Area.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–09387 Filed 5–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0645; FRL–9962–11Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana;
Commissioner’s Order for SABIC
Innovative Plastics
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving, as a revision
to the Indiana State Implementation
Plan (SIP), a submittal from the Indiana
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) to EPA, dated
December 5, 2016. The submittal
consists of an order issued by the
Commissioner of IDEM that establishes
permanent and enforceable sulfur
dioxide (SO2) emission limits for SABIC
Innovative Plastics (SABIC). IDEM
submitted this order so the area near
SABIC can be designated ‘‘attainment’’
of the 2010 primary SO2 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), a matter that will be
addressed in a separate future
rulemaking. EPA’s approval of this this
order would make these SO2 emission
limits and applicable reporting,
recordkeeping, and compliance
demonstration requirements part of the
federally enforceable Indiana SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule is be
effective July 10, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 9,
2017. If adverse comments are received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
*
EPA approval date
*
*
05/10/2017 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
State effective date is
7/30/15.
*
*
05/10/2017 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
State effective date is
7/30/15.
10/1/2015
10/1/2015
*
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0645 at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Ko, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–7947,
ko.joseph@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Additional explanation
*
*
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Why did IDEM issue this Commissioner’s
Order?
II. What are the SO2 limits in this
Commissioner’s Order?
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this
SIP revision?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why did IDEM issue this
Commissioner’s Order?
On December 5, 2016, IDEM
submitted for approval, as a revision to
the Indiana SIP, an order issued by
IDEM’s Commissioner that establishes
SO2 emission limits for SABIC. SO2
emission limits for SABIC previously
did not exist in the Indiana SIP. IDEM
established these emission limits so the
area near SABIC can qualify in the
future for being designated ‘‘attainment’’
of the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. The
history of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
designation process and the applicable
Data Requirements Rule (DRR) is
explained below in order to provide a
more detailed explanation of the context
for IDEM’s request.
On June 3, 2010, pursuant to section
109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
revised the primary (health-based) SO2
NAAQS by establishing a new one-hour
standard codified at title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) section 50.17
(75 FR 35520). Pursuant to section
107(d) of the CAA, EPA must designate
areas as either ‘‘unclassifiable,’’
‘‘attainment,’’ or ‘‘nonattainment’’ for
the 2010 one-hour SO2 primary NAAQS.
Under Section 107(d) of the CAA, a
nonattainment area is any area that does
not meet the NAAQS or that contributes
to a violation in a nearby area. An
attainment area is any area, other than
a nonattainment area, that meets the
NAAQS. Unclassifiable areas are those
that cannot be classified on the basis of
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21697-21703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09387]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308; FRL-9961-86-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for
Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The revision includes regulatory amendments that allow
gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs) located in Northern Virginia,
Fredericksburg, and Richmond that are currently required to install and
operate vapor recovery equipment on gasoline dispensers (otherwise
referred to as Stage II vapor recovery, or simply as Stage II) to
decommission that equipment by January 2017. In prior rulemaking
actions, EPA already approved Virginia's demonstrations that
decommissioning Stage II is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and
EPA guidance. The intended effect of this action is to approve
Virginia's revised petroleum transfer and storage regulation to allow
for decommissioning of Stage II equipment.
DATES: This final rule is effective on June 9, 2017.
[[Page 21698]]
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by
email at rehn.brian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 21, 2016, EPA published a notice
of direct final rulemaking (81 FR 72724) and an accompanying proposed
rulemaking (NPR) (81 FR 72757) for the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Therein, EPA proposed approval of Virginia's revised 9 VAC 5, Chapter
40, Rule 4-37 (Rule 4-37), Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer Operations. These regulations had been amended to
allow for the decommissioning of Stage II vapor recovery systems at
GDFs in areas of the Commonwealth subject to Stage II under Virginia's
SIP. The SIP revision was submitted by the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) on October 15, 2015.
After receiving adverse comments during the public comment period
on its proposed action, EPA withdrew the October 21, 2016 direct final
rule in a notice published in the December 9, 2016 (81 FR 89007)
Federal Register. As indicated in the October 21, 2016 direct final
rule, EPA's separate proposed rule published at the same time serves as
the proposed rulemaking.
I. Background
Stage II vapor recovery is a means of capturing volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) emitted as vapors displaced from a vehicle's gas tank
during refueling operations, via vapor controls equipped on a gasoline
pump at a GDF. Stage II vapor recovery uses special refueling nozzles
and coaxial hoses on the gasoline dispenser to capture these vapors
that might otherwise be emitted to the atmosphere during vehicle
fueling. These gasoline vapors contain air emissions and serve as
precursors to the formation of ground-level ozone--an ambient air
pollutant regulated under the CAA. Under section 182(b)(3) of the CAA,
areas classified as moderate or worse ozone nonattainment were required
to adopt a Stage II vapor recovery program. Areas in the Ozone
Transport Region (OTR) were required under section 184(a) and (b)(2) to
adopt Stage II, or a comparable measure that could achieve similar
emission reductions. Virginia currently has three SIP-approved Stage II
programs in the Richmond, Fredericksburg, and the Virginia portion of
the Washington, DC areas.
The Richmond Stage II program was instituted as a result of the
area being designated nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the CAA of 1990. The Richmond
Stage II area (the Richmond Area) has since been redesignated as
attainment for both the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (November 17, 1997; 62 FR
61237) and for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (June 1, 2007; 72 FR 30485).
However, Virginia's SIP-approved maintenance plans for the 1-hour and
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS relied upon emissions reductions from Stage II
as a means to ensure continued maintenance of the ozone NAAQS. Although
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked on June 15, 2005, EPA's
implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS retained Stage II as a
required measure to prevent backsliding under the NAAQS.
The Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA ozone
nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the Washington Area) was
subject to Stage II not only because of its designation as
nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS, but also because this area lies in a
CAA-established OTR. The area was designated serious nonattainment
under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The Washington Area was later designated
moderate nonattainment under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as was the
neighboring Fredericksburg ozone nonattainment area (referred to herein
as Fredericksburg Area). On November 13, 2002, EPA reclassified the
Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA area as severe
nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 67 FR 68805. Virginia
subsequently submitted and EPA approved attainment plans for the 1-hour
and 1997 8-hour NAAQS for the Washington Area, and EPA also approved a
redesignation and maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg Area.
Although the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked effective June 2005, EPA's
implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS retained Stage II-related
requirements under CAA section 182(b)(3) for certain areas. Stage II
continued to apply in the Washington, DC nonattainment area as an anti-
backsliding measure under the implementation rules for the 1997 and
2008 ozone NAAQS. The 2008 ozone implementation rule similarly required
that Stage II remain in the Fredericksburg Area as a maintenance
measure pending EPA determination that onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR) was in widespread use and Virginia could demonstrate that Stage
II was no longer a necessary component of its air quality plans.
Virginia adopted Stage II regulations in the November 2, 1992
edition of the Virginia Register of Regulations (Vol 9, Issue 3),
effective January 1, 1993. Virginia submitted its Stage II regulation
to EPA as a SIP revision on November 5, 1992. EPA approved Virginia's
Stage II SIP revision on June 23, 1993 (59 FR 32353).
ORVR is an emissions control system equipped on new, gasoline-
powered vehicles (beginning with model year 1998 vehicles) for the
purpose of capturing refueling gasoline vapors before they escape the
vehicle gas tank and to store them in an underhood canister for later
engine combustion. Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA directed that Stage II
requirements under section 182(b)(3) would no longer apply to moderate
ozone nonattainment areas upon promulgation of standards for ORVR
systems as part of the emission control system on newly manufactured
vehicles. Section 202(a)(6) further provides that EPA may, by rule,
waive the section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas designated serious or worse upon EPA's
determination that ORVR technology is in ``widespread use.'' EPA issued
its widespread use determination on May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28772),
indicating that ORVR was in widespread use throughout the U.S. vehicle
fleet, and that at that time ORVR vehicles were essentially equal to
and would soon surpass the emissions reductions achieved by Stage II
alone.
Virginia has examined whether Stage II vapor recovery continues to
be necessary for ozone control purposes, given the prevalence of ORVR-
equipped gasoline-powered vehicles and the redundancy between ORVR and
Stage II systems in reducing gasoline tank displacement emissions
associated with refueling. Additionally, Virginia analyzed the
interference effect between certain Stage II systems and ORVR systems,
which can result in VOC emissions being greater where ORVR and certain
Stage II systems are simultaneously used than they would be
[[Page 21699]]
if only Stage II or ORVR were used. From these analyses, Virginia
determined that Stage II vapor recovery is no longer necessary as a
control measure to address ambient ozone in the Washington,
Fredericksburg, and Richmond areas.
On November 12, 2013 and March 18, 2014, Virginia submitted SIP
revisions to EPA that evaluated the emissions impacts to each of the
affected Virginia Stage II areas associated with removal of the
program. Those SIP revisions amended the ozone maintenance plan for the
Richmond Area and the attainment plan for the Washington Area to
demonstrate that removal of the Stage II programs would not interfere
with those areas' ability to attain and maintain any NAAQS. On May 26,
2015 (80 FR 29959), EPA approved the Commonwealth's March 18, 2014 SIP
revision amending the approved ozone attainment plan for the Virginia
portion of Washington Area and the approved ozone maintenance plan for
the Fredericksburg Area to remove the Stage II program. On August 11,
2014, EPA approved Virginia's November 12, 2013 SIP revision amending
the approved ozone maintenance plan SIP for the Richmond Area to remove
the Stage II program. 79 FR 46711. None of these approvals were
challenged in court by any objecting party.
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
On October 15, 2015, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a
formal revision to remove the requirements for Stage II vapor recovery
controls in Virginia ozone nonattainment areas from the approved
Virginia SIP (Revision C14). This October 2015 SIP revision contains
the amended Stage II vapor recovery regulatory provisions of Virginia
Rule 4-37, entitled ``Emission Standards for Volatile Organic Compounds
from Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations.'' The October
2015 SIP revision includes Virginia's regulatory amendments listed at
9VAC5-20 and 9VAC5-40 that were adopted by Virginia in June of 2014,
and published in the Virginia Register of Regulations on June 15, 2015
which removed Stage II vapor recovery requirements from Virginia law
governing petroleum liquid storage and transfer operations. The purpose
of this SIP revision is to remove Stage II vapor recovery requirements
from the Commonwealth's SIP. Under Virginia's amended Rule 4-37,
gasoline stations in the Washington and Fredericksburg Areas were no
longer required to employ Stage II systems as of January 2014, and
Richmond Area stations were no longer required to employ Stage II vapor
recovery systems as of January 2017. Facilities electing to
decommission Stage II are now required under Rule 4-37 to meet
established decommissioning procedures, and facilities electing to
continue to operate Stage II are required to continue to operate
properly and maintain their Stage II systems.
As described in the Background section of this action, EPA already
approved Virginia's SIP revisions submitted on November 12, 2013 and
March 18, 2014 demonstrating that removal of Stage II as a control
measure from the SIP will not interfere with the Washington,
Fredericksburg, and Richmond Areas' ability to attain and maintain any
applicable NAAQS. VA DEQ examined whether Stage II is necessary as an
ozone control measure and determined this program is no longer
beneficial to air quality in the Commonwealth, given the widespread use
of ORVR equipment in new vehicles manufactured since 1998 and the
inherent redundancies between Stage II vapor recovery equipment and
vehicle-based ORVR systems, and in light of the incompatibilities
between some Stage II vapor recovery equipment and vehicle-based, ORVR
systems.
EPA has evaluated the regulatory amendments adopted by Virginia to
its Rule 4-37 to rescind Stage II vapor recovery requirements for new
and existing stations, to adopt decommissioning procedures and
requirements for GDFs electing to no longer operate existing Stage II
systems, and to require the continued operation and maintenance of
Stage II equipment for stations that elect to continue participation in
the program. Virginia's regulatory changes meet EPA guidance and the
related requirements of sections 182 and 202 of the CAA with respect to
the applicability of Stage II requirements after EPA's issuance of its
ORVR widespread use determination in 2012, as described in the
Background section of this document. Virginia has properly analyzed the
impact of removal of the Stage II program in adherence with EPA's
``Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from
State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable Measures,'' dated
August 7, 2012 (EPA-457/B-12-001), including applicability of Stage II
or comparable measures in the OTR, per section 184 of the CAA. As
previously found by EPA, Virginia has demonstrated that removal of the
Stage II requirement does not interfere with any affected area's
ability to attain or maintain any NAAQS, or with any other applicable
requirement of the CAA, under section 110(l) of the CAA.
For further information on Virginia's analysis of the impacts of
removal of the Stage II programs in the Washington and Fredericksburg
Areas, please refer to EPA's May 26, 2015 approval of the SIP
demonstration applicable to those areas. See 80 FR 29959. For further
information with respect to Virginia's analysis of the removal of Stage
II in the Richmond Area, please refer to EPA's August 11, 2014 approval
of the Commonwealth's demonstration applicable to Richmond. See 79 FR
46711.
III. Response to Comments
EPA received several anonymous comments on the October 21, 2016
proposed rulemaking. These comments are summarized below with EPA's
response.
Comment: The commenter states that Virginia should retain Stage II
requirements, as they will keep Virginia's standards for good air
quality at its highest when there is a legal requirement that must be
followed.
Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that
retaining Stage II as a regulatory requirement will maintain air
quality in the regulated Virginia areas in question. Virginia
demonstrated in two prior EPA-approved SIP revisions (80 FR 29959 (May
26, 2015) and 79 FR 46711 (August 11, 2014)) that retaining Stage II in
the presence of widespread use of ORVR equipment not only does not
further reduce refueling emissions--it actually increases emissions due
to an incompatibility between certain Stage II equipment and ORVR.
Removal of Virginia Stage II regulatory requirements will not interfere
with any of the Virginia areas' ability to achieve or maintain any
NAAQS. Virginia's Stage II removal demonstration SIP revisions which
EPA approved clearly showed removal of Stage II requirements would not
interfere with any applicable CAA requirement concerning reasonable
further progress or attainment of a NAAQS or any other CAA requirement,
per section 110(l) of the CAA. Virginia's SIP-approved demonstrations
show that ORVR systems alone will achieve emission reductions
equivalent to Stage II and ORVR combined in all three Virginia areas
which were subject to Stage II. Virginia's noninterference
demonstrations were performed in accordance with EPA's final rule
determining that ORVR is now in ``widespread use'' in the national
motor vehicle fleet (May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28770)) and with EPA's
``Guidance on Removing Stage II Vapor Control
[[Page 21700]]
Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures'' (EPA-457/B-12-001, August 7, 2012), hereafter referred to as
EPA's Stage II Removal Guidance. A copy of this guidance has been
placed in the public docket for this action.
Virginia's March 18, 2014 SIP revision demonstrated that removal of
Stage II in the Washington and Fredericksburg Areas would not increase
emissions under the approved ozone attainment plan for the Northern
Virginia portion of the Washington, DC nonattainment area or the
approved ozone maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg Area, and would
not interfere with these areas' ability to attain and maintain the
ozone or any other NAAQS. EPA approved Virginia's March 18, 2014 SIP
revision on May 26, 2015 (80 FR 29959).
Virginia's November 12, 2013 SIP revision amended the approved
maintenance plan SIP for the Richmond Area to demonstrate that removal
of the Stage II program would not interfere with this area's ability to
attain the ozone NAAQS. EPA approved Virginia's November 12, 2013 SIP
revision on August 11, 2014 (79 FR 46711).
These prior, approved Stage II removal demonstration SIPs show that
a vast majority of Virginia vehicles being refueled at GDFs are now
equipped with vehicle-based ORVR systems, and that these ORVR systems
will better control the VOC refueling emissions previously captured by
station-based Stage II equipment, making Stage II no longer necessary.
Given known incompatibilities between certain types of Stage II
equipment used in Virginia and ORVR systems, removal of Stage II
regulatory requirements and the resultant decommissioning of Stage II
systems has been demonstrated by Virginia (in its November 2013 and
March 2014 SIP revisions) to not interfere with air quality in the
applicable areas of the Commonwealth. The science and rationale behind
allowing Virginia to remove Stage II equipment from these areas was
fully discussed in the SIP noninterference demonstrations approved by
EPA on August 11, 2014 and May 26, 2015. This action relies upon those
demonstrations and serves only to remove the Stage II requirements,
which Virginia has already removed from its own regulations, from the
SIP.
Therefore, the commenter's assertion that keeping Stage II as a
requirement along with ORVR would better maintain air quality than ORVR
alone is contrary to the prior air quality demonstration SIPs submitted
by Virginia (and approved by EPA), which demonstrate that air quality
in affected areas of Virginia is not adversely impacted by removal of
the Stage II requirement.
Comment: The commenter generally supports EPA's action to approve
Virginia's regulatory amendments to remove Stage II, as use of ORVR and
Stage II is ``terribly inefficient.'' However, the commenter argues
that the term ``widespread use'' in reference to ORVR is vague. The
commenter wants EPA to ensure that policies that require ORVR be
mandatory be implemented in place of Stage II. The commenter asserts
that ORVR is better than Stage II as a means of recovering refueling
emissions, but having neither in place would be worse than having them
both--even if they are incompatible.
Response: Preliminarily, EPA disagrees with the commenter's
assertion that ORVR is not required or that policies requiring ORVR are
not in place. EPA promulgated ORVR standards on April 6, 1994 at 59 FR
16262, codified at 40 CFR parts 86 (including 86.098-8), 88, and 600.
Beginning model year 1998, ORVR was phased-in as a required system on
new passenger vehicles, and has been required on nearly all new highway
vehicles manufactured since model year 2006. Consequently, ORVR is used
in such vehicles and controls VOC emissions throughout the United
States, no matter how any areas are designated and classified with
respect to the ozone NAAQS.
Under CAA section 182 (b)(3), Stage II is required to be used at
GDFs located in areas classified as serious or worse ozone
nonattainment areas, and consequently controls VOC emissions only in
such areas and in areas covered by a ``comparable measures'' SIP under
section 184. Originally, CAA section 182(b)(3) also required Stage II
in moderate ozone nonattainment areas; however, section 202(a)(6)
directed that the moderate area requirement no longer applied after EPA
promulgated ORVR standards in 1994. EPA issued a final rule on May 16,
2012 (77 FR 28770) determining that ORVR was then in ``widespread use''
in the national motor vehicle fleet, under authority of section
202(a)(6). As a result, EPA waived Stage II requirements under section
182 for ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious or above.
States previously required to implement Stage II under section
182(b)(3) could take action to remove their Stage II program
requirements via revisions to their SIPs.
EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that ``widespread
use'' is vaguely defined and that EPA does not have clearly defined
policies that require ORVR in place of Stage II. EPA's May 2012
``widespread use'' determination rule, which no one timely challenged
and cannot be challenged now, clearly defined what constitutes
widespread use of ORVR, and sets forth how EPA's widespread use
determination relates to states with Stage II programs in their SIPs.
Subsequent to issuance of the ``widespread use'' determination action,
EPA issued its Stage II removal guidance document, for use by states in
developing SIP revisions to remove Stage II while demonstrating that
interference with attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS will not occur.
Virginia's prior, EPA-approved, Stage II removal demonstration SIP
revisions show not only that removal of Stage II will not jeopardize
air quality goals for affected Washington, Fredericksburg, and Richmond
Areas, but also that ORVR alone will achieve greater emission
reductions than ORVR in combination with Stage II in those Virginia
Stage II program areas.
Finally, because EPA has stated that ORVR is required, EPA
disagrees with the implication from the commenter that our approval of
the removal of Stage II from the Virginia SIP would leave no vapor
recovery system in place. ORVR provides for vapor recovery.
IV. Final Action
In accordance with section 110 of the CAA, EPA is approving
Virginia's revision to its SIP to amend its Stage II vapor recovery
regulatory provisions to remove the requirement for Virginia area GDFs
to operate Stage II in areas formerly subject to Stage II under CAA
sections 182 and 184, and to add provisions to allow GDFs currently
operating Stage II equipment the option to decommission those systems.
Specifically, EPA is approving and incorporating by reference the
Virginia SIP revision that amended the Commonwealth's Rule 4-37
governing petroleum liquid and transfer operations applicable to
existing stationary sources, which includes modified requirements for
the Commonwealth's Stage II vapor recovery program in 9-VAC5-5220 and
9VAC5-5270, effective July 20, 2015.
EPA is approving this SIP revision because Virginia has previously
demonstrated through its two prior approved Stage II SIP
noninterference demonstrations that removal of the Stage II program
regulatory requirement will not result in an increase in emissions that
could interfere with Virginia's attainment or maintenance of the ozone
NAAQS or any other applicable CAA requirement.
[[Page 21701]]
V. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
revised Stage II program regulations consistent with the relevant
federal requirements. In any event, because EPA has also determined
that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state
enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal enforcement
authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA,
including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce
the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, independently of
any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen enforcement under
section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or any, state
audit privilege or immunity law.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Virginia's
amendments to Article 37 of 9VAC5-40 and also amendments to Virginia's
general provisions at 9VAC5-20-21, reflecting the addition of a new
source of documents incorporated by reference, effective on July 20,
2015. Additionally, EPA is approving Virginia's amended Rule 4-37
governing petroleum liquid and transfer operations applicable to
existing stationary sources, specifically 9-VAC5-5220 and 9VAC5-5270,
effective July 20, 2015.
Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion
in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan,
are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA
as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and
will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal
Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\1\ EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these materials generally available through
https://www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region III Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as
[[Page 21702]]
appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects,
using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area where EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 10, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action to amend Virginia's Stage II regulatory provisions
may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: April 14, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV--Virginia
0
2. In Sec. 52.2420:
0
a. The table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entry for
Section 5-40-5220 and by adding an entry for Section 5-40-5270; and
0
b. The table in paragraph (e) is amended by revising the entry for
``Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, Section B.)'' and
by adding an entry for ``Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 5-
20-21, Section E.15.).''
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Virginia Regulations and Statutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
State citation Title/subject effective EPA approval date Explanation [former
date SIP citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 VAC 5, Chapter 40 Existing Stationary Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II Emissions Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 37 Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations (Rule 4-37)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
5-40-5220.................. Standard for Volatile 07/30/2015 05/10/2017 [Insert .....................
Organic Compounds. Federal Register
Citation].
* * * * * * *
5-40-5270.................. Standard for Toxic 07/30/2015 05/10/2017 [Insert .....................
Pollutants. Federal Register
Citation].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) * * *
[[Page 21703]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of non-regulatory SIP Applicable geographic submittal EPA approval date Additional
revision area date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Documents Incorporated by Northern Virginia 10/1/2015 05/10/2017 [Insert State effective
Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, (Metropolitan Federal Register date is 7/30/15.
Section B.). Washington) Ozone Citation].
Nonattainment Area,
Fredericksburg Ozone
Maintenance Area,
Richmond-Petersburg
Ozone Maintenance Area.
* * * * * * *
Documents Incorporated by Northern Virginia 10/1/2015 05/10/2017 [Insert State effective
Reference (9 VAC 5-20-21, (Metropolitan Federal Register date is 7/30/15.
Section E.15.). Washington) Ozone Citation].
Nonattainment Area,
Fredericksburg Ozone
Maintenance Area,
Richmond-Petersburg
Ozone Maintenance Area.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-09387 Filed 5-9-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P