Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Attainment Demonstration for the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone Early Action Compact Area, 48280-48283 [05-16293]
Download as PDF
48280
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 17, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420, the entry for the
Attainment Demonstration and the Early
I
Action Plan for the Roanoke MSA Early
Action Compact Area in paragraph (e) is
added at the end of the table to read as
follows:
§ 52.2420
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MATERIAL
State submittal date
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
Applicable geographic area
*
*
Attainment Demonstration and Early Action Plan
for the Roanoke MSA Ozone Early Action
Compact Area.
*
*
Botetourt County, Roanoke City,
Roanoke County, and Salem City.
[FR Doc. 05–16294 Filed 8–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R03–OAR–2005–VA–0005; FRL–7954–4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Attainment Demonstration for the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
Early Action Compact Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking final action to
approve a revision to the
Commonwealth of Virginia State
Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision consists of an Early Action
Compact (EAC) Plan that will enable the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
EAC Area to demonstrate attainment
and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality (NAAQS)
standard. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
DATES: This final rule is effective on
September 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Regional
Material in EDocket (RME) ID Number
R03–OAR–2005–VA–0005. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the RME index at https://
www.docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Once in
the system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then
key in the appropriate RME
identification number. Although listed
in the electronic docket, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
SUMMARY:
VerDate jul<14>2003
11:56 Aug 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
*
12/21/04,
2/15/05
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or
in hard copy for public inspection
during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main
Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose
Quinto, (215) 814–2182, or by e-mail at
quinto.rose@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 17, 2005 (70 FR 28260), EPA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the
Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR
proposed approval of the attainment
demonstration and the Early Action
Plan (EAP) for the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area,
which consists of the City of Winchester
and Frederick County. The formal SIP
revision was submitted by the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
on December 20, 2004 and
supplemented on February 15, 2005.
Other specifics of the Commonwealth’s
SIP revision for the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area,
and the rationale for EPA’s proposed
action are explained in the NPR and
will not be restated here. On June 16,
2005, EPA received adverse comments
on its May 17, 2005 NPR. A summary
of the comments submitted and EPA’s
responses are provided in Section II of
this document.
II. Summary of Public Comments and
EPA Responses
Comment: Several commenters
expressed support for the compact
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA approval date
*
8/17/05 [Insert Federal
Register page number where the document begins].
Additional
explanation
*
process, the goal of clean air sooner, the
incentives and flexibility the program
provides for encouraging early
reductions of ozone-forming pollution,
and the deferred effective date of
nonattainment designations.
Response: EPA acknowledges the
comments of support for our final
action.
Comment: One commenter opposes
the approval of the SIP revision for the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
EAC Area because the Area is in
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard.
The commenter also states that the SIP
revision provides for the deferment of a
nonattainment designation until a future
date, potentially as late as December 31,
2007, and relieves the Area of
obligations under Title I, part D of the
CAA. Although the commenter is
supportive of the goal of addressing
proactively the public health concerns
associated with ozone pollution, the
commenter believes that EPA does not
have the legal authority to defer
effective dates of designations or to
allow areas to be relieved of obligations
under Title I, part D of the CAA while
they are violating the 8-hour ozone
standard, or are designated
nonattainment of that standard.
Response: EPA first announced the
EAC process in a June 19, 2002 letter
from Gregg Cooke, Administrator, EPA
Region VI to Robert Huston, Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality,
followed by a November 14, 2002
memorandum from Jeffrey R.
Holmstead, Assistant Administrator,
EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation to the
EPA Regional Administrators, entitled,
‘‘Schedule for 8-Hour Ozone
Designations and its Effect on Early
Action Compacts.’’ EPA formalized the
EAC process in the designation
rulemaking on April 30, 2004 (69 FR
23858). In the designation rule, EPA
designated 14 EAC areas as
nonattainment, but deferred the
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 17, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
effective date of the designation until
September 30, 2005. The EAC program
gives local areas the flexibility to
develop their own approach to meeting
the 8-hour ozone standard, provided the
participating communities are serious in
their commitment to control emissions
from local sources earlier than the CAA
would otherwise require. By involving
diverse stakeholders, including
representatives from industry, local and
State governments, and local
environmental citizens’ groups, a
number of communities are discussing
for the first time the need for regional
cooperation in solving air quality
problems that affect the health and
welfare of its citizens. People living in
these areas that realize reductions in
pollution levels sooner will enjoy the
health benefits of cleaner air sooner
than might otherwise occur. EPA
believes this proactive approach
involving multiple, diverse stakeholders
is beneficial to the citizens of the area
by raising awareness of the need to
adopt and implement measures that will
reduce emissions and improve air
quality.
EPA disagrees with the comments that
this action on the SIP revision for the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
EAC Area defers the nonattainment
designation for this Area. In our May 17,
2005 NPR (70 FR 28260), EPA proposed
approval of an attainment
demonstration and EAP SIP revision for
the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
EAC Area. This SIP revision includes an
attainment demonstration which
demonstrates attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area by
December 31, 2007, and also
demonstrates maintenance of the 8-hour
NAAQS for five years following the
attainment date. As noted in the
proposed action, approval of the
attainment demonstration and EAP
constitutes one of several milestones
that an area must meet in order to
participate in the EAC process. While
approval of this plan is a prerequisite
for an extension of the deferred effective
date of the designation of this Area, see
40 CFR 81.300(e)(3), neither the
proposed approval of this SIP nor this
final action approving the SIP purports
to extend the deferral of the effective
date of the nonattainment designation
for this Area. In a separate rulemaking
(69 FR 23858, April 30, 2004), EPA
deferred the effective date of the air
quality designations of all 14 EAC areas
to September 30, 2005. In the April 30,
2004 final rule, EPA responded to
comments received during the comment
period for this final rule. In a separate
VerDate jul<14>2003
11:00 Aug 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
proposed rule (70 FR 33409, June 8,
2005), EPA proposed to extend the
deferral of the effective date of the air
quality designations for these 14 EAC
areas. EPA will consider comments
regarding its legal authority in the final
rule associated with the June 8, 2005
proposed rule.
Regardless of whether EPA’s separate
actions deferring the effective date of
the nonattainment designation for this
Area are appropriate, EPA sees no basis
to disapprove the attainment and
maintenance plan. The provisions of the
statute generally provide that areas must
demonstrate attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS. See e.g.,
CAA section 110(a)(1) (requiring areas
to submit plans providing for
‘‘implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement’’ of each NAAQS) and CAA
section 172(c)(1) (requiring
nonattainment areas to submit plans
demonstrating attainment of the
NAAQS). The commenter has provided
no substantive reason why this plan
does not demonstrate attainment and
maintenance of the 8-hour standard.
Therefore, this action approving the
attainment demonstration and
maintenance plan is appropriate.
III. 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: (1)
That are generated or developed before
the commencement of a voluntary
environmental assessment; (2) that are
prepared independently of the
assessment process; (3) that demonstrate
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48281
a clear, imminent and substantial
danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) that 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 ‘‘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 ‘‘regarding
§ 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 ‘‘to 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
program consistent with the 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
Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act is likewise
unaffected by this, or any, State audit
privilege or immunity law.
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
48282
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 17, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the attainment
demonstration and the EAP for the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
EAC Area. The modeling of the ozone
and ozone precursor emissions from
sources affecting the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area
demonstrates that the specified control
strategies will provide for attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by December
31, 2007 and maintenance of that
standard through 2012.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely approves
State law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule approves pre-existing requirements
under State law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by State law, it 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). This rule also does not
have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act. This rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This rule does
not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. This rule 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 Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by October 17, 2005.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule 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, approving the attainment
demonstration and the EAP for the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
EAC Area, 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, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 9, 2005.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
I
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420, the entry for the
Attainment Demonstration and Early
Action Plan for the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone Early Action
Compact Area in paragraph (e) is added
at the end of the table to read as follows:
I
§ 52.2420
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MATERIAL
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
VerDate jul<14>2003
11:00 Aug 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Applicable geographic area
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
State submittal date
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
EPA approval date
17AUR1
Additional
explanation
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 17, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
48283
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MATERIAL—Continued
State submittal date
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
Applicable geographic area
*
*
Attainment Demonstration and Early Action Plan
for the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone
Early Action Compact Area.
*
*
City of Winchester and Frederick
County.
[FR Doc. 05–16293 Filed 8–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R03–OAR–2005–MD–0004; FRL–7954–2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Attainment Demonstration
for the Washington County Ozone
Early Action Compact Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to
approve a revision to the State of
Maryland State Implementation Plan
(SIP). This revision consists of an Early
Action Compact (EAC) Plan that will
enable the Washington County,
Maryland Ozone EAC Area to
demonstrate attainment and
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality (NAAQS)
standard. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
DATES: This final rule is effective on
September 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Regional
Material in EDocket (RME) ID Number
R03–OAR–2005–MD–0004. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the RME index at https://
www.docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Once in
the system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then
key in the appropriate RME
identification number. Although listed
in the electronic docket, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or
in hard copy for public inspection
during normal business hours at the Air
VerDate jul<14>2003
11:00 Aug 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
*
12/20/04,
02/15/05
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Maryland Department of
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen Wentworth, (215) 814–2034, or by
e-mail at wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 17, 2005 (70 FR 28256), EPA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the State of
Maryland. The NPR proposed approval
of the attainment demonstration and the
Early Action Plan (EAP) for the
Washington County Ozone EAC Area.
The formal SIP revision was submitted
by the Maryland Department of the
Environment on December 20, 2004 and
supplemented on February 28, 2005.
Other specifics of the State’s SIP
revision for the Washington County
Ozone EAC Area, and the rationale for
EPA’s proposed action are explained in
the NPR and will not be restated here.
On June 16, 2005, EPA received adverse
comments on its May 17, 2005 NPR. A
summary of the comments submitted
and EPA’s responses are provided in
Section II of this document.
II. Summary of Public Comments and
EPA Responses
Comment: One commenter opposes
the approval of the SIP revision for the
Washington County Ozone EAC Area
because the Area is in violation of the
8-hour ozone standard. The commenter
also states that the SIP revision provides
for the deferment of a nonattainment
designation until a future date,
potentially as late as December 31, 2007,
and relieves the Area of obligations
under Title I, part D of the CAA.
Although the commenter is supportive
of the goal of addressing proactively the
public health concerns associated with
ozone pollution, the commenter
believes that EPA does not have the
legal authority to defer effective dates of
designations or to allow areas to be
relieved of obligations under Title I, part
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA approval date
Additional
explanation
*
8/17/05 [Insert Federal
Register page number where the document begins].
*
........................
D of the CAA while they are violating
the 8-hour ozone standard, or are
designated nonattainment of that
standard.
Response: EPA first announced the
EAC process in a June 19, 2002 letter
from Gregg Cooke, Administrator, EPA
Region VI to Robert Huston, Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality,
followed by a November 14, 2002
memorandum from Jeffrey R.
Holmstead, Assistant Administrator,
EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation to the
EPA Regional Administrators, entitled,
‘‘Schedule for 8-Hour Ozone
Designations and its Effect on Early
Action Compacts.’’ EPA formalized the
EAC process in the designation
rulemaking on April 30, 2004 (69 FR
23858). In the designation rule, EPA
designated 14 EAC areas as
nonattainment, but deferred the
effective date of the designation until
September 30, 2005. The EAC program
gives local areas the flexibility to
develop their own approach to meeting
the 8-hour ozone standard, provided the
participating communities are serious in
their commitment to control emissions
from local sources earlier than the CAA
would otherwise require. By involving
diverse stakeholders, including
representatives from industry, local and
State governments, and local
environmental citizens’ groups, a
number of communities are discussing
for the first time the need for regional
cooperation in solving air quality
problems that affect the health and
welfare of its citizens. People living in
these areas that achieve reductions in
pollution levels sooner will enjoy the
health benefits of cleaner air sooner
than might otherwise occur. EPA
believes this proactive approach
involving multiple, diverse stakeholders
is beneficial to the citizens of the area
by raising awareness of the need to
adopt and implement measures that will
reduce emissions and improve air
quality.
EPA disagrees with the comments that
this action on the SIP revision for the
Washington County Ozone EAC Area
defers the nonattainment designation for
this Area. In our May 17, 2005 NPR (70
FR 28256), EPA proposed approval of an
E:\FR\FM\17AUR1.SGM
17AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 17, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48280-48283]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16293]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R03-OAR-2005-VA-0005; FRL-7954-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Attainment Demonstration for the Northern Shenandoah Valley
Ozone Early Action Compact Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve a revision to the
Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision
consists of an Early Action Compact (EAC) Plan that will enable the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area to demonstrate attainment and
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality (NAAQS)
standard. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act).
DATES: This final rule is effective on September 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Regional
Material in EDocket (RME) ID Number R03-OAR-2005-VA-0005. All documents
in the docket are listed in the RME index at https://www.docket.epa.gov/
rmepub/. Once in the system, select ``quick search,'' then key in the
appropriate RME identification number. Although listed in the
electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in RME or in hard copy
for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State
submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by e-
mail at quinto.rose@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 17, 2005 (70 FR 28260), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR proposed
approval of the attainment demonstration and the Early Action Plan
(EAP) for the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area, which consists
of the City of Winchester and Frederick County. The formal SIP revision
was submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality on
December 20, 2004 and supplemented on February 15, 2005. Other
specifics of the Commonwealth's SIP revision for the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area, and the rationale for EPA's proposed
action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. On June
16, 2005, EPA received adverse comments on its May 17, 2005 NPR. A
summary of the comments submitted and EPA's responses are provided in
Section II of this document.
II. Summary of Public Comments and EPA Responses
Comment: Several commenters expressed support for the compact
process, the goal of clean air sooner, the incentives and flexibility
the program provides for encouraging early reductions of ozone-forming
pollution, and the deferred effective date of nonattainment
designations.
Response: EPA acknowledges the comments of support for our final
action.
Comment: One commenter opposes the approval of the SIP revision for
the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area because the Area is in
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard. The commenter also states that
the SIP revision provides for the deferment of a nonattainment
designation until a future date, potentially as late as December 31,
2007, and relieves the Area of obligations under Title I, part D of the
CAA. Although the commenter is supportive of the goal of addressing
proactively the public health concerns associated with ozone pollution,
the commenter believes that EPA does not have the legal authority to
defer effective dates of designations or to allow areas to be relieved
of obligations under Title I, part D of the CAA while they are
violating the 8-hour ozone standard, or are designated nonattainment of
that standard.
Response: EPA first announced the EAC process in a June 19, 2002
letter from Gregg Cooke, Administrator, EPA Region VI to Robert Huston,
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, followed by a November 14,
2002 memorandum from Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant Administrator,
EPA's Office of Air and Radiation to the EPA Regional Administrators,
entitled, ``Schedule for 8-Hour Ozone Designations and its Effect on
Early Action Compacts.'' EPA formalized the EAC process in the
designation rulemaking on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858). In the
designation rule, EPA designated 14 EAC areas as nonattainment, but
deferred the
[[Page 48281]]
effective date of the designation until September 30, 2005. The EAC
program gives local areas the flexibility to develop their own approach
to meeting the 8-hour ozone standard, provided the participating
communities are serious in their commitment to control emissions from
local sources earlier than the CAA would otherwise require. By
involving diverse stakeholders, including representatives from
industry, local and State governments, and local environmental
citizens' groups, a number of communities are discussing for the first
time the need for regional cooperation in solving air quality problems
that affect the health and welfare of its citizens. People living in
these areas that realize reductions in pollution levels sooner will
enjoy the health benefits of cleaner air sooner than might otherwise
occur. EPA believes this proactive approach involving multiple, diverse
stakeholders is beneficial to the citizens of the area by raising
awareness of the need to adopt and implement measures that will reduce
emissions and improve air quality.
EPA disagrees with the comments that this action on the SIP
revision for the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area defers the
nonattainment designation for this Area. In our May 17, 2005 NPR (70 FR
28260), EPA proposed approval of an attainment demonstration and EAP
SIP revision for the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area. This
SIP revision includes an attainment demonstration which demonstrates
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Northern Shenandoah Valley
Ozone EAC Area by December 31, 2007, and also demonstrates maintenance
of the 8-hour NAAQS for five years following the attainment date. As
noted in the proposed action, approval of the attainment demonstration
and EAP constitutes one of several milestones that an area must meet in
order to participate in the EAC process. While approval of this plan is
a prerequisite for an extension of the deferred effective date of the
designation of this Area, see 40 CFR 81.300(e)(3), neither the proposed
approval of this SIP nor this final action approving the SIP purports
to extend the deferral of the effective date of the nonattainment
designation for this Area. In a separate rulemaking (69 FR 23858, April
30, 2004), EPA deferred the effective date of the air quality
designations of all 14 EAC areas to September 30, 2005. In the April
30, 2004 final rule, EPA responded to comments received during the
comment period for this final rule. In a separate proposed rule (70 FR
33409, June 8, 2005), EPA proposed to extend the deferral of the
effective date of the air quality designations for these 14 EAC areas.
EPA will consider comments regarding its legal authority in the final
rule associated with the June 8, 2005 proposed rule.
Regardless of whether EPA's separate actions deferring the
effective date of the nonattainment designation for this Area are
appropriate, EPA sees no basis to disapprove the attainment and
maintenance plan. The provisions of the statute generally provide that
areas must demonstrate attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. See
e.g., CAA section 110(a)(1) (requiring areas to submit plans providing
for ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of each NAAQS) and
CAA section 172(c)(1) (requiring nonattainment areas to submit plans
demonstrating attainment of the NAAQS). The commenter has provided no
substantive reason why this plan does not demonstrate attainment and
maintenance of the 8-hour standard. Therefore, this action approving
the attainment demonstration and maintenance plan is appropriate.
III. 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: (1) That are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
that are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) that
demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public
health or environment; or (4) that 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 ``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 ``regarding
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
``to 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
program consistent with the 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 Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act is likewise
unaffected by this, or any, State audit privilege or immunity law.
[[Page 48282]]
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the attainment demonstration and the EAP for the
Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area. The modeling of the ozone
and ozone precursor emissions from sources affecting the Northern
Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area demonstrates that the specified
control strategies will provide for attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by December 31, 2007 and maintenance of that standard through
2012.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under State law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
State law, it 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). This rule also does not
have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a State rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
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 rule 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. This rule 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 17, 2005. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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, approving the attainment demonstration and the EAP for
the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone EAC Area, 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, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 9, 2005.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
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, the entry for the Attainment Demonstration and
Early Action Plan for the Northern Shenandoah Valley Ozone Early Action
Compact Area in paragraph (e) is added at the end of the table to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA Approved Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Material
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic submittal EPA approval date Additional
area date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48283]]
* * * * * * *
Attainment Demonstration and Early City of Winchester and 12/20/04, 8/17/05 [Insert ..............
Action Plan for the Northern Frederick County. 02/15/05 Federal Register page
Shenandoah Valley Ozone Early number where the
Action Compact Area. document begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 05-16293 Filed 8-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P