Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Redesignation of the City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, and Stafford County Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area's Maintenance Plan, 76165-76168 [05-24363]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations (2) Assist or support training and informational programs for Department attorneys and client agencies concerning Section 530B and other professional responsibility requirements, including disseminating relevant and timely information. (3) Assemble, centralize and maintain ethics reference materials, including the codes of ethics of the District of Columbia and every state and territory, and any relevant interpretations thereof. (4) Coordinate with the relevant litigating components of the Department to defend attorneys in any disciplinary or other proceeding where it is alleged that they failed to meet their ethical obligations, provided that the attorney made a good-faith effort to ascertain the ethics requirements and made a goodfaith effort to comply with those requirements. (5) Serve as a liaison with the state and federal bar associations in matters relating to the implementation and interpretation of Section 530B, and amendments and revisions to the various state ethics codes. (6) Perform such other duties and assignments as deemed necessary from time to time by the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General. (c) Nothing in this subpart shall be construed as affecting the functions or overriding the authority of the Office of Legal Counsel as established by 28 CFR 0.25. Dated: December 15, 2005. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General. [FR Doc. 05–24329 Filed 12–22–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–19–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA–R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007; FRL–8012– 2] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Redesignation of the City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, and Stafford County Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area’s Maintenance Plan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is approving a redesignation request and a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:34 Dec 22, 2005 Jkt 208001 Virginia. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) is requesting that the City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, and Stafford County (the Fredericksburg area) be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). In conjunction with its redesignation request, the Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 10 years. EPA is also approving the adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the 8-hour maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area for purposes of transportation conformity, and is approving those MVEBs. EPA is approving the redesignation request and the maintenance plan revision to the Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements of the CAA. DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on January 23, 2006. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2005–VA– 0007. All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. 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 through https:// www.regulations.gov 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: Amy Caprio, (215) 814–2156, or by email at caprio.amy@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On September 12, 2005 (70 FR 53746), EPA proposed approval of a redesignation request and maintenance plan submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Fredericksburg area. On September 30, 2005 (70 FR 57238), EPA withdrew the September 12, 2005 proposed rule. PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 76165 On November 2, 2005 (70 FR 66316), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR proposed approval of both Virginia’s redesignation request and a SIP revision that establishes a maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area that sets forth how the Fredericksburg area will maintain attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 10 years. The formal SIP revision was submitted by the VADEQ on May 2, 2005 and May 4, 2005. Other specific requirements of Virginia’s redesignation request SIP revision for the maintenance plan, and the rationale for EPA’s proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR. II. 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 privilege to documents and information ‘‘required by law,’’ E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM 23DER1 76166 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES 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 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. III. Final Action EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Virginia’s May 2, 2005 redesignation request and May 4, 2005 maintenance plan because the requirements for approval have been satisfied. EPA has evaluated Virginia’s redesignation request, submitted on May 2, 2005, and determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:34 Dec 22, 2005 Jkt 208001 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the redesignation request and monitoring data demonstrate that the Fredericksburg area has attained the 8hour ozone standard. The final approval of this redesignation request will change the designation of the Fredericksburg area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is approving the associated maintenance plan for this area, submitted on May 4, 2005, as a revision to the Virginia SIP. EPA is approving the maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area because it meets the requirements of section 175A. EPA is also approving the MVEBs submitted by Virginia for this area in conjunction with its redesignation request. The Fredericksburg area is subject to the CAA’s requirements for moderate ozone nonattainment areas until and unless it is redesignated to attainment. IV. 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. Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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), because it merely proposes to affect the status of a geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or allow the state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements, 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 (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. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new requirements on sources. 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. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under the executive order. 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 E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM 23DER1 76167 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 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). review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action, to approve the redesignation request, maintenance plan and adequacy determination for MVEBs for the Fredericksburg area, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) C. Petitions for Judicial Review 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. 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 February 21, 2006. 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 List of Subjects Applicable geographic area * * 8–Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the Fredericksburg VA Area. 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I Subpart VV—Virginia 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an entry for the 8–Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, Fredericksburg, VA Area at the end of the table to read as follows: I § 52.2420 * * * City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, and Stafford County. Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * EPA approval date * * 12/23/05 [Insert page number where the document begins]. 5/4/05 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 1. The authority citation for Part 81 continues to read as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] State submittal date Name of non-regulatory SIP revision I 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 40 CFR Part 81 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas. PART 81—[AMENDED] Dated: December 13, 2005. Donald S. Welsh, Regional Administrator, Region III. Additional explanation * Fredericksburg, VA Area to read as follows: 2. Section 81.347 is amended by revising the ozone table entry for the I § 81.347 * * Virginia. * * * VIRGINIA—OZONE (8–HOUR STANDARD) Designation a Category/classification Designated area Date 1 * * * Fredericksburg, VA Area: City of Fredericksburg .............................................................. Spotsylvania County ................................................................. Stafford County ......................................................................... * * * Date 1 Type * * 12/23/05 12/23/05 12/23/05 * * * * erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:34 Dec 22, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 * * Attainment. Attainment. Attainment. a Includes 1 This Type E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM 23DER1 76168 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 246 / Friday, December 23, 2005 / Rules and Regulations [FR Doc. 05–24363 Filed 12–22–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 261 [FRL–8012–4] Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Final rule. erjones on PROD1PC68 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) today is granting a petition submitted by Saturn Corporation in Spring Hill, Tennessee (Saturn) to exclude (or ‘‘delist’’) a certain hazardous waste from the lists of hazardous wastes. Saturn generates the petitioned waste, the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) sludge, by treating wastewater from Saturn’s chemical conversion coating of aluminum. The waste so generated is a wastewater treatment sludge that meets the definition of F019. Saturn petitioned EPA to grant a ‘‘generator-specific’’ delisting because Saturn believes that its F019 waste does not meet the criteria for which this type of waste was listed. EPA reviewed all of the waste-specific information provided by Saturn, performed calculations, and determined that the waste could be disposed in a landfill without harming human health and the environment. This action responds to Saturn’s petition to delist this waste on a generator-specific basis from the hazardous waste lists, and to public comments on the proposed rule. EPA took into account the public comments on the proposed rule before setting the final delisting levels. Final delisting levels in the waste leachate are based on the EPA, Region 6’s Delisting Risk Assessment Software. In accordance with the conditions specified in this final rule, Saturn’s petitioned waste is excluded from the requirements of hazardous waste regulations under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). DATES: Effective December 23, 2005. ADDRESSES: The RCRA regulatory docket for this final rule is located at the EPA Library, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303, and is available for viewing from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. The public VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:34 Dec 22, 2005 Jkt 208001 may copy material from this regulatory docket at $0.15 per page. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general and technical information concerning this final rule, please contact Kris Lippert, RCRA Enforcement and Compliance Branch (Mail Code 4WD– RCRA), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303, (404) 562–8605, or call, toll free (800) 241–1754. Questions may also be e-mailed to Ms. Lippert at Lippert.kristin@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of today’s preamble are listed in the following outline: I. Background A. What Is a Delisting Petition? B. What Laws and Regulations Give EPA the Authority to Delist Wastes? C. What is the History of this Rulemaking? II. Summary of Delisting Petition Submitted by Saturn Corporation, Spring Hill, Tennessee (Saturn) A. What Waste Did Saturn Petition EPA to Delist? B. What Information Did Saturn Submit to Support This Petition? III. EPA’s Evaluation and Final Rule A. What Decision Is EPA Finalizing and Why? B. What Are the Terms of This Exclusion? C. When Is the Delisting Effective? D. How Does This Action Affect the States? IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion A. Who Submitted Comments on the Proposed Rule? B. Comments and Responses From EPA V. Regulatory Impact VI. Congressional Review Act VII. Executive Order 12875 I. Background A. What Is a Delisting Petition? A delisting petition is a request made by a hazardous waste generator to exclude one or more of his/her wastes from the lists of RCRA-regulated hazardous wastes in §§ 261.31, 261.32, and 261.33 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 261.31, 261.32, and 261.33). The regulatory requirements for a delisting petition are in 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22. EPA, Region 6 has prepared a guidance manual, Region 6 Guidance Manual for the Petitioner, which is recommended by EPA Headquarters in Washington, DC and all EPA Regions, and can be down-loaded from Region 6’s Web Site at the following URL address: https:// www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6pd/rcra_c/pd-o/ dlistpdf.htm. B. What Laws and Regulations Give EPA the Authority To Delist Wastes? On January 16, 1981, as part of its final and interim final regulations PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 implementing section 3001 of RCRA, EPA published an amended list of hazardous wastes from non-specific and specific sources. This list has been amended several times, and is published in 40 CFR 261.31 and 261.32. These wastes are listed as hazardous because they exhibit one or more of the characteristics of hazardous wastes identified in subpart C of part 261 (i.e., ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity) or meet the criteria for listing contained in § 261.11(a)(2) or (a)(3). Discarded commercial chemical product wastes which meet the listing criteria are listed in § 261.33(e) and (f). Individual waste streams may vary, however, depending on raw materials, industrial processes, and other factors. Thus, while a waste that is described in these regulations generally is hazardous, a specific waste from an individual facility meeting the listing description may not be. For this reason, §§ 260.20 and 260.22 provide an exclusion procedure, allowing persons to demonstrate that a specific waste from a particular generating facility should not be regulated as a hazardous waste. To have their wastes excluded, petitioners must show, first, that wastes generated at their facilities do not meet any of the criteria for which the wastes were listed. See § 260.22(a) and the background documents for the listed wastes. Second, the Administrator must determine, where he/she has a reasonable basis to believe that factors (including additional constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed could cause the waste to be a hazardous waste, that such factors do not warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste. Accordingly, a petitioner also must demonstrate that the waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous waste characteristics (i.e., ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity, and toxicity), and must present sufficient information for the EPA to determine whether the waste contains any other toxicants at hazardous levels. See § 260.22(a), 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and the background documents for the listed wastes. Although wastes which are ‘‘delisted’’ (i.e., excluded) have been evaluated to determine whether or not they exhibit any of the characteristics of hazardous waste, generators remain obligated under RCRA to determine whether or not their wastes continue to be nonhazardous based on the hazardous waste characteristics (i.e., characteristics which may be promulgated subsequent to a delisting decision.). In addition, residues from the treatment, storage, or disposal of listed E:\FR\FM\23DER1.SGM 23DER1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 246 (Friday, December 23, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76165-76168]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24363]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2005-VA-0007; FRL-8012-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Redesignation of the City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania
County, and Stafford County Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and
Approval of the Area's Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a redesignation request and a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) is
requesting that the City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, and
Stafford County (the Fredericksburg area) be redesignated as attainment
for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). In
conjunction with its redesignation request, the Commonwealth submitted
a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg
area that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for the next 10 years. EPA is also approving the adequacy determination
for the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in
the 8-hour maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area for purposes of
transportation conformity, and is approving those MVEBs. EPA is
approving the redesignation request and the maintenance plan revision
to the Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective on January 23,
2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2005-VA-0007. All documents in the docket are listed
in the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. 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 through https://
www.regulations.gov 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: Amy Caprio, (215) 814-2156, or by e-
mail at caprio.amy@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On September 12, 2005 (70 FR 53746), EPA proposed approval of a
redesignation request and maintenance plan submitted by the
Commonwealth of Virginia for the Fredericksburg area. On September 30,
2005 (70 FR 57238), EPA withdrew the September 12, 2005 proposed rule.
On November 2, 2005 (70 FR 66316), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR
proposed approval of both Virginia's redesignation request and a SIP
revision that establishes a maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg
area that sets forth how the Fredericksburg area will maintain
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 10 years. The formal
SIP revision was submitted by the VADEQ on May 2, 2005 and May 4, 2005.
Other specific requirements of Virginia's redesignation request SIP
revision for the maintenance plan, and the rationale for EPA's proposed
action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No
public comments were received on the NPR.

II. 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 privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,''

[[Page 76166]]

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
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.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Virginia's May 2, 2005
redesignation request and May 4, 2005 maintenance plan because the
requirements for approval have been satisfied. EPA has evaluated
Virginia's redesignation request, submitted on May 2, 2005, and
determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the redesignation
request and monitoring data demonstrate that the Fredericksburg area
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The final approval of this
redesignation request will change the designation of the Fredericksburg
area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
EPA is approving the associated maintenance plan for this area,
submitted on May 4, 2005, as a revision to the Virginia SIP. EPA is
approving the maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg area because it
meets the requirements of section 175A. EPA is also approving the MVEBs
submitted by Virginia for this area in conjunction with its
redesignation request. The Fredericksburg area is subject to the CAA's
requirements for moderate ozone nonattainment areas until and unless it
is redesignated to attainment.

IV. 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.
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of
the Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements on small
entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements
on sources. 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 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), nor will it 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), because it
merely proposes to affect the status of a geographical area, does not
impose any new requirements on sources, or allow the state to avoid
adopting or implementing other requirements, 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 (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. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any new requirements on sources. 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. As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this
rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors
and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings
implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney General's
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.

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

[[Page 76167]]

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 February 21, 2006. 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, to approve the redesignation request, maintenance plan
and adequacy determination for MVEBs for the Fredericksburg area, may
not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

Dated: December 13, 2005.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are 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 table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry for the 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan, Fredericksburg, VA Area at
the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.

* * * * *
(e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of non-regulatory SIP Applicable geographic State Additional
revision area submittal date EPA approval date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan City of Fredericksburg, 5/4/05 12/23/05 [Insert
for the Fredericksburg VA Area. Spotsylvania County, page number where
and Stafford County. the document
begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. Section 81.347 is amended by revising the ozone table entry for the
Fredericksburg, VA Area to read as follows:

Sec. 81.347 Virginia.

* * * * *

Virginia--Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\ Category/classification
Designated area ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
Fredericksburg, VA Area:
City of Fredericksburg.... 12/23/05 Attainment......................
Spotsylvania County....... 12/23/05 Attainment......................
Stafford County........... 12/23/05 Attainment......................

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

[[Page 76168]]

[FR Doc. 05-24363 Filed 12-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.