Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Administrative Requirements From the Regulation for the Control of Motor Vehicle Emissions in Northern Virginia, 44149-44151 [2012-18104]
Download as PDF
44149
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS, TECHNICAL MEMORANDA, AND STATUTES IN THE MARYLAND SIP
Code of Maryland administrative regulations
(COMAR) citation
State
effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
26.11.10
*
*
26.11.10.03 ....................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0443; FRL–9702–4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Removal of Administrative
Requirements From the Regulation for
the Control of Motor Vehicle Emissions
in Northern Virginia
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. This revision removes four
internal State administrative
requirements from the Virginia SIP
regulations for the control of motor
vehicle emissions in the Northern
Virginia Area. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on
September 25, 2012 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
written comment by August 27, 2012. If
EPA receives such comments, it will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2012–0443 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
14:46 Jul 26, 2012
Jkt 226001
*
*
6/29/09
*
*
*
*
Revised paragraphs A. and D. of 26.11.10.03 for
Sintering Plants.
*
B. Email: frankford.harold@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0443,
Harold A. Frankford, Mailcode 3AP00,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012–
0443. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
PO 00000
*
*
7/27/2012 [Insert page
number where the
document begins].
*
[FR Doc. 2012–18094 Filed 7–26–12; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
Control of Iron and Steel Production Installations
Visible Emissions ..........
*
Additional explanation/
citation at 40 CFR 52.1100
EPA approval date
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., 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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy 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:
Harold A. Frankford, (215) 814–2108, or
by email at frankford.harold@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. On April 19, 2012, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) submitted a revision to its State
Implementation Plan (SIP).
I. Summary of SIP Revision
The revision consists of the removal
of four administrative regulations from
SIP-approved regulations 9VAC5
Chapter 91 (Regulation for the Control
of Motor Vehicle Emissions in the
Northern Virginia Area) pertaining to
the establishment of regulations
(Regulation 5–91–40), hearings and
proceedings (Regulation 5–91–60),
variances (Regulation 5–91–80), and
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
44150
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
procedural information and guidance
(Regulation 5–91–110). Virginia has
already repealed these four regulations
from the State-enforceable version of
9VAC5, Chapter 91. However, Virginia
has indicated in its SIP revision
submittal that the regulations being
removed from Chapter 91 do exist in the
State-enforceable 9VAC5 Chapter 170
entitled Regulation for General
Administration.
II. EPA Evaluation
EPA has determined that these
administrative regulations need not be
included in the Virginia SIP, as they
describe internal State administrative
procedures, and have no specific
relationship to any pollutant control
strategy under the CAA. While the CAA
does require public hearings to be held
on prospective SIP revisions, such
requirements are found in 40 CFR
51.102. Similarly, in cases where
Virginia grants variances of significant
duration, the DEQ must submit such
variances to EPA as separate SIP
revisions.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 Jul 26, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 § 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 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
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the removal of
Regulations 5–91–40, 5–91–60, 5–91–
80, and 5–91–110 from the Virginia SIP,
as requested by the Virginia DEQ on
April 19, 2012. EPA is publishing this
rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
amendment and anticipates no adverse
comment. However, in the ‘‘Proposed
Rules’’ section of today’s Federal
Register, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal
to approve the SIP revision if adverse
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective on September 25, 2012 without
further notice unless EPA receives
adverse comment by August 27, 2012. If
EPA receives adverse comment, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect. EPA
will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time. Please note that
if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
V. 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• 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.);
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 145 / Friday, July 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
• 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
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 September 25, 2012. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 Jul 26, 2012
Jkt 226001
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. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking.
This action to remove four internal
administrative requirements from the
regulation for the control of motor
vehicle emissions in the Northern
Virginia Area may not be challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
44151
when used as an inert ingredient
(Ultraviolet-stabilizer) (UV), at no more
than 5% in pesticide formulations
containing the active ingredient
napropamide, used in or on growing
crops. United Phosphorus, Inc.
submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), requesting an amendment to
an existing requirement of a tolerance.
This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of titanium dioxide.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
27, 2012. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 25, 2012, and must be filed
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION).
[FR Doc. 2012–18104 Filed 7–26–12; 8:45 am]
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0829, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the OPP Docket in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), located in EPA
West, Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Lieu, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–0079; email address:
lieu.david@epa.gov.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference.
Dated: July 10, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended
as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR
part 52 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
§ 52.2420
[Amended]
2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by removing the entries
for Sections ‘‘5–91–40’’, ‘‘5–91–60’’, ‘‘5–
91–80’’, and ‘‘5–91–110’’ from the table.
■
ADDRESSES:
I. General Information
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0829; FRL–9354–6]
Titanium Dioxide; Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of titanium
dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463–67–7)
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44149-44151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18104]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0443; FRL-9702-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Removal of Administrative Requirements From the Regulation
for the Control of Motor Vehicle Emissions in Northern Virginia
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. This revision removes four internal State administrative
requirements from the Virginia SIP regulations for the control of motor
vehicle emissions in the Northern Virginia Area. This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on September 25, 2012 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by August 27, 2012.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0443 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: frankford.harold@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0443, Harold A. Frankford, Mailcode
3AP00, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0443. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy 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: Harold A. Frankford, (215) 814-2108,
or by email at frankford.harold@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. On April 19, 2012, the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) submitted a revision
to its State Implementation Plan (SIP).
I. Summary of SIP Revision
The revision consists of the removal of four administrative
regulations from SIP-approved regulations 9VAC5 Chapter 91 (Regulation
for the Control of Motor Vehicle Emissions in the Northern Virginia
Area) pertaining to the establishment of regulations (Regulation 5-91-
40), hearings and proceedings (Regulation 5-91-60), variances
(Regulation 5-91-80), and
[[Page 44150]]
procedural information and guidance (Regulation 5-91-110). Virginia has
already repealed these four regulations from the State-enforceable
version of 9VAC5, Chapter 91. However, Virginia has indicated in its
SIP revision submittal that the regulations being removed from Chapter
91 do exist in the State-enforceable 9VAC5 Chapter 170 entitled
Regulation for General Administration.
II. EPA Evaluation
EPA has determined that these administrative regulations need not
be included in the Virginia SIP, as they describe internal State
administrative procedures, and have no specific relationship to any
pollutant control strategy under the CAA. While the CAA does require
public hearings to be held on prospective SIP revisions, such
requirements are found in 40 CFR 51.102. Similarly, in cases where
Virginia grants variances of significant duration, the DEQ must submit
such variances to EPA as separate SIP revisions.
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 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
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 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.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the removal of Regulations 5-91-40, 5-91-60, 5-91-
80, and 5-91-110 from the Virginia SIP, as requested by the Virginia
DEQ on April 19, 2012. EPA is publishing this rule without prior
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment
and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of today's Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if
adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on September
25, 2012 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by
August 27, 2012. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.
V. 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
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.);
[[Page 44151]]
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 appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
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 September 25, 2012. 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking.
This action to remove four internal administrative requirements
from the regulation for the control of motor vehicle emissions in the
Northern Virginia 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, Incorporation by
reference.
Dated: July 10, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Sec. 52.2420 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 52.2420, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing
the entries for Sections ``5-91-40'', ``5-91-60'', ``5-91-80'', and
``5-91-110'' from the table.
[FR Doc. 2012-18104 Filed 7-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P