Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 39651-39653 [2013-15890]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules
review and rationale for approving West
Virginia’s submittal may be found in the
Technical Support Document (TSD) for
this proposed rulemaking action, which
is available online at
www.regulations.gov, Docket number
EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0299.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
following elements or portions thereof
of West Virginia’s February 17, 2012 SIP
revision: (A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii),
(E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L),
and (M). West Virginia’s SIP revision
provides the basic program elements
specified in CAA section 110(a)(2)
necessary to implement, maintain, and
enforce the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This
action does not include any proposed
action on section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA
which pertains to the nonattainment
requirements of part D, Title I of the
CAA, because this element is not
required to be submitted by the 3-year
submission deadline of CAA section
110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a
separate process. This action also does
not include proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, because
this element, or portions thereof, is not
required to be submitted by a state to
meet CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until
the EPA has quantified a state’s
obligations under that section. See EME
Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7 (DC Cir. 2012), reh’g denied 2013
U.S. App. LEXIS 1623 (Jan. 24, 2013).
Additionally, EPA has taken separate
action on the portions of CAA section
110(a)(2) infrastructure elements for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as they relate to
West Virginia’s PSD program, as
required by part C of Title I of the CAA.
This includes portions of the following
infrastructure elements: CAA section
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J). See (77 FR
63736, October 17, 2012) and (78 FR
27062, May 9, 2013). EPA will take later
separate action on CAA section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS as it relates to CAA section 128,
‘‘State Boards.’’
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 Jul 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed 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.);
• 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 proposed rule, which
satisfies the infrastructure requirements
of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the
2008 ozone NAAQS, 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds, Nitrogen dioxide, Record
keeping.
PO 00000
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39651
Dated: June 13, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013–15893 Filed 7–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0211; FRL–9829–8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2008 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Virginia addressing
the basic program elements specified in
110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
necessary to implement, maintain, and
enforce the 2008 ozone national ambient
air quality standards (NAAQS). This
submission is commonly referred to as
an infrastructure SIP. This action does
not include any proposed action on
element (I) which pertains to the
nonattainment requirements of part D,
Title I of the CAA, because this element
is not required to be submitted by the
3-year submission deadline of CAA
section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed
in a separate action. This action is being
taken under the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 1, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2013–0211 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0211,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Air Program Planning, Air
Protection Division, Mailcode 3AP30,
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–2013–
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39652
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules
0211. 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:
Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814–5787, or by
email at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov.
On July
23, 2012, the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ)
submitted a revision to its SIP to satisfy
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 Jul 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of
the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
I. Background
On March 27, 2008, EPA promulgated
a revised NAAQS for ozone based on 8hour average concentrations. EPA
revised the level of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS to 0.075 parts per million
(ppm). Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance,
and enforcement of a new or revised
NAAQS within three years following
the promulgation of such NAAQS or
within such shorter period as EPA may
prescribe. The contents of that
submission may vary depending upon
the facts and circumstances. In
particular, the data and analytical tools
available at the time the state develops
and submits the SIP for a new or revised
NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP
submissions may also vary depending
upon what provisions the state’s
existing SIP already contains.
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the
CAA, states are required to submit SIPs
meeting the applicable requirements of
section 110(a)(2) within three years after
promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS or within such shorter period
as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(1)
provides the procedural and timing
requirements for SIPs and section
110(a)(2) requires states to address basic
SIP elements such as requirements for
monitoring, basic program requirements
and legal authority that are designed to
assure attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS. More specifically, section
110(a)(2) lists specific elements that
states must meet for ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP
requirements related to a newly
established or revised NAAQS. In the
case of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
states typically have met the basic
program elements required in section
110(a)(2) through earlier SIP
submissions in connection with the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
States were required to submit such
SIPs for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
to EPA no later than March 2011.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On July 23, 2012, VADEQ provided a
submittal to satisfy the requirements of
section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. This submittal
addressed the following infrastructure
elements, which EPA is proposing to
approve: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B),
(C) (for enforcement and regulation of
minor sources), (D)(i)(II) (for visibility
protection), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F),
(G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions
thereof. EPA is taking separate action on
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the portions of (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as
they relate to Virginia’s PSD program
and (E)(ii) as it relates to CAA section
128 (State Boards). This action does not
include any proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA which pertains
to the nonattainment requirements of
part D, Title I of the CAA, because this
element is not required to be submitted
by the 3-year submission deadline of
CAA section 110(a)(1), and will be
addressed in a separate process. This
action also does not include proposed
action on section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the
CAA, because this element, or portions
thereof, is not required to be submitted
by a state to meet CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until the EPA has
quantified a state’s obligations under
that section. See EME Homer City
Generation, LP v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C.
Cir. 2012), reh’g denied 2013 U.S. App.
LEXIS 1623 (Jan. 24., 2013). A detailed
summary of EPA’s review and rationale
for approving Virginia’s submittal may
be found in the Technical Support
Document (TSD) for this proposed
rulemaking action, which is available
online at www.regulations.gov, Docket
number EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0211.
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
that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a
voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the
assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules
to the public health or environment; or
(4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the
Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal
opinion that states that the Privilege
law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, precludes
granting a privilege to documents and
information ‘‘required by law,’’
including documents and information
‘‘required by Federal law to maintain
program delegation, authorization or
approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce
Federally authorized environmental
programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal
counterparts. . . .’’ The opinion
concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198,
therefore, documents or other
information needed for civil or criminal
enforcement under one of these
programs could not be privileged
because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing
enforcement in a manner required by
Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval.’’
Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code
Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the
extent consistent with requirements
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 PSD,
NSR, or Title V programs 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 Jul 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
following CAA section 110(a)(2)
elements of Virginia’s SIP revision: (A),
(B), (C) (for enforcement and regulation
of minor sources), (D)(i)(II) (for visibility
protection), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F),
(G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions
thereof. Virginia’s SIP revision provides
the basic program elements specified in
CAA section 110(a)(2) necessary to
implement, maintain, and enforce the
2008 ozone NAAQS. This SIP revision
was submitted on July 23, 2012. This
action does not include any proposed
action on section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA
which pertains to the nonattainment
requirements of part D, Title I of the
CAA, since this element is not required
to be submitted by the 3-year
submission deadline of CAA section
110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a
separate process. This action also does
not include proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, because
this element, or portions thereof, is not
required to be submitted by a state to
meet CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until
the EPA has quantified a state’s
obligations under that section. EPA is
taking separate action on the portions of
(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to
Virginia’s PSD program and (E)(ii) as it
relates to CAA section 128 (State
Boards). EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this document. These comments will be
considered before taking final action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
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 proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed 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
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
39653
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
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 proposed rule, which
satisfies certain infrastructure
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the
CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the
Commonwealth of Virginia, 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds, Nitrogen dioxide.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 13, 2013.
W. C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013–15890 Filed 7–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39651-39653]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15890]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0211; FRL-9829-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia addressing the basic
program elements specified in 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). This submission is commonly
referred to as an infrastructure SIP. This action does not include any
proposed action on element (I) which pertains to the nonattainment
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, because this element is not
required to be submitted by the 3-year submission deadline of CAA
section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate action. This
action is being taken under the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 1, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2013-0211 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0211, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Air Protection Division,
Mailcode 3AP30, 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-
2013-
[[Page 39652]]
0211. 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: Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814-5787, or by
email at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 23, 2012, the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ) submitted a revision to its SIP to
satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
I. Background
On March 27, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised NAAQS for ozone based
on 8-hour average concentrations. EPA revised the level of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts per million (ppm). Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three
years following the promulgation of such NAAQS or within such shorter
period as EPA may prescribe. The contents of that submission may vary
depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and
analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits
the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains.
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to
submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)
within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or
within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(1)
provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs and section
110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as
requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal
authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. In the case of the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, states typically have met the basic program elements
required in section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP submissions in
connection with the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS to EPA no later than March 2011.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On July 23, 2012, VADEQ provided a submittal to satisfy the
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
This submittal addressed the following infrastructure elements, which
EPA is proposing to approve: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) (for
enforcement and regulation of minor sources), (D)(i)(II) (for
visibility protection), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J),
(K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof. EPA is taking separate action
on the portions of (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to
Virginia's PSD program and (E)(ii) as it relates to CAA section 128
(State Boards). This action does not include any proposed action on
section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA which pertains to the nonattainment
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, because this element is not
required to be submitted by the 3-year submission deadline of CAA
section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate process. This
action also does not include proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, because this element, or portions
thereof, is not required to be submitted by a state to meet CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until the EPA has quantified a state's obligations
under that section. See EME Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA, 696 F.3d
7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), reh'g denied 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1623 (Jan. 24.,
2013). A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for approving
Virginia's submittal may be found in the Technical Support Document
(TSD) for this proposed rulemaking action, which is available online at
www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0211.
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 that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger
[[Page 39653]]
to the public health or environment; or (4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
PSD, NSR, or Title V programs 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. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the following CAA section 110(a)(2)
elements of Virginia's SIP revision: (A), (B), (C) (for enforcement and
regulation of minor sources), (D)(i)(II) (for visibility protection),
(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or
portions thereof. Virginia's SIP revision provides the basic program
elements specified in CAA section 110(a)(2) necessary to implement,
maintain, and enforce the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This SIP revision was
submitted on July 23, 2012. This action does not include any proposed
action on section 110(a)(2)(I) of the CAA which pertains to the
nonattainment requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA, since this
element is not required to be submitted by the 3-year submission
deadline of CAA section 110(a)(1), and will be addressed in a separate
process. This action also does not include proposed action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, because this element, or portions
thereof, is not required to be submitted by a state to meet CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) until the EPA has quantified a state's obligations
under that section. EPA is taking separate action on the portions of
(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they relate to Virginia's PSD program and
(E)(ii) as it relates to CAA section 128 (State Boards). EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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 proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed 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.);
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 proposed rule, which satisfies certain infrastructure
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds, Nitrogen dioxide.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 13, 2013.
W. C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-15890 Filed 7-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P