Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Revision to the Maintenance Plans for the Richmond 1990 1-Hour and Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Areas To Remove the Stage II Vapor Recovery Program, 46711-46714 [2014-18620]
Download as PDF
46711
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS
Indiana citation
Subject
*
*
*
*
*
Rule 2. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Requirements
*
*
2–2–6 ............................................
*
*
*
*
Increment
consumption;
requirements
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0142; FRL–9914–49–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Revision to the Maintenance Plans for
the Richmond 1990 1-Hour and
Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Maintenance Areas To Remove
the Stage II Vapor Recovery Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve a revision to the
Virginia State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The revision removes the Stage II
vapor recovery program (Stage II) from
the maintenance plans for the
Richmond 1990 1-hour and RichmondPetersburg 1997 8-hour ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
Maintenance Areas (Richmond Area or
Area). The revision also includes an
analysis that addresses the impact of the
removal of Stage II from subject gasoline
dispensing facilities (GDFs) in the
Richmond Area. The analysis submitted
by the Commonwealth of Virginia
(Commonwealth) satisfies the
requirements of section 110(l) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is approving
this revision in accordance with the
requirements of the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on October
10, 2014 without further notice, unless
EPA receives adverse written comment
by September 10, 2014. If EPA receives
such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
17:19 Aug 08, 2014
*
*
7/11/2012 ..................................................................
*
[FR Doc. 2014–18830 Filed 8–8–14; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
EPA approval
date
Indiana effective date
Jkt 232001
*
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
*
8/11/2014, [INSERT Federal
Register CITATION].
*
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–2014–0142 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–2014–0142,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Air Program Planning,
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–2012–
0142. 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
Sfmt 4700
*
*
Notes
*
*
(b) only
*
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:
Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by
email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On November 12, 2013, the
Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a
formal revision to its SIP through the
Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality (VADEQ). The SIP revision
consists of the removal of Stage II from
the maintenance plans for the
Richmond Area. The SIP revision also
consists of an analysis demonstrating
that the removal of Stage II from the
Richmond Area maintenance plans will
not cause any increase in emissions.
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
46712
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
This analysis satisfies the requirements
of section 110(l) of the CAA because it
demonstrates that the removal of Stage
II from the Richmond Area will not
worsen air quality nor prevent
maintenance of the NAAQS by the Area.
Stage II is a means of capturing
gasoline vapors displaced during
transfer of gasoline from the gasoline
dispensing unit to the motor vehicle
fuel tank during vehicle refueling at a
(GDF). Stage II involves use of special
refueling nozzles and coaxial hoses for
vapor collection at each gasoline pump
at a subject GDF. Gasoline vapors belong
to a class of pollutants known as volatile
organic compounds (VOC). These
compounds along with nitrogen oxides
(NOX) are precursors to the formation of
ozone. Stage II gasoline vapor recovery
systems have been a required emission
control measure in areas classified as
serious, severe, and extreme for the
ozone NAAQS.
With the amendment of the CAA in
1990, Stage II controls were required for
moderate ozone areas, under CAA
section 182(b)(3). However, under
section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.
7521(a)(6), the requirements of section
182(b)(3) no longer apply in moderate
ozone nonattainment areas after EPA
promulgated standards for onboard
refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) as part
of new motor vehicles’ emission control
systems. ORVR is a mechanism
employed by vehicles to re-use the
vapors in their gas tanks instead of
allowing them to escape. Over time,
non-ORVR vehicles continue to be
replaced by ORVR-equipped vehicles.
On May 16, 2012, EPA determined that
ORVR technology is in widespread use
throughout the U.S. vehicle fleet and
waived the requirement for states to
implement Stage II vapor recovery at
GDFs in nonattainment areas classified
as Serious or above for the ozone
NAAQS (77 FR 28772). EPA determined
that emission reductions from ORVRequipped vehicles are essentially equal
to and will soon surpass the emission
reductions achieved by Stage II alone
(77 FR 28772). EPA determined that a
state previously required to implement
a Stage II vapor recovery program may
take appropriate action to remove the
measure from its SIP (77 FR 28772).
The Richmond Area was designated
as a moderate nonattainment area under
the 1990 1-hour ozone NAAQS as well
as the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On
July 26, 1996, VADEQ submitted a
redesignation request and maintenance
plan because the air quality data was
showing attainment of the 1990 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. On November 17, 1997
(62 FR 61237), EPA approved the
redesignation request and maintenance
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Aug 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
plan. On September 26, 2006, VADEQ
submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan because the air
quality data was showing attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On June
1, 2007 (72 FR 30485), EPA approved
the redesignation request and
maintenance plan. Even though the
1990 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked
on June 15, 2005, EPA’s subsequent
implementation rules for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS retained the Stage
II-related requirements under CAA
section 182(b)(3), but only as they
applied to the Area for the Area’s
classification for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS designation for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 51.900(f).
Therefore, the maintenance plans for
both NAAQS contain provisions for the
implementation of Stage II.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The analysis submitted by VADEQ
addresses the effects of removing Stage
II from the Richmond Area. In
accordance with section 110(l) of the
CAA, the analysis demonstrates that the
removal of Stage II from the Richmond
Area will not interfere with the
attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS. In this demonstration, VADEQ
followed guidance provided by EPA in
the following guidance document:
Guidance on Removing Stage II
Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from
State Implementation Plans and
Assessing Comparable Measures. The
guidance document provided a method
in which states could provide certain
calculations showing that increased
emissions from non-ORVR compatible
Stage II would eventually negate
benefits from the implementation of
Stage II. Also, the guidance gave the
states flexibility to provide additional or
alternate analyses to EPA for
consideration.
As recommended by the guidance,
VADEQ calculated the area-wide VOC
inventory emissions benefits from Stage
II. These calculations demonstrate when
the emissions increases from non-ORVR
compatible Stage II would overtake
emissions benefits from Stage II. The
calculation results for the area-wide
Stage II emissions reductions from year
2002 to 2020 are provided in Table 1.
The results provided in Table 1
demonstrate that in 2016 there would
no longer be a VOC emissions benefit
from Stage II, or that the emissions
benefit is negative. Virginia plans on
removing the Stage II requirement on
January 1, 2017. VADEQ also provided
additional data and analyses
demonstrating that Stage II has very
little impact on VOC emissions in the
Richmond Area and that modeling
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
indicates that the formation of ozone in
the Richmond Area is much more
dependent on NOX emissions than VOC
emissions. A detailed summary of EPA’s
review and rationale for proposing to
approve this SIP revision may be found
in the Technical Support Document
(TSD) prepared in support of this
rulemaking action and is available on
line at https://www.regulations.gov,
Docket number EPA–R03–OAR–2014–
0142.
TABLE 1—STAGE II EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS IN THE AREA-WIDE VOC
INVENTORY
Year
2002
2005
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2020
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
Emissions
reductions
(tons per day VOC)
2.17
1.51
0.87
0.71
0.55
0.4
0.28
0.16
0.07
0.00
¥0.06
¥0.10
¥0.14
¥0.19
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia to remove Stage II from the
maintenance plans for the Richmond
Area. EPA is approving this revision
because it was demonstrated that the
removal of the Stage II requirement on
January 1, 2017 will not cause any
emissions increases that could interfere
with the attainment or maintenance of
the NAAQS, or otherwise interfere with
any applicable requirement of the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because EPA 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
October 10, 2014 without further notice
unless EPA receives adverse comment
by September 10, 2014. 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.
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
IV. General Information Pertaining to
SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation
that provides, subject to certain
conditions, for an environmental
assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for
voluntary compliance evaluations
performed by a regulated entity. The
legislation further addresses the relative
burden of proof for parties either
asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the
privilege is claimed. Virginia’s
legislation also provides, subject to
certain conditions, for a penalty waiver
for violations of environmental laws
when a regulated entity discovers such
violations pursuant to a voluntary
compliance evaluation and voluntarily
discloses such violations to the
Commonwealth and takes prompt and
appropriate measures to remedy the
violations. Virginia’s Voluntary
Environmental Assessment Privilege
Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides
a privilege that protects from disclosure
documents and information about the
content of those documents that are the
product of a voluntary environmental
assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information
that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a
voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the
assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger
to the public health or environment; or
(4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the
Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal
opinion that states that the Privilege
Law, Va. Code § 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Aug 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
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.
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.);
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
46713
• 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 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).
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
46714
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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 October 10, 2014. 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
Name of non-regulatory SIP
revision
*
Ozone Maintenance Plan,
emissions inventory &
contingency measures.
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking action.
This action approving the removal of
Stage II from the Richmond Area
maintenance plans may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by revising the entries
for ‘‘Ozone Maintenance Plan,
emissions inventory & contingency
measures, Richmond Area’’, and ‘‘8Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and 2002
Base Year Emissions Inventory’’ to read
as follows:
Dated: July 11, 2014.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
§ 52.2420
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) EPA-approved non-regulatory and
quasi-regulatory material
State submittal date
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
*
*
Richmond Area .................
*
7/26/96 ..............................
11/12/13 ............................
*
*
11/17/97, 62 FR 61237 ....
8/11/2014 [Insert Federal
Register citation].
*
52.2465(c)(119)
Removal of Stage II vapor
recovery program. See
section 52.2428.
*
9/18/06, 9/20/06, 9/25/06,
11/17/06, 2/13/07.
11/12/13 ............................
*
*
6/1/07, 72 FR 30485 ........
......................................
8/11/2014 [Insert Federal
Register citation].
*
The SIP effective date is
6/18/07.
Removal of Stage II vapor
recovery program. See
section 52.2428.
*
*
3. Section 52.2428 is amended by
adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
§ 52.2428 Control Strategy: Carbon
monoxide and ozone.
*
[FR Doc. 2014–18620 Filed 8–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
16:09 Aug 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
*
*
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
46 CFR Part 502
[Docket No. 14–09]
*
*
*
*
(i) As of October 10, 2014, EPA
approves the removal of the Stage II
vapor recovery program from the
maintenance plans for the Richmond
1990 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area
and the Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8Hour Ozone Maintenance Area.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Applicable geographic
area
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
■
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
*
*
*
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Richmond-Petersburg VA
Plan and 2002 Base
Area.
Year Emissions Inventory.
*
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
RIN 3072–AC57
Informal Procedure for Adjudication of
Small Claims
Federal Maritime Commission.
Direct final rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Federal Maritime
Commission (Commission) amends its
regulations concerning the adjudication
of small claims filed with the
Commission seeking reparations in the
amount of $50,000 or less for violation
of the Shipping Act of 1984. The rule
transfers responsibility for the
assignment of these claims from the
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Specialist to the Chief Administrative
Law Judge.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
This rule is effective November
7, 2014 without further action, unless
significant adverse comment is received
by September 8, 2014. If significant
adverse comment is received, the
Federal Maritime Commission will
publish a timely withdrawal of the rule
in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Karen
V. Gregory, Secretary, Federal Maritime
Commission, 800 North Capitol Street
NW., Washington, DC 20573–0001, or
email non-confidential comments to:
Secretary@fmc.gov (email comments as
attachments, preferably in Microsoft
Word or PDF).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen V. Gregory, Secretary, Federal
Maritime Commission, 800 North
Capitol Street NW., Washington, DC
20573–0001, (202) 523–5725, Email:
Secretary@fmc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Submit Comments: Include in the
subject line: Docket No. 14–09, Informal
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\11AUR1.SGM
11AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 154 (Monday, August 11, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46711-46714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18620]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0142; FRL-9914-49-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Revision to the Maintenance Plans for the Richmond 1990 1-
Hour and Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Areas To
Remove the Stage II Vapor Recovery Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a revision to the Virginia State Implementation
Plan (SIP). The revision removes the Stage II vapor recovery program
(Stage II) from the maintenance plans for the Richmond 1990 1-hour and
Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS) Maintenance Areas (Richmond Area or Area). The
revision also includes an analysis that addresses the impact of the
removal of Stage II from subject gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs)
in the Richmond Area. The analysis submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia (Commonwealth) satisfies the requirements of section 110(l) of
the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is approving this revision in accordance
with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 10, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by September 10,
2014. 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-2014-0142 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-2014-0142, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, 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-
2012-0142. 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: Asrah Khadr, (215) 814-2071, or by
email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On November 12, 2013, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a
formal revision to its SIP through the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ). The SIP revision consists of the removal
of Stage II from the maintenance plans for the Richmond Area. The SIP
revision also consists of an analysis demonstrating that the removal of
Stage II from the Richmond Area maintenance plans will not cause any
increase in emissions.
[[Page 46712]]
This analysis satisfies the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA
because it demonstrates that the removal of Stage II from the Richmond
Area will not worsen air quality nor prevent maintenance of the NAAQS
by the Area.
Stage II is a means of capturing gasoline vapors displaced during
transfer of gasoline from the gasoline dispensing unit to the motor
vehicle fuel tank during vehicle refueling at a (GDF). Stage II
involves use of special refueling nozzles and coaxial hoses for vapor
collection at each gasoline pump at a subject GDF. Gasoline vapors
belong to a class of pollutants known as volatile organic compounds
(VOC). These compounds along with nitrogen oxides (NOX) are
precursors to the formation of ozone. Stage II gasoline vapor recovery
systems have been a required emission control measure in areas
classified as serious, severe, and extreme for the ozone NAAQS.
With the amendment of the CAA in 1990, Stage II controls were
required for moderate ozone areas, under CAA section 182(b)(3).
However, under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(6), the
requirements of section 182(b)(3) no longer apply in moderate ozone
nonattainment areas after EPA promulgated standards for onboard
refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) as part of new motor vehicles' emission
control systems. ORVR is a mechanism employed by vehicles to re-use the
vapors in their gas tanks instead of allowing them to escape. Over
time, non-ORVR vehicles continue to be replaced by ORVR-equipped
vehicles. On May 16, 2012, EPA determined that ORVR technology is in
widespread use throughout the U.S. vehicle fleet and waived the
requirement for states to implement Stage II vapor recovery at GDFs in
nonattainment areas classified as Serious or above for the ozone NAAQS
(77 FR 28772). EPA determined that emission reductions from ORVR-
equipped vehicles are essentially equal to and will soon surpass the
emission reductions achieved by Stage II alone (77 FR 28772). EPA
determined that a state previously required to implement a Stage II
vapor recovery program may take appropriate action to remove the
measure from its SIP (77 FR 28772).
The Richmond Area was designated as a moderate nonattainment area
under the 1990 1-hour ozone NAAQS as well as the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. On July 26, 1996, VADEQ submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan because the air quality data was showing attainment of
the 1990 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On November 17, 1997 (62 FR 61237), EPA
approved the redesignation request and maintenance plan. On September
26, 2006, VADEQ submitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan
because the air quality data was showing attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. On June 1, 2007 (72 FR 30485), EPA approved the
redesignation request and maintenance plan. Even though the 1990 1-hour
ozone NAAQS was revoked on June 15, 2005, EPA's subsequent
implementation rules for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS retained the Stage
II-related requirements under CAA section 182(b)(3), but only as they
applied to the Area for the Area's classification for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS designation for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 51.900(f).
Therefore, the maintenance plans for both NAAQS contain provisions for
the implementation of Stage II.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The analysis submitted by VADEQ addresses the effects of removing
Stage II from the Richmond Area. In accordance with section 110(l) of
the CAA, the analysis demonstrates that the removal of Stage II from
the Richmond Area will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance
of the NAAQS. In this demonstration, VADEQ followed guidance provided
by EPA in the following guidance document: Guidance on Removing Stage
II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from State Implementation Plans and
Assessing Comparable Measures. The guidance document provided a method
in which states could provide certain calculations showing that
increased emissions from non-ORVR compatible Stage II would eventually
negate benefits from the implementation of Stage II. Also, the guidance
gave the states flexibility to provide additional or alternate analyses
to EPA for consideration.
As recommended by the guidance, VADEQ calculated the area-wide VOC
inventory emissions benefits from Stage II. These calculations
demonstrate when the emissions increases from non-ORVR compatible Stage
II would overtake emissions benefits from Stage II. The calculation
results for the area-wide Stage II emissions reductions from year 2002
to 2020 are provided in Table 1. The results provided in Table 1
demonstrate that in 2016 there would no longer be a VOC emissions
benefit from Stage II, or that the emissions benefit is negative.
Virginia plans on removing the Stage II requirement on January 1, 2017.
VADEQ also provided additional data and analyses demonstrating that
Stage II has very little impact on VOC emissions in the Richmond Area
and that modeling indicates that the formation of ozone in the Richmond
Area is much more dependent on NOX emissions than VOC
emissions. A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for
proposing to approve this SIP revision may be found in the Technical
Support Document (TSD) prepared in support of this rulemaking action
and is available on line at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number
EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0142.
Table 1--Stage II Emissions Reductions in the Area-Wide VOC Inventory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions
Year reductions (tons
per day VOC)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................................... 2.17
2005............................................... 1.51
2008............................................... 0.87
2009............................................... 0.71
2010............................................... 0.55
2011............................................... 0.4
2012............................................... 0.28
2013............................................... 0.16
2014............................................... 0.07
2015............................................... 0.00
2016............................................... -0.06
2017............................................... -0.10
2018............................................... -0.14
2020............................................... -0.19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia to remove Stage II from the maintenance plans for the Richmond
Area. EPA is approving this revision because it was demonstrated that
the removal of the Stage II requirement on January 1, 2017 will not
cause any emissions increases that could interfere with the attainment
or maintenance of the NAAQS, or otherwise interfere with any applicable
requirement of the CAA. EPA is publishing this rule without prior
proposal because EPA 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 October 10,
2014 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by
September 10, 2014. 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.
[[Page 46713]]
Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.'' Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides
that ``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
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.
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.);
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).
[[Page 46714]]
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 October 10, 2014. 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 action.
This action approving the removal of Stage II from the Richmond
Area maintenance plans 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 11, 2014.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV--Virginia
0
2. In Sec. 52.2420, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by revising
the entries for ``Ozone Maintenance Plan, emissions inventory &
contingency measures, Richmond Area'', and ``8-Hour Ozone Maintenance
Plan and 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) EPA-approved non-regulatory and quasi-regulatory material
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable geographic
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ozone Maintenance Plan, emissions Richmond Area.......... 7/26/96................ 11/17/97, 62 FR 61237................... 52.2465(c)(119)
inventory & contingency measures. 11/12/13............... 8/11/2014 [Insert Federal Register Removal of Stage II
citation]. vapor recovery
program. See section
52.2428.
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and Richmond-Petersburg VA 9/18/06, 9/20/06, 9/25/ 6/1/07, 72 FR 30485..................... The SIP effective date
2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory. Area. 06, 11/17/06, 2/13/07. ........................................ is 6/18/07.
11/12/13............... 8/11/2014 [Insert Federal Register Removal of Stage II
citation]. vapor recovery
program. See section
52.2428.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 52.2428 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2428 Control Strategy: Carbon monoxide and ozone.
* * * * *
(i) As of October 10, 2014, EPA approves the removal of the Stage
II vapor recovery program from the maintenance plans for the Richmond
1990 1-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area and the Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-
Hour Ozone Maintenance Area.
[FR Doc. 2014-18620 Filed 8-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P