Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Revisions to the Attainment Plans for the Commonwealth of Virginia Portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA 1990 1-Hour and 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas and the Maintenance Plan for the Fredericksburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area To Remove the Stage II Vapor Recovery Program, 29959-29964 [2015-12351]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
requirements at 40 CFR 51.300–51.309
and CAA sections 169A and 169B. All
general SIP requirements contained in
CAA section 110, other provisions of the
CAA, and our regulations applicable to
this action were also evaluated. The
purpose of this action is to ensure
compliance with these requirements
and to provide additional rationale to
support our conclusions.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of Colorado
revisions to its SIP to address the
requirements of EPA’s regional haze
rule discussed in section III, Final
Action, of this preamble. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available
electronically through
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard
copy at the appropriate EPA office (see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble
for more information).
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:03 May 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
this action does not involve the use of
measurement or other standards; 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).
• The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by July 27, 2015.
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. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29959
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Sulfur oxides.
Dated: May 8, 2015.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator Region 8.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart G—Colorado
2. Section 52.320 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(124) introductory
text to read as follows:
■
§ 52.320
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(124) On May 25, 2011 the State of
Colorado submitted revisions to its State
Implementation Plan to address the
requirements of EPA’s regional haze
rule. On December 31, 2012, EPA issued
a final rule approving this submittal and
responding to public comments. On
May 26, 2015 EPA reissued the final
rule with respect to the nitrogen oxides
(NOX) best available retrofit technology
(BART) determination for the Comanche
Generating Station to provide additional
responses to public comments.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–12491 Filed 5–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0422; FRL–9927–90–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Revisions to the Attainment Plans for
the Commonwealth of Virginia Portion
of the Washington, DC–MD–VA 1990 1Hour and 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Areas and the
Maintenance Plan for the
Fredericksburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Maintenance Area To Remove the
Stage II Vapor Recovery Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
29960
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia)
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions remove the Stage II vapor
recovery program (Stage II) from the
attainment plans for the Virginia portion
of the Washington, DC–MD–VA 1990 1Hour and 1997 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
Nonattainment Areas (Northern Virginia
Areas), as well as from the maintenance
plan for the Fredericksburg 1997 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS Maintenance Area
(Fredericksburg Area) (the three areas
are collectively referred to as the
Virginia Areas or Areas). These
revisions also include an analysis that
addresses the impact of the removal of
Stage II from subject gasoline dispensing
facilities (GDFs) in the Virginia Areas.
The analysis submitted by the
Commonwealth satisfies the
requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA). EPA is approving these revisions
in accordance with the requirements of
the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on July 27,
2015 without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse written comment by
June 25, 2015. 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–2014–0422 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–2014–0422,
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–2014–
0422. 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
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:03 May 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 March 18, 2014, Virginia
submitted formal revisions to its SIP
through the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ). These
SIP revisions consist of the removal of
Stage II from the attainment and
maintenance plans for the Virginia
Areas. The SIP revisions also consists of
an analysis demonstrating that the
removal of Stage II from the Virginia
Areas’ attainment and maintenance
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
plans will not cause any increase in
emissions. This analysis satisfies the
requirements of section 110(l) of the
CAA because it demonstrates the SIP
revision will not interfere with any
applicable requirements concerning
attainment or reasonable further
progress (RFP) of the NAAQS nor
interfere with any other CAA applicable
requirement. Virginia’s analysis shows
that the removal of Stage II from these
Areas will not worsen air quality nor
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS in the
Areas. The analysis also satisfies the
requirements of CAA section 184(b)(2)
for comparability of control measures
with the emissions reductions from
Stage II for the portion of the Areas in
the Ozone Transport Region (OTR).
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 the 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 (VOCs). 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.
The amendment of the CAA in 1990
required, under CAA section 182(b)(3),
Stage II controls for moderate ozone
nonattainment areas and Stage II or
comparable controls in the OTR. See
CAA section 184(a) and (b)(2). However,
under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, the
requirements of section 182(b)(3) would
no longer apply in moderate ozone
nonattainment areas upon EPA
promulgation of standards for onboard
refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) as part
of new motor vehicles’ emission control
systems, and would no longer apply in
serious or above ozone areas after EPA’s
determination that ORVR technology is
in widespread use. ORVR is a
mechanism employed by vehicles to reuse the vapors in their gas tanks instead
of allowing them to escape. Over time,
non-ORVR vehicles continued 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. In that rulemaking, EPA
determined that emission reductions
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
from ORVR-equipped vehicles were
essentially equal to and would soon
surpass the emission reductions
achieved by Stage II alone, and that a
state previously required to implement
a Stage II vapor recovery program may
take appropriate action to remove the
measure from its SIP. See 77 FR 28772
(further providing that states could
address CAA section 110(l) for removal
of Stage II by showing removal would
not result in an emissions increase).
The Washington, DC–MD–VA 1990 1Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area was
designated as a serious nonattainment
area under the 1990 1-Hour Ozone
NAAQS. The Washington, DC–MD–VA
1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
Nonattainment Area was designated as
moderate under the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS. The Fredericksburg Area for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS was
designated as a moderate nonattainment
area.
On December 19, 1997, the District of
Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia (the
three States) submitted an attainment
plan for the Washington, DC–MD–VA
1990 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS
Nonattainment Area. On April 17, 2003
(68 FR 19106), EPA conditionally
approved the attainment plan. However,
on November 13, 2002 (67 FR 68805),
EPA reclassified the Area as severe
nonattainment. To meet the
requirements of the severe
classification, the three States submitted
an attainment plan on February 24,
2004. On May 13, 2005 (70 FR 25688),
this attainment plan was approved.
On June 12, 2007, the three States
submitted an attainment plan for the
Washington, DC–MD–VA 1997 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area,
which EPA proposed to approve on
March 20, 2013 (78 FR 17161).
Subsequently on February 28, 2012 (77
FR 11739), EPA published a clean data
determination as well as a
determination of attainment that the
Area met the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS by its mandated attainment
date, which was based on the 2008 to
2010 monitored air quality data. While
the clean data determination suspended
the requirement to submit certain
planning-related SIPs for the Area,
including the attainment demonstration,
EPA was not precluded from acting on
an attainment demonstration submitted
for the Area. On April 10, 2015 (80 FR
19206), EPA approved the attainment
plan. On September 28, 2005, a
redesignation request and maintenance
plan for the Fredericksburg Area were
submitted by Virginia. On December 23,
2005 (70 FR 76165), EPA approved the
Fredericksburg Area redesignation
request and maintenance plan.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:03 May 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
The 1990 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS was
revoked on June 15, 2005. However,
EPA’s implementation rule for the 1997
8-Hour Ozone NAAQS retained the
Stage II-related requirements under
CAA section 182(b)(3), for certain areas
under the 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS (see 40
CFR 51.900(f)). Therefore, the 1997 8Hour Ozone NAAQS attainment plan for
the Washington, DC–MD–VA Area was
required to contain provisions for the
implementation of Stage II.
II. Summary of SIP Revisions and EPA
Analysis
The March 18, 2014 SIP revision
submitted by VADEQ seeks removal of
Stage II from the attainment and
maintenance plans for the Virginia
Areas. The analysis submitted by
VADEQ for the SIP revision addresses
the effects of removing Stage II from the
Virginia Areas. In accordance with
section 110(l) of the CAA, the analysis
demonstrates that the removal of Stage
II from the Virginia Areas will not
interfere with the attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS. The
analysis also meets the requirements of
CAA section 184(b)(2), which the
Northern Virginia Area is subject to
because it is a part of the OTR. For this
analysis, VADEQ followed EPA’s
August 7, 2012 Guidance on Removing
Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation
Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures. The guidance document
provides a method in which states could
provide certain calculations showing
that increased emissions from nonORVR compatible Stage II would
eventually negate benefits from the
implementation of Stage II. Also, the
guidance gives the states flexibility to
provide additional or alternate analyses
to EPA for consideration.
As recommended by the guidance,
VADEQ calculated the area-wide (the
Virginia Areas) VOC inventory
emissions benefits from Stage II. These
calculations show the point at which
the emissions increases from non-ORVR
compatible Stage II would overtake
emissions benefits from Stage II. The
VOC inventory calculation results from
year 2008 to 2020 are provided in Table
1, Stage II Emissions Reductions in the
Virginia Areas-Wide VOC Inventory.
The results provided in Table 1
demonstrate that in 2013 there would
no longer be a VOC emissions benefit
from Stage II, or that the emissions
benefit is negative, and Virginia
removed the Stage II requirement from
its regulations on January 1, 2014.
VADEQ also provided additional data
and analyses demonstrating that Stage II
has very little impact on VOC emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29961
in the Virginia Areas and that modeling
indicates that the formation of ozone in
the Area is much more dependent on
NOX emissions than VOC emissions.
EPA finds removal of Stage II from the
attainment and maintenance plans will
not increase emissions of VOC or
increase ozone. EPA also finds removal
will not interfere with attainment,
maintenance, or RFP for the NAAQS,
nor interfere with any other CAA
requirement. The SIP revision also
addresses CAA section 184(b)(2)
comparability requirements. A detailed
summary of EPA’s review and rationale
for proposing to approve these SIP
revisions including analysis of CAA
sections 110(l) and 184(b)(2) 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–
0422.
TABLE 1—STAGE II EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS IN THE VIRGINIA AREASWIDE VOC INVENTORY
Year
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2020
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
Emissions
reductions
(tons per
day VOC)
0.58
0.46
0.31
0.19
0.08
¥0.01
¥0.07
¥0.13
¥0.17
¥0.20
¥0.22
¥0.24
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
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
29962
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:03 May 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 revisions
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia to remove Stage II from the
attainment plans for the Northern
Virginia Areas and maintenance plan for
the Fredericksburg Area. EPA is
approving these revisions because it was
demonstrated that the removal of the
Stage II requirement on January 1, 2014
will not cause any emissions increases
that could interfere with the Virginia
Areas’ attainment or maintenance of the
1990 1-Hour and/or 1997 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS or any other applicable CAA
requirement. EPA is also approving
these revisions because they meet the
requirements of the comparability
clause in CAA section 184(b)(2). 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 revisions if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on July
27, 2015 without further notice unless
EPA receives adverse comment by June
25, 2015. 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.
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 (Public Law 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
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
29963
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this 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 July 27, 2015. 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 Virginia Areas’
attainment and 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.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by revising the entries
for ‘‘1-Hour Ozone Modeled
Demonstration of Attainment and
Attainment Plan,’’ ‘‘8-Hour Ozone
Maintenance Plan for the
Fredericksburg Area,’’ and ‘‘8-hour
Ozone Modeled Demonstration of
Attainment and Attainment Plan for the
1997 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 52.2420
Dated: May 7, 2015.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
EPA-APPROVED NON-REGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MATERIAL
Applicable
geographic
area
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
*
*
1-Hour Ozone Modeled Demonstration of Attainment and Attainment Plan.
State submittal
date
*
Washington 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area.
*
8/19/03
2/25/04
EPA approval date
Additional explanation
*
*
5/16/05, 70 FR 25688 ..........
*
2005 motor vehicle
emissions budgets of
97.4 tons per day (tpy)
for VOC and 234.7 tpy
of NOX.
Removal of Stage II
vapor recovery program. See section
52.2428.
3/18/14
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
3. Section 52.2428, is amended by
adding paragraph (l) to read as follows:
■
14:03 May 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
*
*
4/10/15, 80 FR 19206 ..........
5/26/15 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
*
Washington, DC–
MD–VA 1997 8Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.
*
§ 52.2428 Control Strategy: Carbon
monoxide and ozone.
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
5/26/15 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
6/12/07
*
City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania
County, and Stafford County.
*
*
12/23/05, 70 FR 76165.
12/20/12, 77 FR 75386 ........
3/18/14
*
*
8-hour Ozone Modeled Demonstration of Attainment and Attainment Plan for the 1997
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
5/4/05
9/26/11
3/18/14
*
*
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the
Fredericksburg Area.
5/26/15 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00027
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
*
Revised 2009 and 2015
motor vehicle emission
budgets for NOX.
Removal of Stage II
vapor recovery program. See section
52.2428.
*
2009 motor vehicle
emissions budgets of
66.5 tons per day (tpd)
for VOC and 146.1 tpd
of NOX.
Removal of Stage II
vapor recovery program. See section
52.2428.
(l) As of May 26, 2015, EPA approves
the removal of the Stage II vapor
recovery program from the attainment
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
29964
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 26, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
plans for the Virginia portion of the
Washington DC–MD–VA 1990 1-hour
and 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
Nonattainment Areas and from the
maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg
1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area.
[FR Doc. 2015–12351 Filed 5–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0192; FRL–9927–96–
Region–5]
Approval of Air Quality Implementation
Plans; Ohio: Cleveland and Delta;
Determination of Attainment for the
2008 Lead Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
On February 20, 2015, the
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(Ohio EPA) submitted a request to the
Environmental Protections Agency
(EPA) to make a determination under
the Clean Air Act (CAA) that the
Cleveland and Delta nonattainment
areas have attained the 2008 lead (Pb)
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS or standard). In this action,
EPA is determining that the Cleveland
and Delta nonattainment areas (hereafter
also referred to as the ‘‘Cleveland area’’,
‘‘Delta area’’ or ‘‘areas’’) have attained
the 2008 Pb NAAQS. These
determinations of attainment are based
upon complete, quality-assured and
certified ambient air monitoring data for
the 2012–2014 design period showing
that the areas have monitored
attainment of the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
Additionally, as a result of this
determination, EPA is suspending the
requirements for the areas to submit
attainment demonstrations, together
with reasonably available control
measures (RACM), reasonable further
progress (RFP) plans, contingency
measures for failure to meet RFP, and
attainment deadlines for as long as the
areas continue to attain the 2008 Pb
NAAQS.
SUMMARY:
This direct final rule will be
effective July 27, 2015, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 25,
2015. If adverse comments are received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:03 May 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
OAR–2015–0192, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano,
Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2015–
0192. 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 docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Sarah
Arra, Environmental Scientist, at (312)
886–9401 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401,
arra.sarah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. Application of EPA’s Clean Data Policy to
the 2008 Pb NAAQS
IV. Do the Cleveland and Delta areas meet the
2008 Pb NAAQS?
V. What is the effect of this action?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is taking final action to
determine that the Cleveland area and
Delta area have attained the 2008 Pb
NAAQS. This is based upon complete,
quality-assured and certified ambient air
monitoring data for the 2012–2014
monitoring period showing that the
areas have monitored attainment of the
2008 Pb NAAQS.
Further, with this determination of
attainment, the requirements for the
Cleveland and Delta areas to submit
attainment demonstrations together
with RACM, RFP plans, and
contingency measures for failure to meet
RFP and attainment deadlines are
suspended for as long as the area
continues to attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
As discussed below, this action is
consistent with EPA’s regulations and
with its longstanding interpretation of
subpart 1 of part D of the CAA.
If either the Cleveland area or the
Delta area violates the 2008 Pb NAAQS
after this action, the basis for the
suspension of these attainment planning
E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM
26MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 26, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29959-29964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12351]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0422; FRL-9927-90-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Revisions to the Attainment Plans for the Commonwealth of
Virginia Portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA 1990 1-Hour and 1997 8-
Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas and the Maintenance Plan for the
Fredericksburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area To Remove the Stage
II Vapor Recovery Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29960]]
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve revisions to the Commonwealth of Virginia
(Virginia) State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions remove the
Stage II vapor recovery program (Stage II) from the attainment plans
for the Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA 1990 1-Hour and
1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
Nonattainment Areas (Northern Virginia Areas), as well as from the
maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
Maintenance Area (Fredericksburg Area) (the three areas are
collectively referred to as the Virginia Areas or Areas). These
revisions also include an analysis that addresses the impact of the
removal of Stage II from subject gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs)
in the Virginia Areas. The analysis submitted by the Commonwealth
satisfies the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is approving
these revisions in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on July 27, 2015 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by June 25, 2015. 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-2014-0422 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-2014-0422, 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-
2014-0422. 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 March 18, 2014, Virginia submitted formal revisions to its SIP
through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ). These
SIP revisions consist of the removal of Stage II from the attainment
and maintenance plans for the Virginia Areas. The SIP revisions also
consists of an analysis demonstrating that the removal of Stage II from
the Virginia Areas' attainment and maintenance plans will not cause any
increase in emissions. This analysis satisfies the requirements of
section 110(l) of the CAA because it demonstrates the SIP revision will
not interfere with any applicable requirements concerning attainment or
reasonable further progress (RFP) of the NAAQS nor interfere with any
other CAA applicable requirement. Virginia's analysis shows that the
removal of Stage II from these Areas will not worsen air quality nor
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS in the Areas. The
analysis also satisfies the requirements of CAA section 184(b)(2) for
comparability of control measures with the emissions reductions from
Stage II for the portion of the Areas in the Ozone Transport Region
(OTR).
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
the 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
(VOCs). 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.
The amendment of the CAA in 1990 required, under CAA section
182(b)(3), Stage II controls for moderate ozone nonattainment areas and
Stage II or comparable controls in the OTR. See CAA section 184(a) and
(b)(2). However, under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, the requirements
of section 182(b)(3) would no longer apply in moderate ozone
nonattainment areas upon EPA promulgation of standards for onboard
refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) as part of new motor vehicles' emission
control systems, and would no longer apply in serious or above ozone
areas after EPA's determination that ORVR technology is in widespread
use. 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 continued 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. In that rulemaking,
EPA determined that emission reductions
[[Page 29961]]
from ORVR-equipped vehicles were essentially equal to and would soon
surpass the emission reductions achieved by Stage II alone, and that a
state previously required to implement a Stage II vapor recovery
program may take appropriate action to remove the measure from its SIP.
See 77 FR 28772 (further providing that states could address CAA
section 110(l) for removal of Stage II by showing removal would not
result in an emissions increase).
The Washington, DC-MD-VA 1990 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area was
designated as a serious nonattainment area under the 1990 1-Hour Ozone
NAAQS. The Washington, DC-MD-VA 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment
Area was designated as moderate under the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS. The
Fredericksburg Area for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS was designated as a
moderate nonattainment area.
On December 19, 1997, the District of Columbia, Maryland, and
Virginia (the three States) submitted an attainment plan for the
Washington, DC-MD-VA 1990 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area. On
April 17, 2003 (68 FR 19106), EPA conditionally approved the attainment
plan. However, on November 13, 2002 (67 FR 68805), EPA reclassified the
Area as severe nonattainment. To meet the requirements of the severe
classification, the three States submitted an attainment plan on
February 24, 2004. On May 13, 2005 (70 FR 25688), this attainment plan
was approved.
On June 12, 2007, the three States submitted an attainment plan for
the Washington, DC-MD-VA 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area,
which EPA proposed to approve on March 20, 2013 (78 FR 17161).
Subsequently on February 28, 2012 (77 FR 11739), EPA published a clean
data determination as well as a determination of attainment that the
Area met the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS by its mandated attainment date,
which was based on the 2008 to 2010 monitored air quality data. While
the clean data determination suspended the requirement to submit
certain planning-related SIPs for the Area, including the attainment
demonstration, EPA was not precluded from acting on an attainment
demonstration submitted for the Area. On April 10, 2015 (80 FR 19206),
EPA approved the attainment plan. On September 28, 2005, a
redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg Area
were submitted by Virginia. On December 23, 2005 (70 FR 76165), EPA
approved the Fredericksburg Area redesignation request and maintenance
plan.
The 1990 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS was revoked on June 15, 2005. However,
EPA's implementation rule for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS retained the
Stage II-related requirements under CAA section 182(b)(3), for certain
areas under the 1-Hour Ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 51.900(f)). Therefore,
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS attainment plan for the Washington, DC-MD-
VA Area was required to contain provisions for the implementation of
Stage II.
II. Summary of SIP Revisions and EPA Analysis
The March 18, 2014 SIP revision submitted by VADEQ seeks removal of
Stage II from the attainment and maintenance plans for the Virginia
Areas. The analysis submitted by VADEQ for the SIP revision addresses
the effects of removing Stage II from the Virginia Areas. In accordance
with section 110(l) of the CAA, the analysis demonstrates that the
removal of Stage II from the Virginia Areas will not interfere with the
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. The analysis also meets the
requirements of CAA section 184(b)(2), which the Northern Virginia Area
is subject to because it is a part of the OTR. For this analysis, VADEQ
followed EPA's August 7, 2012 Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline
Vapor Control Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing
Comparable Measures. The guidance document provides 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 gives
the states flexibility to provide additional or alternate analyses to
EPA for consideration.
As recommended by the guidance, VADEQ calculated the area-wide (the
Virginia Areas) VOC inventory emissions benefits from Stage II. These
calculations show the point at which the emissions increases from non-
ORVR compatible Stage II would overtake emissions benefits from Stage
II. The VOC inventory calculation results from year 2008 to 2020 are
provided in Table 1, Stage II Emissions Reductions in the Virginia
Areas-Wide VOC Inventory. The results provided in Table 1 demonstrate
that in 2013 there would no longer be a VOC emissions benefit from
Stage II, or that the emissions benefit is negative, and Virginia
removed the Stage II requirement from its regulations on January 1,
2014. VADEQ also provided additional data and analyses demonstrating
that Stage II has very little impact on VOC emissions in the Virginia
Areas and that modeling indicates that the formation of ozone in the
Area is much more dependent on NOX emissions than VOC
emissions. EPA finds removal of Stage II from the attainment and
maintenance plans will not increase emissions of VOC or increase ozone.
EPA also finds removal will not interfere with attainment, maintenance,
or RFP for the NAAQS, nor interfere with any other CAA requirement. The
SIP revision also addresses CAA section 184(b)(2) comparability
requirements. A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for
proposing to approve these SIP revisions including analysis of CAA
sections 110(l) and 184(b)(2) 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-2014-0422.
Table 1--Stage II Emissions Reductions in the Virginia Areas-Wide VOC
Inventory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions
reductions
Year (tons per
day VOC)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008....................................................... 0.58
2009....................................................... 0.46
2010....................................................... 0.31
2011....................................................... 0.19
2012....................................................... 0.08
2013....................................................... -0.01
2014....................................................... -0.07
2015....................................................... -0.13
2016....................................................... -0.17
2017....................................................... -0.20
2018....................................................... -0.22
2020....................................................... -0.24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 29962]]
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.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia to remove Stage II from the attainment plans for the Northern
Virginia Areas and maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg Area. EPA is
approving these revisions because it was demonstrated that the removal
of the Stage II requirement on January 1, 2014 will not cause any
emissions increases that could interfere with the Virginia Areas'
attainment or maintenance of the 1990 1-Hour and/or 1997 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS or any other applicable CAA requirement. EPA is also approving
these revisions because they meet the requirements of the comparability
clause in CAA section 184(b)(2). 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 revisions
if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on July 27,
2015 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by June
25, 2015. 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.
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 (Public Law 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
[[Page 29963]]
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 July 27, 2015. 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 Virginia
Areas' attainment and 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: May 7, 2015.
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 ``1-Hour Ozone Modeled Demonstration of Attainment and
Attainment Plan,'' ``8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the
Fredericksburg Area,'' and ``8-hour Ozone Modeled Demonstration of
Attainment and Attainment Plan for the 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Non-Regulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Material
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable geographic State
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision area submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
1-Hour Ozone Modeled Demonstration of Washington 1-hour ozone 8/19/03 5/16/05, 70 FR 25688......... 2005 motor vehicle emissions budgets
Attainment and Attainment Plan. nonattainment area. 2/25/04 of 97.4 tons per day (tpy) for VOC
and 234.7 tpy of NOX.
3/18/14 5/26/15 [Insert Federal Removal of Stage II vapor recovery
Register Citation]. program. See section 52.2428.
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the City of Fredericksburg, 5/4/05 12/23/05, 70 FR 76165. ......................................
Fredericksburg Area. Spotsylvania County, 9/26/11 12/20/12, 77 FR 75386........ Revised 2009 and 2015 motor vehicle
and Stafford County. emission budgets for NOX.
3/18/14 5/26/15 [Insert Federal Removal of Stage II vapor recovery
Register Citation]. program. See section 52.2428.
* * * * * * *
8-hour Ozone Modeled Demonstration of Washington, DC-MD-VA 6/12/07 4/10/15, 80 FR 19206......... 2009 motor vehicle emissions budgets
Attainment and Attainment Plan for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone of 66.5 tons per day (tpd) for VOC
1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Nonattainment Area. and 146.1 tpd of NOX.
Quality Standards.
3/18/14 5/26/15 [Insert Federal Removal of Stage II vapor recovery
Register Citation]. program. See section 52.2428.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 52.2428, is amended by adding paragraph (l) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2428 Control Strategy: Carbon monoxide and ozone.
* * * * *
(l) As of May 26, 2015, EPA approves the removal of the Stage II
vapor recovery program from the attainment
[[Page 29964]]
plans for the Virginia portion of the Washington DC-MD-VA 1990 1-hour
and 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Areas and from the
maintenance plan for the Fredericksburg 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance
Area.
[FR Doc. 2015-12351 Filed 5-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
