Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Trading Programs, 45187-45191 [2017-20724]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
3. The authority citation for part 1024
continues to read as follows:
40 CFR Part 52
■
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1829b and 1951–1959;
31 U.S.C. 5311–5314 and 5316–5332; title III,
sec. 314 Pub. L. 107–56, 115 Stat. 307; sec.
701, Pub. L. 114–74, 129 Stat. 599.
4. In § 1024.210:
a. Redesignate paragraph (b)(4) as
paragraph (b)(5);
■ b. In newly redesignated paragraph
(b)(5)(ii), remove the words ‘‘paragraph
(b)(4)(ii)’’ and add in their place the
words ‘‘paragraph (b)(5)(ii)’’; and
■ c. Add a new paragraph (b)(4).
The addition reads as follows:
■
■
§ 1024.210 Anti-money laundering
program requirements for mutual funds.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) Provide ongoing training for
appropriate persons; and
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: September 14, 2017.
Jamal El-Hindi,
Deputy Director, Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 2017–20777 Filed 9–27–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–02–C
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:07 Sep 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0215; FRL–9968–34–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Removal of Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR) Trading Programs
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The submitted revision
requests EPA remove from the Virginia
SIP regulations from the Virginia
Administrative Code that established
EPA-administered trading programs
under the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), one of which also included
requirements to address nitrogen oxide
(NOX) reductions required under the
NOX SIP Call. The EPA-administered
trading programs under CAIR were
discontinued on December 31, 2014
upon the implementation of the CrossState Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR),
which was promulgated by EPA to
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
replace CAIR. CSAPR established
federal implementation plans (FIPs) for
23 states, including Virginia. The SIP
submittal seeks removal from the
Virginia SIP of Virginia regulations that
implemented the CAIR annual NOX,
ozone season NOX, and sulfur dioxide
(SO2) trading programs (as CSAPR has
replaced CAIR). EPA is approving the
SIP revision in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
This rule is effective on
November 27, 2017 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
written comment by October 30, 2017.
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 No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2017–0215 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
stahl.cynthia@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\28SER1.SGM
28SER1
ER28SE17.007
PART 1024—RULES FOR MUTUAL
FUNDS
45187
45188
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
confidential business information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara
Calcinore, (215) 814–2043, or by email
at calcinore.sara@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
January 5, 2017, the Commonwealth of
Virginia, through the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), submitted a SIP revision
(Revision D16) that requests removal
from its SIP of Virginia Administrative
Code regulations including 9 VAC 5
Chapter 140: Part II—NOX Annual
Trading Program; Part III—NOX Ozone
Season Trading Program; and Part IV—
SO2 Annual Trading Program (Sections
5–140–1010 through 5–140–3880).
I. Background
EPA promulgated CAIR (70 FR 25162,
May 12, 2005) to address transported
emissions that significantly contributed
to downwind states’ nonattainment and
maintenance of the 1997 ozone and fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
CAIR required 28 states, including
Virginia, to reduce emissions of NOX
and SO2, precursors to the formation of
ambient ozone and PM2.5. Under CAIR,
EPA established federal implementation
plans (FIPs) comprised of separate cap
and trade programs for annual NOX,
ozone season NOX, and annual SO2.
States could comply with the
requirements of CAIR by remaining on
the FIP, which applied only to electric
generating units (EGUs), or by
submitting a CAIR SIP revision that
included as trading sources EGUs and
certain non-EGUs 1 that formerly traded
in the NOX Budget Trading Program
1 These non-EGUs are defined in the NO SIP Call
X
as stationary, fossil fuel-fired boilers, combustion
turbines, or combined cycle systems with a
maximum design heat input greater than 250
million British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/hr).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:07 Sep 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
under the NOX SIP Call.2 On December
28, 2007 (72 FR 73602), EPA approved
a SIP revision submitted by Virginia that
allowed the Commonwealth to
participate in the EPA-administered
CAIR regional cap and trade programs
for NOX annual, NOX ozone season, and
SO2 annual emissions. Virginia’s NOX
ozone season trading program under
CAIR included non-EGUs that were
previously trading in the NOX budget
trading program under the NOX SIP
Call, which satisfied Virginia’s
obligations under the NOX SIP Call.
After EPA promulgated CAIR,
litigation ensued. The United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) initially
vacated CAIR in 2008,3 but ultimately
remanded the rule to EPA without
vacatur to preserve the environmental
benefits provided by CAIR.4 The ruling
allowed CAIR to remain in effect
temporarily until a replacement rule
consistent with the D.C. Circuit’s
opinion was developed. While EPA
worked on developing a replacement
rule, the CAIR program continued as
planned with the NOX annual and
ozone season programs beginning in
2009 and the SO2 annual program
beginning in 2010.
On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208),
acting on the D.C. Circuit’s remand, EPA
promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR to
address the interstate transport of
emissions contributing to nonattainment
and interfering with maintenance of the
two air quality standards covered by
CAIR as well as the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
The rule also contained provisions that
would sunset CAIR-related obligations
on a schedule coordinated with the
implementation of CSAPR compliance
requirements. CSAPR was to become
effective January 1, 2012; however, the
timing of CSAPR’s implementation was
impacted by a number of court actions.
Numerous parties filed petitions for
review of CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit,
and on December 30, 2011, the D.C.
Circuit stayed CSAPR prior to its
implementation and ordered EPA to
continue administering CAIR on an
interim basis.5 On August 21, 2012, the
D.C. Circuit issued its ruling, vacating
and remanding CSAPR to EPA and
ordering continued implementation of
2 In October 1998, EPA finalized the ‘‘Finding of
Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for
Certain States in the Ozone Transport Assessment
Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional
Transport of Ozone’’—commonly called the NOX
SIP Call. See 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998).
3 North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir.
2008).
4 North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir.
2008).
5 Order of Dec. 30, 2011, in EME Homer City
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11–1302.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.
v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
The D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of CSAPR
was reversed by the United States
Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and
the case was remanded to the D.C.
Circuit to resolve remaining issues in
accordance with the Supreme Court’s
ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City
Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014).
On remand, the D.C. Circuit affirmed
CSAPR in most respects.
Throughout the initial round of D.C.
Circuit proceedings and the ensuing
Supreme Court proceedings, the stay on
CSAPR remained in place, and EPA
continued to implement CAIR.
Following the April 2014 Supreme
Court decision, EPA filed a motion
asking the D.C. Circuit to lift the stay in
order to allow CSAPR to replace CAIR
in an equitable and orderly manner
while further D.C. Circuit proceedings
were held to resolve remaining claims
from petitioners. Additionally, EPA’s
motion requested to toll, by three years,
all CSAPR compliance deadlines that
had not passed as of the approval date
of the stay. On October 23, 2014, the
D.C. Circuit granted EPA’s request,6 and
on December 3, 2014 (79 FR 71663), in
an interim final rule, EPA set the
updated effective date of CSAPR as
January 1, 2015 and tolled the
implementation of CSAPR Phase I to
2015 and CSAPR Phase 2 to 2017. In
accordance with the interim final rule,
the sunset date for CAIR was December
31, 2014, and EPA began implementing
CSAPR on January 1, 2015.
Starting in January 2015, the CSAPR
FIP trading programs for annual NOX,
ozone season NOX, and annual SO2
were applicable in Virginia. Thus, since
January 1, 2015, Virginia regulations
implementing the CAIR annual trading
programs, including the NOX ozone
season trading program addressing
Virginia’s obligations under the NOX
SIP Call, have been obsolete and moot
and none of these programs contribute
to emission reductions in Virginia.
On October 26, 2016 (81 FR 74504),
EPA finalized the CSAPR Update Rule
to address interstate transport of ozone
pollution with respect to the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, and issued FIPs that updated
the ozone season NOX budgets for 22
states, including Virginia. Starting in
January 2017, the CSAPR Update
budgets were implemented via
modifications to the CSAPR NOX ozone
season allowance trading program that
was established under the original
CSAPR.
6 Order Document #1518738, EME Homer City
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11–1302 (D.C. Cir.
Issued Oct. 23, 2014).
E:\FR\FM\28SER1.SGM
28SER1
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
VADEQ submitted a SIP revision on
January 5, 2017 requesting the removal
of regulations from the Virginia SIP
under 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140: Part II—
NOX Annual Trading Program, Part III—
NOX Ozone Season Trading Program,
and Part IV—SO2 Annual Trading
Program (Sections 5–140–1010 through
5–140–3880), which implemented the
CAIR annual NOX, ozone season NOX,
and annual SO2 trading programs. These
regulations have been moot since
January 1, 2015, when CSAPR replaced
CAIR, and have been repealed in their
entirety from the Virginia
Administrative Code. The amendments
removing these regulations were
adopted by the State Air Pollution
Control Board on September 9, 2016 and
were effective as of November 16, 2016.
As noted previously, on January 1,
2015, the CAIR annual NOX, ozone
season NOX, and annual SO2 trading
programs were replaced by the trading
programs under the CSAPR FIP.
Therefore, regulations in the Virginia
SIP that implemented the CAIR annual
trading programs have been obsolete
and moot since January 1, 2015. None
of the provisions in 9 VAC 5 Chapter
140 which Virginia seeks to remove
from the SIP presently reduce NOX or
SO2 emissions from EGUs or certain
non-EGUs after December 31, 2014 as
CAIR was replaced by CSAPR.
These obsolete regulations include
provisions under 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140:
Part III—NOX Ozone Season Trading
Program Article 1—CAIR NOX Ozone
Season Trading Program General
Provisions and Article 5—CAIR NOX
Ozone Season Allowance Allocations,
which addressed Virginia’s obligations
under the NOX SIP Call by including
EGUs and certain large non-EGUs that
had formerly traded under the NOX SIP
Call trading program as CAIR trading
sources. Unlike the CAIR trading
program, CSAPR’s trading program for
ozone season NOX as promulgated in
2011 does not provide for non-EGUs to
participate in trading. Therefore, since
January 1, 2015, when CSAPR replaced
CAIR and the CSAPR FIP became
effective in Virginia, the Virginia SIP
has not contained an effective regulation
addressing Virginia’s obligation under
the NOX SIP Call to reduce NOX
emissions from non-EGUs such as
stationary, fossil fuel-fired boilers,
combustion turbines, or combined cycle
systems with a maximum design heat
input greater than 250 MMBtu/hr. The
absence of an effective regulation in the
Virginia SIP to reduce NOX emissions
from these non-EGUs that formerly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:07 Sep 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
participated in the CAIR trading
program resulted from the sunset of
CAIR and EPA’s implementation of
CSAPR starting January 1, 2015.
Because CSAPR did not provide for
trading by non-EGUs, Virginia’s SIP no
longer meets the Virginia NOX SIP Call
obligation with respect to these nonEGUs that formerly traded in CAIR.
However, Virginia’s request in its
January 5, 2017 SIP seeking removal
from its SIP of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140:
Part III—NOX Ozone Season Trading
Program and EPA’s action to approve
the January 5, 2017 submittal did not
create this gap in coverage under the
Virginia SIP. According to Virginia, the
Commonwealth is in the process of
drafting a regulation to address the
Commonwealth’s obligations under the
NOX SIP Call (including its obligation to
address these non-EGUs which formerly
traded in CAIR). In remedying its
provisions to address the NOX SIP Call,
Virginia must satisfy the requirements
of 40 CFR 51.121(f) which lists
requirements such as control measures
to be included in SIP revisions to meet
NOX budgets assigned under the NOX
SIP Call. EPA expects Virginia will
submit such provisions to EPA to be
included in Virginia’s SIP, and EPA will
review and act on any such SIP
submittal from Virginia addressing the
Commonwealth’s NOX SIP Call
obligations in a separate rulemaking.
Since the regulations implementing
the CAIR annual NOX, ozone season
NOX, and annual SO2 trading programs
have been moot and non-operational
since CAIR was replaced by CSAPR on
January 1, 2015, removing these
regulations from the Virginia SIP will
not interfere with reduction of NOX or
SO2 emissions in Virginia and will not
interfere with Virginia’s attainment of
any NAAQS, reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable CAA
requirement. In addition, as Virginia’s
SIP has not effectively addressed nonEGUs that formerly traded in CAIR for
NOX SIP Call obligations since CAIR
sunset, removing 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140:
Part III—NOX Ozone Season Trading
Program from the Virginia SIP will also
not interfere with attainment of
NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or
any CAA requirement as the CAIR’s
sunset removed the non-EGUs from the
ozone season NOX trading program.
Thus, EPA finds the January 5, 2017 SIP
revision approvable in accordance with
section 110 of the CAA, including
specifically with section 110(l) of the
CAA.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the January 5, 2017
SIP revision submission from the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45189
Commonwealth of Virginia, which
sought removal from the Virginia SIP of
moot regulations under 9 VAC 5
Chapter 140 that implemented the CAIR
annual NOX, ozone season NOX, and
annual SO2 trading programs at Part II—
NOX Annual Trading Program; Part III—
NOX Ozone Season Trading Program;
and Part IV—SO2 Annual Trading
Program (Sections 5–140–1010 through
5–140–3880). 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 November 27, 2017 without
further notice unless EPA receives
adverse comment by October 30, 2017.
If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect. EPA
will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time. Please note that
if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
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
E:\FR\FM\28SER1.SGM
28SER1
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
45190
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:07 Sep 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land as defined
in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by November 27, 2017. 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 removing from the
Virginia SIP regulations under Sections
5–140–1010 through 5–140–3880 of 9
VAC 5 Chapter 140 that implemented
the CAIR annual NOX, ozone season
NOX, and annual SO2 trading programs
may not be challenged later in
E:\FR\FM\28SER1.SGM
28SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 187 / Thursday, September 28, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: September 8, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
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 VV—Virginia
§ 52.2420
[Amended]
2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by:
■ a. Removing the section entitled ‘‘Part
II NOX Annual Trading Program’’,
including ‘‘Article 1’’ through ‘‘Article
9’’ including entries ‘‘5–140–1010’’
through ‘‘5–140–1880’’;
■ b. Removing the section entitled ‘‘Part
III NOX Ozone Season Trading
Program’’, including ‘‘Article 1’’ through
‘‘Article 9’’ including entries ‘‘5–140–
2010’’ through ‘‘5–140–2880’’; and;
■ c. Removing the section entitled ‘‘Part
IV SO2 Annual Trading Program’’,
including ‘‘Article 1’’ through ‘‘Article
9’’ including entries ‘‘5–140–3010’’
through ‘‘5–140–3880’’.
■
[FR Doc. 2017–20724 Filed 9–27–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0411; FRL–9968–38–
Region 9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Enhanced
Monitoring; California
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of
California on November 10, 1993. This
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:07 Sep 27, 2017
Jkt 241001
SIP revision concerns the establishment
of a Photochemical Assessment
Monitoring System (PAMS) network in
six ozone nonattainment areas within
California. The EPA is taking this action
under the Clean Air Act based on the
conclusion that all applicable statutory
and regulatory requirements related to
PAMS SIP revisions have been met.
DATES: This rule is effective October 30,
2017.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket No.
EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0411. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed on the Web site,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lo, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
3959, lo.doris@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On August 2, 2017 (82 FR 35922), we
proposed to approve a SIP revision
submitted by the State of California on
November 10, 1993. Herein, we refer to
our proposed action on August 2, 2017,
as the ‘‘proposed rule.’’
In our proposed rule, we provided a
discussion of the regulatory context
leading to the SIP revision submitted by
California on November 10, 1993. In
short, the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’),
as amended in 1990, required the EPA
to designate as nonattainment, and to
classify as Marginal, Moderate, Serious,
Severe or Extreme, any ozone areas that
were still designated nonattainment
under the 1977 Act Amendments, and
any other areas violating the 1-hour
ozone standard, generally based on air
quality monitoring data from the 1987
through 1989 period.1 Within
1 See section 107(d)(4) of the Act. See also 56 FR
56694, November 6, 1991.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45191
California, we classified six ozone
nonattainment areas as Serious, Severe,
or Extreme: Los Angeles-South Coast
Air Basin (‘‘South Coast’’), Sacramento
Metro, San Diego County, San Joaquin
Valley, Southeast Desert Modified Air
Quality Management Area (‘‘Southeast
Desert’’) and Ventura County.2 Such
areas were subject to many
requirements, including those related to
enhanced monitoring in CAA section
182(c)(1).
CAA section 182(c)(1) of the CAA
required the EPA to promulgate rules for
enhanced monitoring of ozone, oxides
of nitrogen, and volatile organic
compounds to obtain more
comprehensive and representative data
on ozone air pollution in areas
designated nonattainment and classified
as Serious, Severe or Extreme. The
EPA’s final PAMS regulation was
promulgated on February 12, 1993 (58
FR 8452). Section 182(c)(1) also
required states to submit SIP revisions
providing for enhanced monitoring for
such areas consistent with the PAMS
regulation.
On November 10, 1993, the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted
to the EPA a SIP revision for PAMS
networks in California (‘‘California
PAMS SIP revision’’). The California
PAMS SIP revision consists of PAMS
commitments from five California air
districts with jurisdiction within the six
relevant ozone nonattainment areas: The
South Coast Air Quality Management
District (AQMD) (for South Coast and
Southeast Desert areas); Sacramento
Metro AQMD (for the Sacramento Metro
area); San Diego County Air Pollution
Control District (APCD) (for the San
Diego County area); San Joaquin Valley
Unified APCD (for the San Joaquin
Valley area), and Ventura County APCD
(for the Ventura County area), as well as
CARB Executive Orders approving the
commitments, and public process
documentation. The California PAMS
SIP revision is intended to meet the
requirements of section 182(c)(1) of the
Act and to comply with the PAMS
regulation, codified at 40 CFR part 58,
as promulgated on February 12, 1993.
In our proposed rule, we identified
the criteria we used to review the
California PAMS SIP revision submittal
and provided our evaluation and
rationale for proposed approval. We
determined that California’s PAMS SIP
revision meets all applicable
requirements: (1) By first committing to,
and then by implementing, PAMS
networks as required in 40 CFR part 58;
and (2) by providing the public with an
opportunity to inspect the proposed
2 See
E:\FR\FM\28SER1.SGM
56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991.
28SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 187 (Thursday, September 28, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45187-45191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20724]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0215; FRL-9968-34-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Removal of Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Trading Programs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. The submitted revision
requests EPA remove from the Virginia SIP regulations from the Virginia
Administrative Code that established EPA-administered trading programs
under the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), one of which also included
requirements to address nitrogen oxide (NOX) reductions
required under the NOX SIP Call. The EPA-administered
trading programs under CAIR were discontinued on December 31, 2014 upon
the implementation of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which
was promulgated by EPA to replace CAIR. CSAPR established federal
implementation plans (FIPs) for 23 states, including Virginia. The SIP
submittal seeks removal from the Virginia SIP of Virginia regulations
that implemented the CAIR annual NOX, ozone season
NOX, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) trading programs
(as CSAPR has replaced CAIR). EPA is approving the SIP revision in
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on November 27, 2017 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by October 30,
2017. 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 No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0215 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
stahl.cynthia@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be
[[Page 45188]]
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Calcinore, (215) 814-2043, or by
email at calcinore.sara@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 5, 2017, the Commonwealth of
Virginia, through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), submitted a SIP revision (Revision D16) that requests removal
from its SIP of Virginia Administrative Code regulations including 9
VAC 5 Chapter 140: Part II--NOX Annual Trading Program; Part
III--NOX Ozone Season Trading Program; and Part IV--
SO2 Annual Trading Program (Sections 5-140-1010 through 5-
140-3880).
I. Background
EPA promulgated CAIR (70 FR 25162, May 12, 2005) to address
transported emissions that significantly contributed to downwind
states' nonattainment and maintenance of the 1997 ozone and fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). CAIR required 28 states, including Virginia, to
reduce emissions of NOX and SO2, precursors to
the formation of ambient ozone and PM2.5. Under CAIR, EPA
established federal implementation plans (FIPs) comprised of separate
cap and trade programs for annual NOX, ozone season
NOX, and annual SO2. States could comply with the
requirements of CAIR by remaining on the FIP, which applied only to
electric generating units (EGUs), or by submitting a CAIR SIP revision
that included as trading sources EGUs and certain non-EGUs \1\ that
formerly traded in the NOX Budget Trading Program under the
NOX SIP Call.\2\ On December 28, 2007 (72 FR 73602), EPA
approved a SIP revision submitted by Virginia that allowed the
Commonwealth to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR regional cap
and trade programs for NOX annual, NOX ozone
season, and SO2 annual emissions. Virginia's NOX
ozone season trading program under CAIR included non-EGUs that were
previously trading in the NOX budget trading program under
the NOX SIP Call, which satisfied Virginia's obligations
under the NOX SIP Call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These non-EGUs are defined in the NOX SIP Call as
stationary, fossil fuel-fired boilers, combustion turbines, or
combined cycle systems with a maximum design heat input greater than
250 million British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/hr).
\2\ In October 1998, EPA finalized the ``Finding of Significant
Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone
Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional
Transport of Ozone''--commonly called the NOX SIP Call.
See 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After EPA promulgated CAIR, litigation ensued. The United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
initially vacated CAIR in 2008,\3\ but ultimately remanded the rule to
EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by
CAIR.\4\ The ruling allowed CAIR to remain in effect temporarily until
a replacement rule consistent with the D.C. Circuit's opinion was
developed. While EPA worked on developing a replacement rule, the CAIR
program continued as planned with the NOX annual and ozone
season programs beginning in 2009 and the SO2 annual program
beginning in 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
\4\ North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit's
remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR to address the interstate
transport of emissions contributing to nonattainment and interfering
with maintenance of the two air quality standards covered by CAIR as
well as the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The rule also contained
provisions that would sunset CAIR-related obligations on a schedule
coordinated with the implementation of CSAPR compliance requirements.
CSAPR was to become effective January 1, 2012; however, the timing of
CSAPR's implementation was impacted by a number of court actions.
Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR in the D.C.
Circuit, and on December 30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit stayed CSAPR prior
to its implementation and ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR on
an interim basis.\5\ On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued its
ruling, vacating and remanding CSAPR to EPA and ordering continued
implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit's vacatur of CSAPR was
reversed by the United States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and the
case was remanded to the D.C. Circuit to resolve remaining issues in
accordance with the Supreme Court's ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City
Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. Circuit
affirmed CSAPR in most respects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Order of Dec. 30, 2011, in EME Homer City Generation, L.P.
v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11-1302.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout the initial round of D.C. Circuit proceedings and the
ensuing Supreme Court proceedings, the stay on CSAPR remained in place,
and EPA continued to implement CAIR. Following the April 2014 Supreme
Court decision, EPA filed a motion asking the D.C. Circuit to lift the
stay in order to allow CSAPR to replace CAIR in an equitable and
orderly manner while further D.C. Circuit proceedings were held to
resolve remaining claims from petitioners. Additionally, EPA's motion
requested to toll, by three years, all CSAPR compliance deadlines that
had not passed as of the approval date of the stay. On October 23,
2014, the D.C. Circuit granted EPA's request,\6\ and on December 3,
2014 (79 FR 71663), in an interim final rule, EPA set the updated
effective date of CSAPR as January 1, 2015 and tolled the
implementation of CSAPR Phase I to 2015 and CSAPR Phase 2 to 2017. In
accordance with the interim final rule, the sunset date for CAIR was
December 31, 2014, and EPA began implementing CSAPR on January 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Order Document #1518738, EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v.
EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir. Issued Oct. 23, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting in January 2015, the CSAPR FIP trading programs for annual
NOX, ozone season NOX, and annual SO2
were applicable in Virginia. Thus, since January 1, 2015, Virginia
regulations implementing the CAIR annual trading programs, including
the NOX ozone season trading program addressing Virginia's
obligations under the NOX SIP Call, have been obsolete and
moot and none of these programs contribute to emission reductions in
Virginia.
On October 26, 2016 (81 FR 74504), EPA finalized the CSAPR Update
Rule to address interstate transport of ozone pollution with respect to
the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and issued FIPs that updated the ozone season
NOX budgets for 22 states, including Virginia. Starting in
January 2017, the CSAPR Update budgets were implemented via
modifications to the CSAPR NOX ozone season allowance
trading program that was established under the original CSAPR.
[[Page 45189]]
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
VADEQ submitted a SIP revision on January 5, 2017 requesting the
removal of regulations from the Virginia SIP under 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140:
Part II--NOX Annual Trading Program, Part III--
NOX Ozone Season Trading Program, and Part IV--
SO2 Annual Trading Program (Sections 5-140-1010 through 5-
140-3880), which implemented the CAIR annual NOX, ozone
season NOX, and annual SO2 trading programs.
These regulations have been moot since January 1, 2015, when CSAPR
replaced CAIR, and have been repealed in their entirety from the
Virginia Administrative Code. The amendments removing these regulations
were adopted by the State Air Pollution Control Board on September 9,
2016 and were effective as of November 16, 2016.
As noted previously, on January 1, 2015, the CAIR annual
NOX, ozone season NOX, and annual SO2
trading programs were replaced by the trading programs under the CSAPR
FIP. Therefore, regulations in the Virginia SIP that implemented the
CAIR annual trading programs have been obsolete and moot since January
1, 2015. None of the provisions in 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140 which Virginia
seeks to remove from the SIP presently reduce NOX or
SO2 emissions from EGUs or certain non-EGUs after December
31, 2014 as CAIR was replaced by CSAPR.
These obsolete regulations include provisions under 9 VAC 5 Chapter
140: Part III--NOX Ozone Season Trading Program Article 1--
CAIR NOX Ozone Season Trading Program General Provisions and
Article 5--CAIR NOX Ozone Season Allowance Allocations,
which addressed Virginia's obligations under the NOX SIP
Call by including EGUs and certain large non-EGUs that had formerly
traded under the NOX SIP Call trading program as CAIR
trading sources. Unlike the CAIR trading program, CSAPR's trading
program for ozone season NOX as promulgated in 2011 does not
provide for non-EGUs to participate in trading. Therefore, since
January 1, 2015, when CSAPR replaced CAIR and the CSAPR FIP became
effective in Virginia, the Virginia SIP has not contained an effective
regulation addressing Virginia's obligation under the NOX
SIP Call to reduce NOX emissions from non-EGUs such as
stationary, fossil fuel-fired boilers, combustion turbines, or combined
cycle systems with a maximum design heat input greater than 250 MMBtu/
hr. The absence of an effective regulation in the Virginia SIP to
reduce NOX emissions from these non-EGUs that formerly
participated in the CAIR trading program resulted from the sunset of
CAIR and EPA's implementation of CSAPR starting January 1, 2015.
Because CSAPR did not provide for trading by non-EGUs, Virginia's SIP
no longer meets the Virginia NOX SIP Call obligation with
respect to these non-EGUs that formerly traded in CAIR. However,
Virginia's request in its January 5, 2017 SIP seeking removal from its
SIP of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140: Part III--NOX Ozone Season
Trading Program and EPA's action to approve the January 5, 2017
submittal did not create this gap in coverage under the Virginia SIP.
According to Virginia, the Commonwealth is in the process of drafting a
regulation to address the Commonwealth's obligations under the
NOX SIP Call (including its obligation to address these non-
EGUs which formerly traded in CAIR). In remedying its provisions to
address the NOX SIP Call, Virginia must satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.121(f) which lists requirements such as
control measures to be included in SIP revisions to meet NOX
budgets assigned under the NOX SIP Call. EPA expects
Virginia will submit such provisions to EPA to be included in
Virginia's SIP, and EPA will review and act on any such SIP submittal
from Virginia addressing the Commonwealth's NOX SIP Call
obligations in a separate rulemaking.
Since the regulations implementing the CAIR annual NOX,
ozone season NOX, and annual SO2 trading programs
have been moot and non-operational since CAIR was replaced by CSAPR on
January 1, 2015, removing these regulations from the Virginia SIP will
not interfere with reduction of NOX or SO2
emissions in Virginia and will not interfere with Virginia's attainment
of any NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable CAA
requirement. In addition, as Virginia's SIP has not effectively
addressed non-EGUs that formerly traded in CAIR for NOX SIP
Call obligations since CAIR sunset, removing 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140: Part
III--NOX Ozone Season Trading Program from the Virginia SIP
will also not interfere with attainment of NAAQS, reasonable further
progress, or any CAA requirement as the CAIR's sunset removed the non-
EGUs from the ozone season NOX trading program. Thus, EPA
finds the January 5, 2017 SIP revision approvable in accordance with
section 110 of the CAA, including specifically with section 110(l) of
the CAA.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the January 5, 2017 SIP revision submission from
the Commonwealth of Virginia, which sought removal from the Virginia
SIP of moot regulations under 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140 that implemented the
CAIR annual NOX, ozone season NOX, and annual
SO2 trading programs at Part II--NOX Annual
Trading Program; Part III--NOX Ozone Season Trading Program;
and Part IV--SO2 Annual Trading Program (Sections 5-140-1010
through 5-140-3880). 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 November 27, 2017
without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by October
30, 2017. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.
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
[[Page 45190]]
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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 27, 2017. 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 removing from the Virginia SIP regulations under
Sections 5-140-1010 through 5-140-3880 of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 140 that
implemented the CAIR annual NOX, ozone season
NOX, and annual SO2 trading programs may not be
challenged later in
[[Page 45191]]
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, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 8, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
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
Sec. 52.2420 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 52.2420, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by:
0
a. Removing the section entitled ``Part II NOX Annual
Trading Program'', including ``Article 1'' through ``Article 9''
including entries ``5-140-1010'' through ``5-140-1880'';
0
b. Removing the section entitled ``Part III NOX Ozone Season
Trading Program'', including ``Article 1'' through ``Article 9''
including entries ``5-140-2010'' through ``5-140-2880''; and;
0
c. Removing the section entitled ``Part IV SO2 Annual
Trading Program'', including ``Article 1'' through ``Article 9''
including entries ``5-140-3010'' through ``5-140-3880''.
[FR Doc. 2017-20724 Filed 9-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P