Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Revisions to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile Organic Compound, 61200-61203 [2017-27522]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
61200
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. 2005–6]
Statutory Cable, Satellite, and DART
License Reporting Practices
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
The United States Copyright
Office is extending the deadlines for the
submission of written comments in
response to its December 1, 2017 notice
of proposed rulemaking concerning the
royalty reporting practices of cable
operators under section 111 and
proposed revisions to the Statement of
Account forms, and on proposed
amendments to the Statement of
Account filing requirements.
DATES: The comment period for the
notice of proposed rulemaking,
published on December 1, 2017 (82 FR
56926), is extended. Initial written
comments must be received no later
than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on March
16, 2018. Written reply comments must
be received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on April 6, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using
the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
comments are available on the
Copyright Office website at https://
copyright.gov/rulemaking/section111. If
electronic submission of comments is
not feasible due to lack of access to a
computer and/or the internet, please
contact the Office using the contact
information below for special
instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarang V. Damle, General Counsel and
Associate Register of Copyrights, by
email at sdam@loc.gov, Regan A. Smith,
Deputy General Counsel, by email at
resm@loc.gov, or Anna Chauvet,
Assistant General Counsel, by email at
achau@loc.gov, or any of them by
telephone at 202–707–8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 1, 2017, the Office issued a
notice of proposed rulemaking
(‘‘NPRM’’) on proposed rules governing
the royalty reporting practices of cable
operators under section 111 and
proposed revisions to the Statement of
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
Account forms, and on proposed
amendments to the Statement of
Account filing requirements.1 After
determining that meetings with
interested parties might be beneficial
and that reply comments would be
appropriate for this rulemaking, on
December 11, 2017, the Office issued a
notice of ex-parte communication and
request for reply comments.2
On December 13, 2017, NCTA—The
Internet & Television Association
submitted a motion seeking to extend
the initial comment period until March
16, 2018, with written comments due by
April 2, 2018.3
To ensure that commenters have
sufficient time to respond to the NPRM,
the Office is extending the deadline for
the submission of initial written
comments to 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time
on March 16, 2018. Written reply
comments must be received no later
than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April
6, 2018.
Dated: December 19, 2017.
Karyn Temple Claggett,
Acting Register of Copyrights and Director
of the U.S. Copyright Office.
[FR Doc. 2017–27933 Filed 12–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0544; FRL–9972–40–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Revisions to the Regulatory Definition
of Volatile Organic Compound
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
two state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions (Revision C16 and Revision
I16) formally submitted by the
Commonwealth of Virginia. These
revisions pertain to amendments made
to the definition of ‘‘volatile organic
compound’’ (VOC) in the Virginia
Administrative Code to conform with
EPA’s regulatory definition of VOC.
Specifically, these amendments remove
the record keeping and reporting
requirements for t-butyl acetate (also
known as tertiary butyl acetate or TBAC;
Chemical Abstracts Service [CAS]
SUMMARY:
1 82
FR 56926 (Dec. 1, 2017).
FR 58153 (Dec. 11, 2017).
3 COLC–2017–0013–0003.
2 82
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
number: 540–88–5) and add 1,1,2,2Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)
ethane (also known as HFE–347pcf2;
CAS number: 406–78–0) as a compound
excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC, which match actions EPA has
taken. EPA is approving these revisions
to update the definition of VOC in the
Virginia SIP under the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2017–0544 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
pino.maria@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
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 July
31, 2017, the Commonwealth of
Virginia, through the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), submitted two SIP revisions
(Revisions C16 and Revision I16).
Revision C16 requested that the
definition of VOC be updated in the
Virginia SIP to conform with EPA’s
February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9339) final
rulemaking updating EPA’s regulatory
definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s)
to remove the recordkeeping, emissions
reporting, photochemical dispersion
modeling, and inventory requirements
related to the use of TBAC as a VOC.
Revision I16 requests that the definition
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
of VOC be updated in the Virginia SIP
to conform with EPA’s August 1, 2016
(81 FR 50330) final rulemaking updating
EPA’s regulatory definition of VOC in
40 CFR 51.100(s) to add 1,1,2,2Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)
ethane to the list of compounds
excluded from EPA’s regulatory
definition of VOC.
I. Background
VOCs are organic compounds of
carbon that, in the presence of sunlight,
react with sources of oxygen molecules,
such as nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
carbon monoxide (CO), in the
atmosphere to produce tropospheric
ozone, commonly known as smog.
Common sources that may emit VOCs
include paints, coatings, housekeeping
and maintenance products, and building
and furnishing materials. Outdoor
emissions of VOCs are regulated by EPA
primarily to prevent the formation of
ozone.
VOCs have different levels of
volatility, depending on the compound,
and react at different rates to produce
varying amounts of ozone. VOCs that
are non-reactive or of negligible
reactivity to form ozone react slowly
and/or form less ozone; therefore,
reducing their emissions has limited
effects on local or regional ozone
pollution. Section 302(s) of the CAA
specifies that EPA has the authority to
define the meaning of VOC and what
compounds shall be treated as VOCs for
regulatory purposes. It is EPA’s policy
that organic compounds with a
negligible level of reactivity should be
excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC in order to focus control efforts
on compounds that significantly affect
ozone concentrations. EPA uses the
reactivity of ethane as the threshold for
determining whether a compound has
negligible reactivity.
Compounds that are less reactive
than, or equally reactive to, ethane
under certain assumed conditions may
be deemed negligibly reactive and,
therefore, suitable for exemption by EPA
from the regulatory definition of VOC.
The policy of excluding negligibly
reactive compounds from the regulatory
definition of VOC was first laid out in
the ‘‘Recommended Policy on Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds’’ (42 FR
35314, July 8, 1977) and was
supplemented subsequently with the
‘‘Interim Guidance on Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds in Ozone
State Implementation Plans’’ (70 FR
54046, September 13, 2005). The
regulatory definition of VOC as well as
a list of compounds that are designated
by EPA as negligibly reactive can be
found at 40 CFR 51.100(s).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
On September 30, 1999, EPA
proposed to revise the regulatory
definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s)
to exclude TBAC as a VOC (64 FR
52731). In most cases, when a negligibly
reactive VOC is exempted from the
definition of VOC, emissions of that
compound are no longer recorded,
collected, or reported to states or the
EPA as part of VOC emissions.
However, EPA’s final rule excluded
TBAC from the definition of VOC for
purposes of VOC emissions limitations
or VOC content requirements, but
continued to define TBAC as a VOC for
purposes of all recordkeeping,
emissions reporting, photochemical
dispersion modeling, and inventory
requirements that apply to VOC (69 FR
69298, November 29, 2004) (2004 Final
Rule). This was primarily due to EPA’s
conclusion in the 2004 Final Rule that
‘‘negligibly reactive’’ compounds may
contribute significantly to ozone
formation if present in sufficient
quantities and that emissions of these
compounds need to be represented
accurately in photochemical modeling
analyses. Per EPA’s 2004 Final Rule,
Virginia partially excluded TBAC from
the regulatory definition of VOC, which
was approved into Virginia’s SIP on
August 18, 2006 (71 FR 47742).
When EPA exempted TBAC from the
VOC definition for purposes of control
requirements in the 2004 Final Rule,
EPA created a new category of
compounds and a new reporting
requirement that required that
emissions of TBAC be reported
separately by states and, in turn, by
industry. However, EPA did not issue
any guidance on how TBAC emissions
should be tracked and reported.
Therefore, the data that was reported as
a result of these requirements was
incomplete and inconsistent. Also, in
the 2004 Final Rule, EPA stated that the
primary objective of the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements for TBAC
was to address the cumulative impacts
of ‘‘negligibly reactive’’ compounds and
suggested that future exempt
compounds may also be subject to such
requirements. However, such
requirements were not included in any
other proposed or final VOC
exemptions.
Because having high quality data on
TBAC emissions alone was unlikely to
be useful in assessing the cumulative
impacts of ‘‘negligibly reactive’’
compounds on ozone formation, EPA
subsequently concluded that the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for TBAC were not
achieving their primary objective of
informing more accurate photochemical
modeling in support of SIP submissions.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61201
Also, there was no evidence that TBAC
was being used at levels that would
cause concern for ozone formation and
that the requirements were not
providing sufficient information to
evaluate the cumulative impacts of
exempted compounds. Therefore,
because the requirements were not
addressing EPA’s concerns as they were
intended, EPA revised the regulatory
definition of VOC under 40 CFR
51.100(s) to remove the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements for TBAC
(February 25, 2016, 81 FR 9341). EPA’s
rationale for this action is explained in
more detail in the final rule for that
action. See 81 FR 50330 (August 1,
2016).
On August 1, 2016, EPA promulgated
a final rule revising the regulatory
definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s)
to add HFE–347pcf2 to the list of
compounds excluded from the
regulatory definition of VOC (81 FR
50330). This action was based on EPA’s
consideration of the compound’s
negligible reactivity and low
contribution to ozone as well as the low
likelihood of risk to human health or the
environment. EPA’s rationale for this
action is explained in more detail in the
final rule for this action. See 81 FR
50330 (August 1, 2016).
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
In order to conform with EPA’s
current regulatory definition of VOC in
40 CFR 51.100(s), the Virginia State Air
Pollution Control Board amended the
definition of VOC in 9 VAC 5–10–20.
These amendments removed the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for TBAC (Revision C16)
and added HFE–347pcf2 to the list of
compounds excluded from the
regulatory definition of VOC (Revision
I16). Revision C16 was adopted by the
State Air Pollution Control Board on
June 17, 2016 and was effective as of
December 15, 2016. Revision I16 was
adopted by the State Air Pollution
Control Board on December 5, 2014 and
was effective as of July 30, 2015.
VADEQ formally submitted Revision
C16 and Revision I16 as two separate
SIP revisions on July 31, 2017.
Virginia’s amendments to the
definition of VOC in 9 VAC 5–10–20 are
in accordance with EPA’s regulatory
changes to the definition of VOC in 40
CFR 51.100(s) and are therefore
approvable for the Virginia SIP in
accordance with CAA section 110. Also,
because EPA has made the
determination that TBAC and HFE–
347pcf2 are of negligible reactivity and
therefore have low contributions to
ozone as well as low likelihood of risk
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
61202
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
to human health or the environment,
removing these chemicals from the
definition of VOC in the Virginia SIP as
well as the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for these chemicals will
not interfere with attainment of any
NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or
any other requirement of the CAA.
Thus, the removal of the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements for TBAC
and the addition of HFR–347pcf2 to the
list of compounds excluded from the
regulatory definition of VOC is in
accordance with CAA section 110(l).
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve both
Revision C16 and Revision I16,
submitted on July 31, 2017, as revisions
to the Virginia SIP, as the submissions
meet the requirements of CAA section
110. Revision C16 updates the
regulatory definition of VOC in the
Virginia SIP and removes the
recordkeeping, emissions reporting,
photochemical dispersion modeling,
and inventory requirements related to
the use of TBAC as a VOC. Revision I16
updates the regulatory definition of
VOC in the Virginia SIP to add HFE–
347pcf2 to the list of compounds
excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this document. These comments will be
considered before taking final action.
IV. General Information Pertaining to
SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation
that provides, subject to certain
conditions, for an environmental
assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for
voluntary compliance evaluations
performed by a regulated entity. The
legislation further addresses the relative
burden of proof for parties either
asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the
privilege is claimed. Virginia’s
legislation also provides, subject to
certain conditions, for a penalty waiver
for violations of environmental laws
when a regulated entity discovers such
violations pursuant to a voluntary
compliance evaluation and voluntarily
discloses such violations to the
Commonwealth and takes prompt and
appropriate measures to remedy the
violations. Virginia’s Voluntary
Environmental Assessment Privilege
Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides
a privilege that protects from disclosure
documents and information about the
content of those documents that are the
product of a voluntary environmental
assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
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 § 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
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
under section 304 of the CAA is
likewise unaffected by this, or any, state
audit privilege or immunity law.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this proposed rule, EPA is
proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the updated definition of VOC
in 9 VAC 5–10–20 of the Virginia
Administrative Code that removed the
recordkeeping, emissions reporting,
photochemical dispersion modeling,
and inventory requirements related to
the use of TBAC as a VOC and added
HFE–347pcf2 to the list of compounds
excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials
generally available through https://
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region III Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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);
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
• 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).
This action amending the definition
of VOC in the Virginia SIP to conform
with the regulatory definition of VOC in
40 CFR 51.100(s) 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 12, 2017.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2017–27522 Filed 12–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0737; FRL–9972–57–
Region 9]
Approval of California Air Plan
Revisions, Northern Sierra Air Quality
Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the Northern Sierra Air
Quality Management District
(NSAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns emissions of
particulate matter (PM) from wood
burning devices. We are proposing to
approve a local measure to reduce
emissions from these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act). We are taking comments on this
proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
January 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2017–0737 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Doris Lo, at lo.doris@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be removed or edited
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
SUMMARY:
61203
information you consider to be
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. The 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:
Rynda Kay, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–
4118, kay.rynda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What measure did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this measure?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
measure?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the measure?
B. Does the measure meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What measure did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the measure addressed by
this proposal with the dates that it was
adopted by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED MEASURE
Resolution No.
Measure title
Adopted
Submitted
NSAQMD ............
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Local agency
2017–01
Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District Resolution #2017–01 ...
01/23/17
02/28/17
On August 28, 2017, the submittal for
the NSAQMD measure was deemed by
operation of law to meet the
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51
Appendix V, which must be met before
formal EPA review.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
B. Are there other versions of this
measure?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
measure?
There are no previous versions of the
NSAQMD measure in the SIP.
Particulate matter, including PM with
diameters that are generally 2.5 microns
or smaller (PM2.5) and PM with
diameters that are generally 10 microns
or smaller (PM10), contributes to effects
that are harmful to human health and
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61200-61203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27522]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0544; FRL-9972-40-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Revisions to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile Organic
Compound
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve two state implementation plan (SIP) revisions (Revision C16 and
Revision I16) formally submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. These
revisions pertain to amendments made to the definition of ``volatile
organic compound'' (VOC) in the Virginia Administrative Code to conform
with EPA's regulatory definition of VOC. Specifically, these amendments
remove the record keeping and reporting requirements for t-butyl
acetate (also known as tertiary butyl acetate or TBAC; Chemical
Abstracts Service [CAS] number: 540-88-5) and add 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-
1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane (also known as HFE-347pcf2; CAS
number: 406-78-0) as a compound excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC, which match actions EPA has taken. EPA is approving these
revisions to update the definition of VOC in the Virginia SIP under the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0544 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. 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 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 [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 31, 2017, the Commonwealth of
Virginia, through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), submitted two SIP revisions (Revisions C16 and Revision I16).
Revision C16 requested that the definition of VOC be updated in the
Virginia SIP to conform with EPA's February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9339) final
rulemaking updating EPA's regulatory definition of VOC in 40 CFR
51.100(s) to remove the recordkeeping, emissions reporting,
photochemical dispersion modeling, and inventory requirements related
to the use of TBAC as a VOC. Revision I16 requests that the definition
[[Page 61201]]
of VOC be updated in the Virginia SIP to conform with EPA's August 1,
2016 (81 FR 50330) final rulemaking updating EPA's regulatory
definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s) to add 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-
(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane to the list of compounds excluded from
EPA's regulatory definition of VOC.
I. Background
VOCs are organic compounds of carbon that, in the presence of
sunlight, react with sources of oxygen molecules, such as nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO), in the atmosphere to
produce tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog. Common sources that
may emit VOCs include paints, coatings, housekeeping and maintenance
products, and building and furnishing materials. Outdoor emissions of
VOCs are regulated by EPA primarily to prevent the formation of ozone.
VOCs have different levels of volatility, depending on the
compound, and react at different rates to produce varying amounts of
ozone. VOCs that are non-reactive or of negligible reactivity to form
ozone react slowly and/or form less ozone; therefore, reducing their
emissions has limited effects on local or regional ozone pollution.
Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that EPA has the authority to
define the meaning of VOC and what compounds shall be treated as VOCs
for regulatory purposes. It is EPA's policy that organic compounds with
a negligible level of reactivity should be excluded from the regulatory
definition of VOC in order to focus control efforts on compounds that
significantly affect ozone concentrations. EPA uses the reactivity of
ethane as the threshold for determining whether a compound has
negligible reactivity.
Compounds that are less reactive than, or equally reactive to,
ethane under certain assumed conditions may be deemed negligibly
reactive and, therefore, suitable for exemption by EPA from the
regulatory definition of VOC. The policy of excluding negligibly
reactive compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC was first laid
out in the ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977) and was supplemented
subsequently with the ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds in Ozone State Implementation Plans'' (70 FR 54046, September
13, 2005). The regulatory definition of VOC as well as a list of
compounds that are designated by EPA as negligibly reactive can be
found at 40 CFR 51.100(s).
On September 30, 1999, EPA proposed to revise the regulatory
definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s) to exclude TBAC as a VOC (64 FR
52731). In most cases, when a negligibly reactive VOC is exempted from
the definition of VOC, emissions of that compound are no longer
recorded, collected, or reported to states or the EPA as part of VOC
emissions. However, EPA's final rule excluded TBAC from the definition
of VOC for purposes of VOC emissions limitations or VOC content
requirements, but continued to define TBAC as a VOC for purposes of all
recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling,
and inventory requirements that apply to VOC (69 FR 69298, November 29,
2004) (2004 Final Rule). This was primarily due to EPA's conclusion in
the 2004 Final Rule that ``negligibly reactive'' compounds may
contribute significantly to ozone formation if present in sufficient
quantities and that emissions of these compounds need to be represented
accurately in photochemical modeling analyses. Per EPA's 2004 Final
Rule, Virginia partially excluded TBAC from the regulatory definition
of VOC, which was approved into Virginia's SIP on August 18, 2006 (71
FR 47742).
When EPA exempted TBAC from the VOC definition for purposes of
control requirements in the 2004 Final Rule, EPA created a new category
of compounds and a new reporting requirement that required that
emissions of TBAC be reported separately by states and, in turn, by
industry. However, EPA did not issue any guidance on how TBAC emissions
should be tracked and reported. Therefore, the data that was reported
as a result of these requirements was incomplete and inconsistent.
Also, in the 2004 Final Rule, EPA stated that the primary objective of
the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for TBAC was to address
the cumulative impacts of ``negligibly reactive'' compounds and
suggested that future exempt compounds may also be subject to such
requirements. However, such requirements were not included in any other
proposed or final VOC exemptions.
Because having high quality data on TBAC emissions alone was
unlikely to be useful in assessing the cumulative impacts of
``negligibly reactive'' compounds on ozone formation, EPA subsequently
concluded that the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for TBAC
were not achieving their primary objective of informing more accurate
photochemical modeling in support of SIP submissions. Also, there was
no evidence that TBAC was being used at levels that would cause concern
for ozone formation and that the requirements were not providing
sufficient information to evaluate the cumulative impacts of exempted
compounds. Therefore, because the requirements were not addressing
EPA's concerns as they were intended, EPA revised the regulatory
definition of VOC under 40 CFR 51.100(s) to remove the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements for TBAC (February 25, 2016, 81 FR 9341).
EPA's rationale for this action is explained in more detail in the
final rule for that action. See 81 FR 50330 (August 1, 2016).
On August 1, 2016, EPA promulgated a final rule revising the
regulatory definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s) to add HFE-347pcf2 to
the list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC
(81 FR 50330). This action was based on EPA's consideration of the
compound's negligible reactivity and low contribution to ozone as well
as the low likelihood of risk to human health or the environment. EPA's
rationale for this action is explained in more detail in the final rule
for this action. See 81 FR 50330 (August 1, 2016).
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
In order to conform with EPA's current regulatory definition of VOC
in 40 CFR 51.100(s), the Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board
amended the definition of VOC in 9 VAC 5-10-20. These amendments
removed the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for TBAC (Revision
C16) and added HFE-347pcf2 to the list of compounds excluded from the
regulatory definition of VOC (Revision I16). Revision C16 was adopted
by the State Air Pollution Control Board on June 17, 2016 and was
effective as of December 15, 2016. Revision I16 was adopted by the
State Air Pollution Control Board on December 5, 2014 and was effective
as of July 30, 2015. VADEQ formally submitted Revision C16 and Revision
I16 as two separate SIP revisions on July 31, 2017.
Virginia's amendments to the definition of VOC in 9 VAC 5-10-20 are
in accordance with EPA's regulatory changes to the definition of VOC in
40 CFR 51.100(s) and are therefore approvable for the Virginia SIP in
accordance with CAA section 110. Also, because EPA has made the
determination that TBAC and HFE-347pcf2 are of negligible reactivity
and therefore have low contributions to ozone as well as low likelihood
of risk
[[Page 61202]]
to human health or the environment, removing these chemicals from the
definition of VOC in the Virginia SIP as well as the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for these chemicals will not interfere with
attainment of any NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other
requirement of the CAA. Thus, the removal of the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for TBAC and the addition of HFR-347pcf2 to the
list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC is in
accordance with CAA section 110(l).
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve both Revision C16 and Revision I16,
submitted on July 31, 2017, as revisions to the Virginia SIP, as the
submissions meet the requirements of CAA section 110. Revision C16
updates the regulatory definition of VOC in the Virginia SIP and
removes the recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical
dispersion modeling, and inventory requirements related to the use of
TBAC as a VOC. Revision I16 updates the regulatory definition of VOC in
the Virginia SIP to add HFE-347pcf2 to the list of compounds excluded
from the regulatory definition of VOC. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will
be considered before taking final action.
IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA
rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference the updated definition of VOC in 9 VAC 5-10-20
of the Virginia Administrative Code that removed the recordkeeping,
emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling, and inventory
requirements related to the use of TBAC as a VOC and added HFE-347pcf2
to the list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of
VOC. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally
available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region III
Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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);
[[Page 61203]]
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).
This action amending the definition of VOC in the Virginia SIP to
conform with the regulatory definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s) 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 12, 2017.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2017-27522 Filed 12-26-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
