Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Emissions Statement Rule Certification for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 10652-10655 [2018-04812]
Download as PDF
10652
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2018 / Proposed Rules
statement requirement in section
182(a)(3)(B) and is proposing to approve
this SIP revision. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before
taking final action.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
November 3, 2017 Pennsylvania SIP
revision certifying that Pennsylvania’s
existing SIP-approved emissions
statement regulation meets the
emissions statement requirement of
section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
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);
• 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);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Mar 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule, which
proposes to approve Pennsylvania’s
certification that Pennsylvania’s SIPapproved emissions statement
regulation meets the emissions
statement requirement of section
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA, does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 23, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018–04813 Filed 3–9–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0738; FRL–9975–35–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Emissions Statement Rule Certification
for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
state implementation plan (SIP) revision
formally submitted by the
Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia).
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), states’
SIPs must require stationary sources in
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
marginal or above to report annual
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
volatile organic compounds (VOC). This
emissions statement requirement also
applies to stationary sources located in
the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) that
emit or have the potential to emit at
least 50 tons per year (tpy) of VOC or
100 tpy of NOX. The SIP revision
provides Virginia’s certification that its
existing emissions statement program
satisfies the emissions statement
requirements of the CAA for the 2008
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). EPA is proposing
to approve Virginia’s emissions
statement program certification for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as a SIP revision in
accordance with the requirements of the
CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before April 11, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2017–0738 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
spielberger.susan@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:
I. Background
Under the CAA, EPA establishes
NAAQS for criteria pollutants in order
to protect human health and the
E:\FR\FM\12MRP1.SGM
12MRP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2018 / Proposed Rules
environment. In response to scientific
evidence linking ozone exposure to
adverse health effects, EPA promulgated
the first ozone NAAQS, the 0.12 part per
million (ppm) 1-hour ozone NAAQS, in
1979. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8,
1979). The CAA requires EPA to review
and reevaluate the NAAQS every 5
years in order to consider updated
information regarding the effects of the
criteria pollutants on human health and
the environment. On July 18, 1997, EPA
promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS,
referred to as the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight hours.
62 FR 38855. This 8-hour ozone NAAQS
was determined to be more protective of
public health than the previous 1979
1-hour ozone NAAQS. In 2008, EPA
strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm. The 0.075 ppm
standard is referred to as the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27,
2008).
On May 21, 2012 and June 11, 2012,
EPA designated nonattainment areas for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088
and 77 FR 34221. Effective July 20,
2012, the Washington, DC-MD-VA area
was designated as marginal
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. The Washington, DC-MD-VA
nonattainment area is comprised of
Arlington County, Fairfax County,
Loudoun County, Prince William
County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City,
Falls Church City, Manassas City, and
Manassas Park City. See 40 CFR 81.347.
Section 182 of the CAA identifies
additional plan submissions and
requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas. Specifically, section 182(a)(3)(B)
of the CAA requires that states develop
and submit, as a revision to their SIP,
rules which establish annual reporting
requirements for certain stationary
sources. Sources that are within
marginal or above ozone nonattainment
areas must annually report the actual
emissions of NOX and VOC to the state.
However, states may waive sources that
emit under 25 tpy of NOX and VOC if
the state provides an inventory of
emissions from such class or category of
sources as required by CAA sections 172
and 182. See CAA section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii).
Additionally, portions of Virginia are
included in the ozone transport region
(OTR) established by Congress in
section 184 of the CAA. The OTR is
comprised of the states of Connecticut,
Delaware, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and the
Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical
Area that includes the District of
Columbia and portions of Virginia. The
areas designated as in the Virginia
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Mar 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
portion of the OTR are as follows:
Arlington County, Fairfax County,
Loudoun County, Prince William
County, Stafford County, Alexandria
City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City,
Manassas City, and Manassas Park
City.1
Pursuant to section 184(b)(2), any
stationary source located in the OTR
that emits or has the potential to emit
at least 50 tpy of VOC shall be
considered a major stationary source
and subject to the requirements which
would be applicable to major stationary
sources if the area was classified as a
moderate nonattainment area. See CAA
section 184. Thus, states within the OTR
are subject to plan (or SIP) requirements
in CAA section 182(b) applicable to
moderate nonattainment areas. Also,
section 182(f)(1) of the CAA requires
that the plan provisions required for
major stationary sources of VOC also
apply to major stationary sources of
NOX for states with ozone
nonattainment areas. A major stationary
source of NOX is defined as a stationary
facility or source of air pollutants which
directly emits, or has the potential to
emit, 100 tpy or more of NOX. See CAA
section 302(j).
In summary, sources located within
the portions of Virginia included in the
OTR, including areas designated as
attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
that emit more than 50 tpy of VOC or
100 tpy of NOX are considered major
sources and are subject to the same
requirements as major stationary
sources located in moderate or above
nonattainment areas. These
requirements include the emissions
statement requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). See CAA section 182(f) and
184(b)(2). Sources located in designated
marginal or above nonattainment areas
must also submit an emissions
statement as required by CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). As stated previously, states
may waive sources that emit less than
the 25 tpy of NOX and 25 tpy of VOC
threshold if the state provides an
inventory of emissions from such class
or category of sources as required by
CAA sections 172 and 182. See CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii). States are
required by section 182(a)(3)(B) of the
CAA to submit, for approval into the
state’s SIP, rules requiring the sources
described above to provide annual
statements showing their actual
emissions of NOX and VOC to the state.
The EPA published guidance on
source emissions statements in a July
1 See,
e.g. ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; NSR in the
Ozone Transport Region’’, 71 FR 39570 (July 13,
2006) and 71 FR 890 (January 6, 2006).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10653
1992 memorandum titled, ‘‘Guidance on
the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program’’ and in a March 14,
2006 memorandum titled, ‘‘Emission
Statement Requirements Under 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS Implementation’’ (2006
memorandum). In addition, on March 6,
2015, EPA issued a final rule addressing
a range of nonattainment area SIP
requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, including the emissions
statement requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) (2015 final rule). 80 FR
12264. The 2006 memorandum clarified
that the source emissions statement
requirement of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)
was applicable to all areas designated
nonattainment for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS and classified as marginal or
above under subpart 2, part D, title I of
the CAA. Per EPA’s 2015 final rule, the
source emissions statement requirement
also applies to all areas designated
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
According to EPA’s 2015 final rule,
most areas that are required to have an
emissions statement program for the
2008 ozone NAAQS already have one in
place due to a nonattainment
designation for an earlier ozone
NAAQS. EPA’s 2015 final rule states
that, ‘‘If an area has a previously
approved emissions statement rule in
force for the 1997 ozone NAAQS or the
1-hour ozone NAAQS that covers all
portions of the nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS, such rule
should be sufficient for purposes of the
emissions statement requirement for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.’’ In cases where an
existing emissions statement rule is still
adequate to meet the emissions
statement requirement under the 2008
ozone NAAQS, states may provide the
rationale for that determination to EPA
in a written statement for approval in
the SIP to meet the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B). In this statement,
states should identify how the
emissions statement requirements of
CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) are met by
their existing emissions statement rule.
In summary, the Commonwealth of
Virginia is required to submit, as a
formal revision to its SIP, a statement
certifying that Virginia’s existing
emissions statement program satisfies
the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) and covers the Washington,
DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.2
2 EPA did not require Virginia or other states to
certify that its existing SIP approved emissions
statement program continued to satisfy CAA
requirements for areas in the OTR to have an
emissions statement program.
E:\FR\FM\12MRP1.SGM
12MRP1
10654
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
On August 1, 2017, the
Commonwealth of Virginia, through the
Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality (VADEQ), submitted, as a
formal revision to its SIP, a statement
certifying that Virginia’s existing SIPapproved emissions statement program
covers the Virginia portion of the
Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and is
at least as stringent as the requirements
of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). In its
submittal, Virginia states that the
emissions statement requirements of
CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) are contained
under 9VAC5–20–160 (Registration) of
the Virginia Administrative Code and
are SIP-approved under 40 CFR
52.2420(c). According to Virginia, these
provisions mandate that facilities
emitting more than 25 tpy of NOX or
VOC must submit emission statements
to Virginia while those emitting less
than 25 tpy must comply with inventory
requirements.
The provisions under 9VAC5–20–160
that implement Virginia’s emissions
statement program were approved into
the Virginia SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR
21451).3 These provisions require the
owner of any stationary source that
emits 25 tpy or more of VOC or NOX
and is located in an emissions control
area designated under 9VAC5–20–206
(Volatile Organic Compound and
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Control
Areas) to submit an emissions statement
to the Virginia State Air Pollution
Control Board by April 15 of each year
for the emissions discharged during the
previous calendar year.4 Emissions
3 The provisions under 9VAC5–20–160 were
derived from VR120–02–31. EPA’s May 2, 1995
direct final rulemaking (DFR) approved a SIP
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia requesting the addition of provisions under
VR120–02–31 paragraph B, which established
Virginia’s emissions statement program, and
Appendix S (Air Quality Program Policies and
Procedures), which described the procedure for
preparing and submitting emissions statements for
stationary sources, to the Virginia SIP. See 60 FR
21451. On March 6, 1992, the Virginia State
Assembly enacted Chapter 216—an act to amend
Section 9–77.7, Code of Virginia, which authorized
reorganization of the Virginia Administrative Code,
including reorganization of the air pollution control
regulations, effective July 1, 1992. Beginning April
17, 1995, Virginia began publication of its air
quality control regulations in the new format. On
April 21, 2000, EPA approved a SIP revision from
Virginia requesting the reorganization and
renumbering of the Virginia SIP to match the
recodification of Virginia’s air pollution control
regulations under the Virginia Administrative Code.
See 65 FR 21315. As a result, the SIP approved
provisions under VR120–02–31 and Appendix S are
now under 9VAC5–20–160 and 9VAC5–20–121,
respectively.
4 The emissions control areas defined under
9VAC5–20–206 include the Northern Virginia
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Mar 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
statements are required to be prepared
and submitted in accordance with
9VAC5–20–121 (Air Quality Program
Policies and Procedures), which
references Virginia’s January 1, 1993
document AQP–8 titled, ‘‘Procedures for
Preparing and Submitting Emission
Statements for Stationary Sources.’’ The
provisions under 9VAC5–20–121 were
also approved into the Virginia SIP on
May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21451).
EPA’s review of the Commonwealth
of Virginia’s submittal finds that
Virginia’s existing, SIP-approved
emissions statement program under
9VAC5–20–160 satisfies the
requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for emission statements for
sources located in marginal or above
nonattainment areas including such
sources in the Virginia portion of the
Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA
notes 9VAC5–20–160 also requires
sources located in portions of Virginia
included in the OTR to submit required
emission statements in accordance with
CAA section 184 (OTR requirements)
and 182 (plan submissions and
requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas). Pursuant to CAA sections 182
and 184, Virginia is required to have an
emissions statement program for sources
located in marginal or above
nonattainment areas and the portions of
Virginia included in the OTR. EPA finds
the provisions under 9VAC5–20–160
satisfy these requirements of CAA
sections 182 and 184 because they apply
to the Northern Virginia Emissions
Control Area, which includes the
Virginia localities within the Virginia
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA
nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS (i.e., Arlington County, Fairfax
County, Loudoun County, Prince
William County, Alexandria City,
Fairfax City, Falls Church City,
Manassas City, and Manassas Park City),
and the portions of Virginia included in
the OTR (i.e., Arlington County, Fairfax
County, Loudoun County, Prince
William County, Stafford County,
Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls
Church City, Manassas City, and
Manassas Park City). EPA also finds
Virginia’s emissions thresholds for
sources that are required to submit an
emissions statement meet the
Emissions Control Area, the Fredericksburg
Emissions Control Area, the Richmond Emissions
Control Area, the Hampton Roads Emissions
Control Area, and the Western Virginia Emissions
Control Area. The Northern Virginia Emissions
Control Area consists of the localities of Arlington
County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince
William County, Stafford County, Alexandra City,
Fairfax City, Falls Church City, Manassas City, and
Manassas Park City.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements of CAA sections 182 and
184. As stated above, 9VAC5–20–160
requires the owner of any stationary
source located in an emissions control
area that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC
or NOX to annually submit an emissions
statement. This 25 tpy threshold is
equivalent to the threshold required by
CAA section 182. As previously
mentioned, per CAA section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii), states may waive
sources that emit less than 25 tpy of
NOX or VOC if the state provides an
inventory of emissions from such class
or category of sources as required by
CAA sections 172 and 182. Virginia
does provide emissions inventories for
nonattainment areas as required by CAA
section 172(c)(3).5 Therefore, EPA has
determined that 9VAC5–20–160, which
is currently in the Virginia SIP, is
appropriate to address the emissions
statement requirements in section
182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
EPA is proposing to approve, as a SIP
revision, the Commonwealth of
Virginia’s August 1, 2017 emissions
statement program certification for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as approvable
under CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
Commonwealth of Virginia’s SIP
revision submitted on August 1, 2017,
which certifies that Virginia’s existing
SIP-approved emissions statement
program under 9VAC5–20–160 satisfies
the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
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
5 See, e.g., ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; District of Columbia,
Maryland, and Virginia; 2011 Base Year Emissions
Inventories for the Washington, DC-MD-VA
Nonattainment Area for the 2008 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ 80 FR 27255 (May
13, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\12MRP1.SGM
12MRP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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 § 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:41 Mar 09, 2018
Jkt 244001
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
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.);
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
10655
• 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).
This SIP revision consisting of
Virginia’s certification that its existing
SIP-approved emissions statement
program under 9VAC5–20–160 satisfies
the requirements of CAA section
182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 26, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018–04812 Filed 3–9–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\12MRP1.SGM
12MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 48 (Monday, March 12, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10652-10655]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04812]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0738; FRL-9975-35-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Emissions Statement Rule Certification for the 2008 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision formally submitted
by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia). Under the Clean Air Act
(CAA), states' SIPs must require stationary sources in ozone
nonattainment areas classified as marginal or above to report annual
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC). This emissions statement requirement also applies to
stationary sources located in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) that
emit or have the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year (tpy) of
VOC or 100 tpy of NOX. The SIP revision provides Virginia's
certification that its existing emissions statement program satisfies
the emissions statement requirements of the CAA for the 2008 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to
approve Virginia's emissions statement program certification for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as a SIP revision in accordance with the requirements
of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 11, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0738 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:
I. Background
Under the CAA, EPA establishes NAAQS for criteria pollutants in
order to protect human health and the
[[Page 10653]]
environment. In response to scientific evidence linking ozone exposure
to adverse health effects, EPA promulgated the first ozone NAAQS, the
0.12 part per million (ppm) 1-hour ozone NAAQS, in 1979. See 44 FR 8202
(February 8, 1979). The CAA requires EPA to review and reevaluate the
NAAQS every 5 years in order to consider updated information regarding
the effects of the criteria pollutants on human health and the
environment. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS,
referred to as the 1997 ozone NAAQS, of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight
hours. 62 FR 38855. This 8-hour ozone NAAQS was determined to be more
protective of public health than the previous 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
In 2008, EPA strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075
ppm. The 0.075 ppm standard is referred to as the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See
73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
On May 21, 2012 and June 11, 2012, EPA designated nonattainment
areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088 and 77 FR 34221. Effective
July 20, 2012, the Washington, DC-MD-VA area was designated as marginal
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The Washington, DC-MD-VA
nonattainment area is comprised of Arlington County, Fairfax County,
Loudoun County, Prince William County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City,
Falls Church City, Manassas City, and Manassas Park City. See 40 CFR
81.347.
Section 182 of the CAA identifies additional plan submissions and
requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Specifically, section
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA requires that states develop and submit, as a
revision to their SIP, rules which establish annual reporting
requirements for certain stationary sources. Sources that are within
marginal or above ozone nonattainment areas must annually report the
actual emissions of NOX and VOC to the state. However,
states may waive sources that emit under 25 tpy of NOX and
VOC if the state provides an inventory of emissions from such class or
category of sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182. See CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii).
Additionally, portions of Virginia are included in the ozone
transport region (OTR) established by Congress in section 184 of the
CAA. The OTR is comprised of the states of Connecticut, Delaware,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, and the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area that
includes the District of Columbia and portions of Virginia. The areas
designated as in the Virginia portion of the OTR are as follows:
Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William
County, Stafford County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church
City, Manassas City, and Manassas Park City.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See, e.g. ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; Virginia; NSR in the Ozone Transport Region'',
71 FR 39570 (July 13, 2006) and 71 FR 890 (January 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to section 184(b)(2), any stationary source located in the
OTR that emits or has the potential to emit at least 50 tpy of VOC
shall be considered a major stationary source and subject to the
requirements which would be applicable to major stationary sources if
the area was classified as a moderate nonattainment area. See CAA
section 184. Thus, states within the OTR are subject to plan (or SIP)
requirements in CAA section 182(b) applicable to moderate nonattainment
areas. Also, section 182(f)(1) of the CAA requires that the plan
provisions required for major stationary sources of VOC also apply to
major stationary sources of NOX for states with ozone
nonattainment areas. A major stationary source of NOX is
defined as a stationary facility or source of air pollutants which
directly emits, or has the potential to emit, 100 tpy or more of
NOX. See CAA section 302(j).
In summary, sources located within the portions of Virginia
included in the OTR, including areas designated as attainment for the
2008 ozone NAAQS, that emit more than 50 tpy of VOC or 100 tpy of
NOX are considered major sources and are subject to the same
requirements as major stationary sources located in moderate or above
nonattainment areas. These requirements include the emissions statement
requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). See CAA section 182(f) and
184(b)(2). Sources located in designated marginal or above
nonattainment areas must also submit an emissions statement as required
by CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). As stated previously, states may waive
sources that emit less than the 25 tpy of NOX and 25 tpy of
VOC threshold if the state provides an inventory of emissions from such
class or category of sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182.
See CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii). States are required by section
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA to submit, for approval into the state's SIP,
rules requiring the sources described above to provide annual
statements showing their actual emissions of NOX and VOC to
the state.
The EPA published guidance on source emissions statements in a July
1992 memorandum titled, ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program'' and in a March 14, 2006 memorandum titled,
``Emission Statement Requirements Under 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
Implementation'' (2006 memorandum). In addition, on March 6, 2015, EPA
issued a final rule addressing a range of nonattainment area SIP
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, including the emissions
statement requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) (2015 final rule).
80 FR 12264. The 2006 memorandum clarified that the source emissions
statement requirement of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) was applicable to all
areas designated nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and classified
as marginal or above under subpart 2, part D, title I of the CAA. Per
EPA's 2015 final rule, the source emissions statement requirement also
applies to all areas designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
According to EPA's 2015 final rule, most areas that are required to
have an emissions statement program for the 2008 ozone NAAQS already
have one in place due to a nonattainment designation for an earlier
ozone NAAQS. EPA's 2015 final rule states that, ``If an area has a
previously approved emissions statement rule in force for the 1997
ozone NAAQS or the 1-hour ozone NAAQS that covers all portions of the
nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, such rule should be
sufficient for purposes of the emissions statement requirement for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.'' In cases where an existing emissions statement rule
is still adequate to meet the emissions statement requirement under the
2008 ozone NAAQS, states may provide the rationale for that
determination to EPA in a written statement for approval in the SIP to
meet the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B). In this statement,
states should identify how the emissions statement requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) are met by their existing emissions statement
rule.
In summary, the Commonwealth of Virginia is required to submit, as
a formal revision to its SIP, a statement certifying that Virginia's
existing emissions statement program satisfies the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B) and covers the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA did not require Virginia or other states to certify that
its existing SIP approved emissions statement program continued to
satisfy CAA requirements for areas in the OTR to have an emissions
statement program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 10654]]
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
On August 1, 2017, the Commonwealth of Virginia, through the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ), submitted, as a
formal revision to its SIP, a statement certifying that Virginia's
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program covers the Virginia
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008
ozone NAAQS and is at least as stringent as the requirements of CAA
section 182(a)(3)(B). In its submittal, Virginia states that the
emissions statement requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) are
contained under 9VAC5-20-160 (Registration) of the Virginia
Administrative Code and are SIP-approved under 40 CFR 52.2420(c).
According to Virginia, these provisions mandate that facilities
emitting more than 25 tpy of NOX or VOC must submit emission
statements to Virginia while those emitting less than 25 tpy must
comply with inventory requirements.
The provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 that implement Virginia's
emissions statement program were approved into the Virginia SIP on May
2, 1995 (60 FR 21451).\3\ These provisions require the owner of any
stationary source that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC or NOX
and is located in an emissions control area designated under 9VAC5-20-
206 (Volatile Organic Compound and Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Control
Areas) to submit an emissions statement to the Virginia State Air
Pollution Control Board by April 15 of each year for the emissions
discharged during the previous calendar year.\4\ Emissions statements
are required to be prepared and submitted in accordance with 9VAC5-20-
121 (Air Quality Program Policies and Procedures), which references
Virginia's January 1, 1993 document AQP-8 titled, ``Procedures for
Preparing and Submitting Emission Statements for Stationary Sources.''
The provisions under 9VAC5-20-121 were also approved into the Virginia
SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21451).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 were derived from VR120-
02-31. EPA's May 2, 1995 direct final rulemaking (DFR) approved a
SIP revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia requesting
the addition of provisions under VR120-02-31 paragraph B, which
established Virginia's emissions statement program, and Appendix S
(Air Quality Program Policies and Procedures), which described the
procedure for preparing and submitting emissions statements for
stationary sources, to the Virginia SIP. See 60 FR 21451. On March
6, 1992, the Virginia State Assembly enacted Chapter 216--an act to
amend Section 9-77.7, Code of Virginia, which authorized
reorganization of the Virginia Administrative Code, including
reorganization of the air pollution control regulations, effective
July 1, 1992. Beginning April 17, 1995, Virginia began publication
of its air quality control regulations in the new format. On April
21, 2000, EPA approved a SIP revision from Virginia requesting the
reorganization and renumbering of the Virginia SIP to match the
recodification of Virginia's air pollution control regulations under
the Virginia Administrative Code. See 65 FR 21315. As a result, the
SIP approved provisions under VR120-02-31 and Appendix S are now
under 9VAC5-20-160 and 9VAC5-20-121, respectively.
\4\ The emissions control areas defined under 9VAC5-20-206
include the Northern Virginia Emissions Control Area, the
Fredericksburg Emissions Control Area, the Richmond Emissions
Control Area, the Hampton Roads Emissions Control Area, and the
Western Virginia Emissions Control Area. The Northern Virginia
Emissions Control Area consists of the localities of Arlington
County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince William County,
Stafford County, Alexandra City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City,
Manassas City, and Manassas Park City.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's review of the Commonwealth of Virginia's submittal finds that
Virginia's existing, SIP-approved emissions statement program under
9VAC5-20-160 satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for
emission statements for sources located in marginal or above
nonattainment areas including such sources in the Virginia portion of
the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
EPA notes 9VAC5-20-160 also requires sources located in portions of
Virginia included in the OTR to submit required emission statements in
accordance with CAA section 184 (OTR requirements) and 182 (plan
submissions and requirements for ozone nonattainment areas). Pursuant
to CAA sections 182 and 184, Virginia is required to have an emissions
statement program for sources located in marginal or above
nonattainment areas and the portions of Virginia included in the OTR.
EPA finds the provisions under 9VAC5-20-160 satisfy these requirements
of CAA sections 182 and 184 because they apply to the Northern Virginia
Emissions Control Area, which includes the Virginia localities within
the Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS (i.e., Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun
County, Prince William County, Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls
Church City, Manassas City, and Manassas Park City), and the portions
of Virginia included in the OTR (i.e., Arlington County, Fairfax
County, Loudoun County, Prince William County, Stafford County,
Alexandria City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City, Manassas City, and
Manassas Park City). EPA also finds Virginia's emissions thresholds for
sources that are required to submit an emissions statement meet the
requirements of CAA sections 182 and 184. As stated above, 9VAC5-20-160
requires the owner of any stationary source located in an emissions
control area that emits 25 tpy or more of VOC or NOX to
annually submit an emissions statement. This 25 tpy threshold is
equivalent to the threshold required by CAA section 182. As previously
mentioned, per CAA section 182(a)(3)(B)(ii), states may waive sources
that emit less than 25 tpy of NOX or VOC if the state
provides an inventory of emissions from such class or category of
sources as required by CAA sections 172 and 182. Virginia does provide
emissions inventories for nonattainment areas as required by CAA
section 172(c)(3).\5\ Therefore, EPA has determined that 9VAC5-20-160,
which is currently in the Virginia SIP, is appropriate to address the
emissions statement requirements in section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve, as a SIP revision, the
Commonwealth of Virginia's August 1, 2017 emissions statement program
certification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS as approvable under CAA section
182(a)(3)(B). EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed
in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia;
2011 Base Year Emissions Inventories for the Washington, DC-MD-VA
Nonattainment Area for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard,'' 80 FR 27255 (May 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Virginia's SIP
revision submitted on August 1, 2017, which certifies that Virginia's
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program under 9VAC5-20-160
satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
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
[[Page 10655]]
when a regulated entity discovers such violations pursuant to a
voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses such
violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate
measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental
Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege
that protects from disclosure documents and information about the
content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary
environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to
documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed before
the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) are
prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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);
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 SIP revision consisting of Virginia's certification that its
existing SIP-approved emissions statement program under 9VAC5-20-160
satisfies the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008
ozone NAAQS 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 26, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018-04812 Filed 3-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P