Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 66361-66363 [2019-26145]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
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 the 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, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed 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).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations,
Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Dec 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
Dated: November 26, 2019.
Gregory Sopkin,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2019–26028 Filed 12–3–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2019–0162; FRL–10002–
85–Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Infrastructure Requirements for the
2015 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. Whenever
EPA promulgates a new or revised
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS or standard), the Clean Air Act
(CAA) requires states to make SIP
submissions to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the NAAQS. The
infrastructure requirements are designed
to ensure that the structural components
of each state’s air quality management
program are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA. Virginia
has formally submitted a SIP revision
addressing the following infrastructure
elements, or portions thereof, of section
110(a) of the CAA for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B),
(C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J),
(K), (L), and (M). EPA is proposing to
approve Virginia’s submittal addressing
the infrastructure requirements for the
2015 ozone NAAQS in accordance with
the requirements of section 110(a) of the
CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2019–0162 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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66361
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://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara
Calcinore, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The
telephone number is (215) 814–2043.
Ms. Calcinore can also be reached via
electronic mail at calcinore.sara@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under the CAA, EPA establishes
NAAQS for criteria pollutants to protect
human health and the environment. In
response to scientific evidence linking
ozone exposure to adverse health
effects, EPA promulgated the first ozone
NAAQS, the 0.12 parts per million
(ppm) 1-hour ozone NAAQS, in 1979.
44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). The CAA
requires EPA to review and reevaluate
the NAAQS every five 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 1hour ozone NAAQS. In 2008, EPA
strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm, referred to as
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR
16436 (March 27, 2008). On October 26,
2015, EPA issued a final rule
strengthening both the primary and
secondary ozone NAAQS for groundlevel ozone to 0.070 ppm, based on the
fourth-highest maximum daily 8-hour
ozone concentration per year, averaged
over three years. 80 FR 65291.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
66362
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Whenever EPA promulgates a new or
revised NAAQS, CAA section 110(a)(1)
requires states to make SIP submissions
to provide for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS. This particular type of SIP
submission is commonly referred to as
an ‘‘infrastructure SIP.’’ These
submissions must meet the various
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2),
as applicable. Due to ambiguity in some
of the language of CAA section
110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is
appropriate to interpret these provisions
in the specific context of acting on
infrastructure SIP submissions. EPA has
previously provided comprehensive
guidance on the application of these
provisions through a guidance
document for infrastructure SIP
submissions and through regional
actions on infrastructure submissions.1
Unless otherwise noted below, EPA is
following that existing approach in
acting on Virginia’s submission. In
addition, in the context of acting on
such infrastructure submissions, EPA
evaluates the submitting state’s SIP for
facial compliance with statutory and
regulatory requirements, not for the
state’s implementation of its SIP.2 EPA
has other authority to address any issues
concerning a state’s implementation of
the rules, regulations, consent orders,
etc. that comprise its SIP.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
On January 28, 2019, the
Commonwealth of Virginia formally
submitted, through the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), a SIP revision to satisfy the
infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a) for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS (referred to as ‘‘Virginia’s
submittal’’). Virginia’s submittal
addresses the following infrastructure
elements, or portions thereof, for the
2015 ozone NAAQS: CAA section
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E),
(F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
Virginia’s January 28, 2019 submittal
does not address the following elements
1 EPA explains and elaborates on these
ambiguities and its approach to address them in
‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),’’ Memorandum from
Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013 (also referred
to as ‘‘2013 Infrastructure Guidance’’), included in
the docket for this rulemaking action available at
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number EPA–R03–
OAR–2019–0162, as well as in numerous agency
actions, including EPA’s prior action on Virginia’s
infrastructure SIP to address the interstate transport
requirements for the 2012 fine particulate matter
NAAQS (83 FR 21233, May 9, 2018).
2 See U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
decision in Montana Environmental Information
Center v. EPA, No. 16–71933 (Aug. 30, 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Dec 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
of CAA section 110(a)(2): The portion of
element (C) referring to permit programs
known as nonattainment new source
review (NNSR); sub-element (D)(i)(I)
related to interstate transport; and
element (I), which pertains to the
nonattainment requirements of part D,
title I of the CAA. According to EPA’s
2013 Infrastructure Guidance, both
element (I) and the portion of element
(C) related to NNSR pertain to part D of
title I of the CAA, which addresses SIP
requirements and submission deadlines
for areas designated nonattainment for a
NAAQS. Both elements pertain to SIP
revisions that are collectively referred to
as nonattainment SIPs or attainment
plans. Such SIP revisions are required if
an area is designated nonattainment
and, if required, would be due to EPA
by the dates statutorily prescribed in
CAA part D, subparts 2 through 5.
Because the CAA directs states to
submit these plan elements on a
separate schedule, EPA does not believe
it is necessary for states to include these
elements in the infrastructure SIP
submission due three years after
adoption or revision of a NAAQS.
Virginia’s submittal also did not address
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) related to
interstate transport for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is not
proposing any action related to
Virginia’s obligations under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. EPA will take separate action
on CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2015 ozone NAAQS once Virginia
submits a SIP revision addressing this
sub-element.
Based upon EPA’s review of Virginia’s
January 28, 2019 SIP revision, EPA is
proposing to determine that Virginia’s
submittal satisfies the infrastructure
elements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A),
(B), (C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H),
(J), (K), (L), and (M) for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
A detailed summary of EPA’s review
and rationale for approving Virginia’s
submittal may be found in the technical
support document (TSD) for this
proposed rulemaking action included in
the docket for this rulemaking action
available at www.regulations.gov,
Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–
2019–0162.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to find that
Virginia’s January 28, 2019 submittal
satisfies the following infrastructure
requirements of CAA section 110(a) for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS: CAA section
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E),
(F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). As
discussed previously, Virginia’s
submittal did not address the following
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
infrastructure elements: The portion of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) related to
NNSR; CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
related to interstate transport; and CAA
section 110(a)(2)(I) pertaining to the
nonattainment requirements of part D,
title I of the CAA. Therefore, EPA is not
taking action on these elements. 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
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 Dec 03, 2019
Jkt 250001
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).
The SIP is not proposed for approval
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 proposing to approve
Virginia’s submittal addressing the
infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II),
D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and
(M) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 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
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66363
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 21, 2019.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2019–26145 Filed 12–3–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2019–0635, FRL–10002–
87–Region 10]
Air Plan Approval; Washington;
Revised Public Notice Provisions and
Other Miscellaneous Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the general air quality
regulations submitted by the
Washington Department of Ecology. The
four categories of revisions to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed for
approval in this action are: Revising the
adoption by reference date for federal
regulations cross referenced in the state
regulations; revising the definition of
volatile organic compounds (VOC) to
match changes to the federal definition;
updating public involvement
procedures for the new source review
air permitting program to reflect
changes to the federal requirements,
allowing greater use of electronic notice
and electronic access to information;
and correcting typographical errors and
minor wording changes for clarity.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2019–0635 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The 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. The EPA will generally not
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 4, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66361-66363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26145]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0162; FRL-10002-85-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2015 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. Whenever EPA promulgates a new or
revised national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or standard), the
Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to make SIP submissions to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. The
infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural
components of each state's air quality management program are adequate
to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. Virginia has
formally submitted a SIP revision addressing the following
infrastructure elements, or portions thereof, of section 110(a) of the
CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
(D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). EPA is
proposing to approve Virginia's submittal addressing the infrastructure
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS in accordance with the
requirements of section 110(a) of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 3, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2019-0162 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Calcinore, Planning &
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2043. Ms. Calcinore can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Under the CAA, EPA establishes NAAQS for criteria pollutants to
protect human health and the environment. In response to scientific
evidence linking ozone exposure to adverse health effects, EPA
promulgated the first ozone NAAQS, the 0.12 parts per million (ppm) 1-
hour ozone NAAQS, in 1979. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). The CAA
requires EPA to review and reevaluate the NAAQS every five 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, referred to
as the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). On October
26, 2015, EPA issued a final rule strengthening both the primary and
secondary ozone NAAQS for ground-level ozone to 0.070 ppm, based on the
fourth-highest maximum daily 8-hour ozone concentration per year,
averaged over three years. 80 FR 65291.
[[Page 66362]]
Whenever EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, CAA section
110(a)(1) requires states to make SIP submissions to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. This
particular type of SIP submission is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure SIP.'' These submissions must meet the various
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2), as applicable. Due to ambiguity
in some of the language of CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it
is appropriate to interpret these provisions in the specific context of
acting on infrastructure SIP submissions. EPA has previously provided
comprehensive guidance on the application of these provisions through a
guidance document for infrastructure SIP submissions and through
regional actions on infrastructure submissions.\1\ Unless otherwise
noted below, EPA is following that existing approach in acting on
Virginia's submission. In addition, in the context of acting on such
infrastructure submissions, EPA evaluates the submitting state's SIP
for facial compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, not
for the state's implementation of its SIP.\2\ EPA has other authority
to address any issues concerning a state's implementation of the rules,
regulations, consent orders, etc. that comprise its SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA explains and elaborates on these ambiguities and its
approach to address them in ``Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page,
September 13, 2013 (also referred to as ``2013 Infrastructure
Guidance''), included in the docket for this rulemaking action
available at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2019-
0162, as well as in numerous agency actions, including EPA's prior
action on Virginia's infrastructure SIP to address the interstate
transport requirements for the 2012 fine particulate matter NAAQS
(83 FR 21233, May 9, 2018).
\2\ See U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision in
Montana Environmental Information Center v. EPA, No. 16-71933 (Aug.
30, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
On January 28, 2019, the Commonwealth of Virginia formally
submitted, through the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(VADEQ), a SIP revision to satisfy the infrastructure requirements of
CAA section 110(a) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (referred to as
``Virginia's submittal''). Virginia's submittal addresses the following
infrastructure elements, or portions thereof, for the 2015 ozone NAAQS:
CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G),
(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
Virginia's January 28, 2019 submittal does not address the
following elements of CAA section 110(a)(2): The portion of element (C)
referring to permit programs known as nonattainment new source review
(NNSR); sub-element (D)(i)(I) related to interstate transport; and
element (I), which pertains to the nonattainment requirements of part
D, title I of the CAA. According to EPA's 2013 Infrastructure Guidance,
both element (I) and the portion of element (C) related to NNSR pertain
to part D of title I of the CAA, which addresses SIP requirements and
submission deadlines for areas designated nonattainment for a NAAQS.
Both elements pertain to SIP revisions that are collectively referred
to as nonattainment SIPs or attainment plans. Such SIP revisions are
required if an area is designated nonattainment and, if required, would
be due to EPA by the dates statutorily prescribed in CAA part D,
subparts 2 through 5. Because the CAA directs states to submit these
plan elements on a separate schedule, EPA does not believe it is
necessary for states to include these elements in the infrastructure
SIP submission due three years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS.
Virginia's submittal also did not address CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) related to interstate transport for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is not proposing any action related to Virginia's
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
EPA will take separate action on CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2015 ozone NAAQS once Virginia submits a SIP revision addressing this
sub-element.
Based upon EPA's review of Virginia's January 28, 2019 SIP
revision, EPA is proposing to determine that Virginia's submittal
satisfies the infrastructure elements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B),
(C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
A detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for approving
Virginia's submittal may be found in the technical support document
(TSD) for this proposed rulemaking action included in the docket for
this rulemaking action available at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0162.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to find that Virginia's January 28, 2019 submittal
satisfies the following infrastructure requirements of CAA section
110(a) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
(D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). As
discussed previously, Virginia's submittal did not address the
following infrastructure elements: The portion of CAA section
110(a)(2)(C) related to NNSR; CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) related to
interstate transport; and CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) pertaining to the
nonattainment requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. Therefore,
EPA is not taking action on these elements. 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
[[Page 66363]]
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).
The SIP is not proposed for approval 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 proposing to
approve Virginia's submittal addressing the infrastructure requirements
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), (E), (F),
(G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 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: November 21, 2019.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2019-26145 Filed 12-3-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P