Air Plan Approval; Virginia; 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards Second Maintenance Plan for the Richmond-Petersburg Area, 17374-17376 [2023-05463]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17374
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
and Union Bay Reach between Portage
Bay and Webster Point on Lake
Washington in Seattle, WA. The
regulation prohibits persons and vessels
from being in the regulated areas unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
Puget Sound or a designated
representative.
The regulations in 33 CFR
100.1311 will be enforced Saturday,
May 6, 2023, from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m.
DATES:
If
you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or
email Lieutenant Peter J. McAndrew,
Sector Puget Sound Waterways
Management Division, Coast Guard;
telephone 206–217–6045, email
SectorPugetSound@uscg.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Dated: March 16, 2023.
P.M. Hilbert,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port, Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2023–05954 Filed 3–22–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2022–0870; FRL–9148–02–
R3]
Air Plan Approval; Virginia; 1997 8Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards Second
Maintenance Plan for the RichmondPetersburg Area
I. Background
On January 12, 2023 (88 FR 2050),
EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the
Commonwealth of Virginia. In the
NPRM, EPA proposed approval of
Virginia’s plan for maintaining the 1997
ozone NAAQS in the RichmondPetersburg Area through December 31,
2028, in accordance with CAA section
175A. The formal SIP revision was
submitted by Virginia on September 21,
2021.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
The Coast
Guard will enforce special local
regulations in 33 CFR 100.1311 for the
Windermere Cup on May 6, 2023, from
7 a.m. to 1 p.m. This action is necessary
to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waterways during this oneday event. Our regulation for marine
events within the Thirteenth Coast
Guard District, § 100.1311(a), specifies
the location of the regulated area for the
Windermere Cup which encompasses
waters from Montlake Cut and Union
Bay Reach between Portage Bay and
Webster Point on Lake Washington in
Seattle, WA. All non-participants are
prohibited from entering, transiting
through, anchoring in, or remaining
within the regulated area unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or
their designated representative.
The Captain of the Port may be
assisted by other federal, state, and local
law enforcement agencies in enforcing
this regulation.
If the Captain of the Port determines
that the regulated area need not be
enforced for the full duration stated in
this notice, he will issue a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners to terminate this
notice of enforcement.
In addition to this notification of
enforcement in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard plans to provide
notification of this enforcement period
via the Local Notice to Mariners and
marine information broadcasts.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
ACTION: Final rule.
On June 1st, 2007 (72 FR 30485), EPA
approved a redesignation request (and
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
maintenance plan) from VADEQ for the
Agency (EPA) is approving a state
Richmond-Petersburg Area for the 1997
implementation plan (SIP) revision
ozone NAAQS. In accordance with CAA
submitted by the Commonwealth of
section 175A(b), at the end of the eighth
Virginia. This revision pertains to the
year after the effective date of the
Commonwealth’s plan, submitted by the redesignation, the state must also
Virginia Department of Environmental
submit a second maintenance plan to
Quality (VADEQ), for maintaining the
ensure ongoing maintenance of the
1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
standard for an additional 10 years, and
quality standards (NAAQS) (referred to
in South Coast Air Quality Management
as the ‘‘1997 ozone NAAQS’’) in the
District v. EPA,1 the District of
Richmond, Virginia Area (RichmondColumbia (D.C.) Circuit held that this
Petersburg Area). EPA is approving this
requirement cannot be waived for areas,
revision to the Virginia SIP in
like the Richmond-Petersburg Area, that
accordance with the requirements of the had been redesignated to attainment for
Clean Air Act (CAA).
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS prior to
DATES: This final rule is effective on
revocation and that were designated
April 24, 2023.
attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
CAA section 175A sets forth the criteria
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
for adequate maintenance plans. In
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R03–OAR–2022–0870. All addition, EPA has published
longstanding guidance that provides
documents in the docket are listed on
further insight on the content of an
the www.regulations.gov website.
approvable maintenance plan,
Although listed in the index, some
explaining that a maintenance plan
information is not publicly available,
should address five elements: (1) an
e.g., confidential business information
attainment emissions inventory; (2) a
(CBI) or other information whose
maintenance demonstration; (3) a
disclosure is restricted by statute.
commitment for continued air quality
Certain other material, such as
monitoring; (4) a process for verification
copyrighted material, is not placed on
of continued attainment; and (5) a
the internet and will be publicly
contingency plan.2 VADEQ’s September
available only in hard copy form.
21,
2021 submittal fulfills Virginia’s
Publicly available docket materials are
obligation to submit a second
available through www.regulations.gov,
maintenance plan and addresses each of
or please contact the person identified
the five necessary elements, as
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
explained in the NPRM.
CONTACT section for additional
As discussed in the January 12, 2023,
availability information.
NPRM, EPA allows the submittal of a
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
limited maintenance plan (LMP) to meet
Serena Nichols, Planning &
the statutory requirement that the area
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air &
will maintain for the statutory period.
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Qualifying areas may meet the
Protection Agency, Region III, 1600 John maintenance demonstration by showing
F. Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone
1 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
2 ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to
number is (215) 814–2053. Ms. Nichols
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum
can also be reached via electronic mail
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
at Nichols.Serena@epa.gov.
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni
Memo).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
that the area’s design value 3 is well
below the NAAQS and that the
historical stability of the area’s air
quality levels indicates that the area is
unlikely to violate the NAAQS in the
future. EPA evaluated VADEQ’s
September 21, 2021 submittal for
consistency with all applicable EPA
guidance and CAA requirements. EPA
found that the submittal met CAA
section 175A and all CAA requirements,
and proposed approval of the LMP for
the Richmond-Petersburg Area as a
revision to the Virginia SIP.
Other specific requirements of
Virginia’s September 21, 2021 submittal
and the rationale for EPA’s proposed
action are explained in the NPRM and
will not be restated here. No public
comments were received on the NPRM.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
III. Final Action
EPA is approving VADEQ’s second
maintenance plan for the RichmondPetersburg Area for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS as a revision to the Virginia
SIP.
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. 10.11198, 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
3 The ozone design value for a monitoring site is
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations.
The design value for an ozone nonattainment area
is the highest design value of any monitoring site
in the area. www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-qualitydesign-values.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
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. 10.11199, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
17375
CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or
any, state audit privilege or immunity
law.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land as defined
in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
17376
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by May 22, 2023. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action,
approving VADEQ’s second
maintenance plan for the RichmondPetersburg Area for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
Applicable geographic
area
*
*
Second Maintenance Plan for the
Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area.
*
Richmond-Petersburg
Area.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2023–05463 Filed 3–22–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2022–0976; FRL–10788–
03–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Interim
Final Determination To Stay and Defer
Sanctions in the Detroit Sulfur Dioxide
Nonattainment Area
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
In the Proposed Rules section
of this Federal Register, EPA is
proposing conditional approval of
Michigan’s State Implementation Plan
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:18 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
State
submittal
date
*
09/21/21
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(e)(1) is amended by adding the entry
‘‘Second Maintenance Plan for the
Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area’’ at the end
of the table to read as follows:
■
§ 52.2420
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
EPA approval date
*
3/23/23, [INSERT
Federal Register
CITATION].
(SIP), as revised on December 20, 2022,
for attaining the 2010 1-hour primary
sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS). Based on
that proposed conditional approval,
EPA is making an interim final
determination (IFD) by this action.
Although this action is effective upon
publication, EPA will take comment on
this interim final determination.
DATES: This interim final determination
is effective on March 23, 2023.
However, comments will be accepted
until April 24, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2022–0976 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
arra.sarah@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
PO 00000
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
*
*
Additional explanation
*
*
The Richmond-Petersburg area consists of the counties of Charles
City, Chesterfield, Hanover,
Henrico, and Prince George, and
the cities of Colonial Heights,
Hopewell, Richmond, and Petersburg.
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
E:\FR\FM\23MRR1.SGM
23MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17374-17376]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05463]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2022-0870; FRL-9148-02-R3]
Air Plan Approval; Virginia; 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards Second Maintenance Plan for the Richmond-
Petersburg Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. This revision pertains to the Commonwealth's plan, submitted
by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ), for
maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) (referred to as the ``1997 ozone NAAQS'') in the
Richmond, Virginia Area (Richmond-Petersburg Area). EPA is approving
this revision to the Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on April 24, 2023.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2022-0870. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serena Nichols, Planning &
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1600 John F. Kennedy
Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is
(215) 814-2053. Ms. Nichols can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On January 12, 2023 (88 FR 2050), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. In the
NPRM, EPA proposed approval of Virginia's plan for maintaining the 1997
ozone NAAQS in the Richmond-Petersburg Area through December 31, 2028,
in accordance with CAA section 175A. The formal SIP revision was
submitted by Virginia on September 21, 2021.
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
On June 1st, 2007 (72 FR 30485), EPA approved a redesignation
request (and maintenance plan) from VADEQ for the Richmond-Petersburg
Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. In accordance with CAA section 175A(b),
at the end of the eighth year after the effective date of the
redesignation, the state must also submit a second maintenance plan to
ensure ongoing maintenance of the standard for an additional 10 years,
and in South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA,\1\ the
District of Columbia (D.C.) Circuit held that this requirement cannot
be waived for areas, like the Richmond-Petersburg Area, that had been
redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS prior to
revocation and that were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. CAA section 175A sets forth the criteria for adequate
maintenance plans. In addition, EPA has published longstanding guidance
that provides further insight on the content of an approvable
maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five elements: (1) an attainment emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance
demonstration; (3) a commitment for continued air quality monitoring;
(4) a process for verification of continued attainment; and (5) a
contingency plan.\2\ VADEQ's September 21, 2021 submittal fulfills
Virginia's obligation to submit a second maintenance plan and addresses
each of the five necessary elements, as explained in the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
\2\ ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni Memo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the January 12, 2023, NPRM, EPA allows the
submittal of a limited maintenance plan (LMP) to meet the statutory
requirement that the area will maintain for the statutory period.
Qualifying areas may meet the maintenance demonstration by showing
[[Page 17375]]
that the area's design value \3\ is well below the NAAQS and that the
historical stability of the area's air quality levels indicates that
the area is unlikely to violate the NAAQS in the future. EPA evaluated
VADEQ's September 21, 2021 submittal for consistency with all
applicable EPA guidance and CAA requirements. EPA found that the
submittal met CAA section 175A and all CAA requirements, and proposed
approval of the LMP for the Richmond-Petersburg Area as a revision to
the Virginia SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations. The design value for an ozone nonattainment
area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area.
www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other specific requirements of Virginia's September 21, 2021
submittal and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in
the NPRM and will not be restated here. No public comments were
received on the NPRM.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving VADEQ's second maintenance plan for the Richmond-
Petersburg Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS as a revision to the Virginia
SIP.
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.
10.11198, 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. 10.11199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area
[[Page 17376]]
where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 22, 2023. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action, approving VADEQ's second maintenance plan for the
Richmond-Petersburg Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, may not be
challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV--Virginia
0
2. In Sec. 52.2420, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding
the entry ``Second Maintenance Plan for the Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-
Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of non-regulatory SIP Applicable State Additional
revision geographic area submittal date EPA approval date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Second Maintenance Plan for the Richmond-Petersburg 09/21/21 3/23/23, [INSERT The Richmond-
Richmond-Petersburg 1997 8-Hour Area. Federal Register Petersburg area
Ozone Nonattainment Area. CITATION]. consists of the
counties of
Charles City,
Chesterfield,
Hanover, Henrico,
and Prince George,
and the cities of
Colonial Heights,
Hopewell,
Richmond, and
Petersburg.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-05463 Filed 3-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
