81 FR 72757 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 204 (October 21, 2016)

Page Range		72757-72758
FR Document		2016-25297

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the purpose of removing the requirement for gasoline vapor recovery equipment on gasoline dispensing pumps (otherwise referred to as Stage II vapor recovery, or simply as Stage II) in Virginia area facilities formerly required to have installed and operated Stage II vapor recovery controls under the prior, approved Virginia SIP. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the Commonwealth's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for EPA's approval of Virginia's Stage II-related SIP revision with amended regulations addressing vapor recovery is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 204 (Friday, October 21, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72757-72758]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25297]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0308; FRL-9954-17-Region 3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Virginia; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Requirements for 
Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve 
the state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
Commonwealth of Virginia for the purpose of removing the requirement 
for gasoline vapor recovery equipment on gasoline dispensing pumps 
(otherwise referred to as Stage II vapor recovery, or simply as Stage 
II) in Virginia area facilities formerly required to have installed and 
operated Stage II vapor recovery controls under the prior, approved 
Virginia SIP. In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal 
Register, EPA is approving the Commonwealth's SIP submittal as a direct 
final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a 
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A 
detailed rationale for EPA's approval of Virginia's Stage II-related 
SIP revision with amended regulations addressing vapor recovery is set 
forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in 
response to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA 
receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and 
all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final 
rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second 
comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action 
should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by November 21, 2016.

[[Page 72758]]


ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2016-0308 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
pino.maria@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, 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 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by 
email at rehn.brian@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the 
information provided in the direct final action, with the same title, 
that is located in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of 
the Federal Register.

    Dated: September 29, 2016.
Shawn M. Garvin,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2016-25297 Filed 10-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules 72757

B. Subpart 1 RACM Requirements Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Subpart 1 requires that each EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
attainment plan ‘‘provide for the provided that they meet the criteria of Reporting and recordkeeping
implementation of all reasonably the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
available control measures as action merely proposes to approve state organic compounds.
expeditiously as practicable (including law as meeting federal requirements and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
such reductions in emission from the does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by Dated: October 11, 2016.
existing sources in the area as may be Heather McTeer Toney,
obtained through the adoption, at a state law. For that reason, this proposed
action: Regional Administrator, Region 4.
minimum, of reasonably available
control technology), and shall provide • Is not a significant regulatory action [FR Doc. 2016–25433 Filed 10–20–16; 8:45 am]
for attainment of the national primary subject to review by the Office of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ambient air quality standards.’’ See CAA Management and Budget under
section 172(c)(1). EPA has consistently Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
interpreted this provision to require October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
only implementation of potential RACM January 21, 2011); AGENCY
measures that could advance • does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions 40 CFR Part 52
attainment.5 Thus, when an area is
already attaining the standard, no of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
additional RACM measures are U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); [EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0308; FRL–9954–17–
required. EPA’s interpretation that • is certified as not having a Region 3]
Subpart 1 requires only the significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities Approval and Promulgation of Air
implementation of RACM measures that Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
would advance attainment was upheld under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor
by the United States Court of Appeals in
the Fifth Circuit 6 and by the United • does not contain any unfunded Recovery Requirements for Gasoline
mandate or significantly or uniquely Dispensing Facilities
States Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit.7 affect small governments, as described AGENCY: Environmental Protection
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Agency (EPA).
C. Proposed Action of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
ACTION: Proposed rule.
In its August 9, 2016, SIP submission, • does not have Federalism
the Commonwealth determined that no implications as specified in Executive SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
additional control measures are Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the
necessary in the Area to satisfy the CAA 1999); state implementation plan (SIP) revision
section 172(c)(1) RACM requirement • is not an economically significant submitted by the Commonwealth of
because the Area has attained the 1997 regulatory action based on health or Virginia for the purpose of removing the
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. As noted above, safety risks subject to Executive Order requirement for gasoline vapor recovery
EPA has determined that the Area 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); equipment on gasoline dispensing
attained the standard by the April 5, • is not a significant regulatory action
pumps (otherwise referred to as Stage II
2010, attainment date and that no subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
vapor recovery, or simply as Stage II) in
additional measures are required to 28355, May 22, 2001);
Virginia area facilities formerly required
satisfy Subpart 1 RACM when an area • is not subject to requirements of
to have installed and operated Stage II
is attaining the standard. Therefore, EPA Section 12(d) of the National
vapor recovery controls under the prior,
proposes to agree with the Technology Transfer and Advancement
approved Virginia SIP. In the Rules and
Commonwealth’s analysis, to approve Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
Regulations section of this Federal
Kentucky’s SIP revision, and to application of those requirements would
Register, EPA is approving the
incorporate the section 172(c)(1) RACM be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the Commonwealth’s SIP submittal as a
determination into the SIP. direct final rule without prior proposal
discretionary authority to address, as
IV. Statutory and Executive Order appropriate, disproportionate human because the Agency views this as a
Reviews health or environmental effects, using noncontroversial submittal and
practicable and legally permissible anticipates no adverse comments. A
Under the CAA, the Administrator is detailed rationale for EPA’s approval of
required to approve a SIP submission methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Virginia’s Stage II-related SIP revision
that complies with the provisions of the with amended regulations addressing
Act and applicable federal regulations. The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any vapor recovery is set forth in the direct
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). final rule. If no adverse comments are
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has received in response to this action, no
This memorandum is not required to satisfy EPA’s
regional consistency regulations. See 40 CFR jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian further activity is contemplated. If EPA
56.5(b)(1); 81 FR 51102 (August 3, 2016). country, the rule does not have tribal receives adverse comments, the direct
5 This interpretation was adopted in the General
implications as specified by Executive final rule will be withdrawn and all
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS

Preamble, see 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992), and has public comments received will be
been upheld as applied to the Clean Data Policy, as Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
well as to nonattainment SIP submissions. See 2000), nor will it impose substantial addressed in a subsequent final rule
NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra direct costs on tribal governments or based on this proposed rule. EPA will
Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
preempt tribal law. not institute a second comment period.
6 Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 743–745 (5th
Any parties interested in commenting
Cir. 2002). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 on this action should do so at this time.
7 Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162–163 (D.C.

Cir. 2002); NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Environmental protection, Air DATES: Comments must be received in
Cir. 2009). pollution control, Incorporation by writing by November 21, 2016.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Oct 20, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1

72758 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, ACTION: Proposed rule. you include your name and other
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– contact information in the body of your
OAR–2016–0308 at http:// SUMMARY: During a review of comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
www.regulations.gov, or via email to Louisiana’s regulations, the you submit. If the EPA cannot read your
pino.maria@epa.gov. For comments Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) comment due to technical difficulties
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the identified a variety of State-initiated and cannot contact you for clarification,
online instructions for submitting changes to Louisiana’s hazardous waste the EPA may not be able to consider
comments. Once submitted, comments program under the Resource your comment. Electronic files should
cannot be edited or removed from Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), avoid the use of special characters, any
Regulations.gov. For either manner of as amended, for which the State had not form of encryption, and be free of any
submission, the EPA may publish any previously sought authorization. EPA defects or viruses. You can view and
proposes to authorize the State for the
comment received to its public docket. copy the documents that form the basis
program changes. In addition, EPA
Do not submit electronically any for this authorization and codification
proposes to codify in the regulations
information you consider to be and associated publicly available
entitled ‘‘Approved State Hazardous
confidential business information (CBI) materials from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Waste Management Programs’’,
or other information whose disclosure is Monday through Friday at the following
Louisiana’s authorized hazardous waste
restricted by statute. Multimedia location: EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross
program. The EPA will incorporate by
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,
reference into the Code of Federal
accompanied by a written comment. phone number: (214) 665–8533 or (214)
Regulations (CFR) those provisions of
The written comment is considered the 665–8178. Interested persons wanting to
the State regulations that are authorized
official comment and should include and that EPA will enforce under RCRA. examine these documents should make
discussion of all points you wish to an appointment with the office at least
DATES: Send written comments by
make. The EPA will generally not two weeks in advance.
consider comments or comment November 21, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
contents located outside of the primary ADDRESSES: Submit any comments
Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06–
Authorization Coordinator or Julia
other file sharing system). For RCRA–2015–0664, by one of the
Banks, Codification Coordinator, Permit
additional submission methods, please following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Section (RPM), Multimedia Planning
contact the person identified in the ‘‘For and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6,
Further Information Contact’’ section. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments. 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–
For the full EPA public comment policy, 2733, Phone number: (214) 665–8533 or
2. Email: patterson.alima@epa.gov or
information about CBI or multimedia (214) 665–8178, and Email address:
banks.julia@epa.gov.
submissions, and general guidance on 3. Mail: Alima Patterson, Region 6, patterson.alima@epa.gov or
making effective comments, please visit Regional Authorization Coordinator, or banks.julia@epa.gov.
http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
commenting-epa-dockets. Permit Section (RPM), Multimedia additional information, please see the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Planning and Permitting Division, EPA direct final rule published in the ‘‘Rules
Brian Rehn, (215) 814–2176, or by email Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, and Regulations’’ section of this Federal
at rehn.brian@epa.gov. Texas 75202–2733. Register. EPA did not make a proposal
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver prior to the direct final rule because we
further information, please see the your comments to Alima Patterson, believe this action is not controversial
information provided in the direct final Region 6, Regional Authorization and do not expect comments that
action, with the same title, that is Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification oppose it. We have explained the
located in the Rules and Regulations Coordinator, Permit Section (RPM), reasons for this authorization in the
section of this issue of the Federal Multimedia Planning and Permitting preamble to the direct final rule. Unless
Register. Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross we get written comments which oppose
Dated: September 29, 2016.
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. this authorization during the comment
Instructions: Do not submit period, the direct final rule will become
Shawn M. Garvin, information that you consider to be effective 60 days after publication and
Regional Administrator, Region III. Confidential Business Information (CBI) we will not take further action on this
[FR Doc. 2016–25297 Filed 10–20–16; 8:45 am] or otherwise protected through proposal. If we receive comments that
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P regulations.gov, or email. Direct your oppose this action, we will withdraw
comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R06– the direct final rule and it will not take
RCRA–2015–0664. The Federal effect. We will then respond to public
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION regulations.gov Web site is an comments in a later final rule based on
AGENCY ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which this proposal. You may not have another
means the EPA will not know your opportunity for comment. If you want to
40 CFR Parts 271 and 272
identity or contact information unless comment on this action, you must do so
you provide it in the body of your at this time.
[EPA–R06–RCRA–2015–0664; FRL–9951– comment. If you send an email The purpose of this Federal Register
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS

20–Region 6] comment directly to the EPA without document is to codify Louisiana’s base
Louisiana: Final Authorization of State- going through regulations.gov, your hazardous waste management program
Initiated Changes and Incorporation by email address will be automatically and its revisions to that program
Reference of State Hazardous Waste captured and included as part of the through RCRA Clusters XXI, XXII
Management Program comment that is placed in the public including RCRA Cluster XXIII Checklist
docket and made available on the 229 Exclusions for Solvent
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Internet. If you submit an electronic Contaminated Wipes. (See 80 FR 55032)
Agency (EPA). comment, the EPA recommends that September 14, 2015. The EPA provided

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:22 Oct 20, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM 21OCP1

Document Created: 2018-02-13 16:35:41
Document Modified: 2018-02-13 16:35:41

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Proposed rule.
Dates		Comments must be received in writing by November 21, 2016.
Contact		Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by email at [email protected]
FR Citation		81 FR 72757