83 FR 42219 - Air Plan Approval; Virginia; Regional Haze Plan and Visibility for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide and 2012 Fine Particulate Matter Standards
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 162 (August 21, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 162 (August 21, 2018)
| Page Range | 42219-42223 | |
| FR Document | 2018-17448 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 21, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 42219-42223] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-17448] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0601; FRL-9982-32--Region 3] Air Plan Approval; Virginia; Regional Haze Plan and Visibility for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide and 2012 Fine Particulate Matter Standards 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 (the Commonwealth or Virginia) on July 16, 2015. This SIP submittal changes Virginia's reliance on the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to reliance on the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for certain elements of Virginia's regional haze program. EPA is approving the visibility portion of Virginia's infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) and 2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and approving element (J) for visibility of Virginia's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA is also converting the Agency's prior limited approval/limited disapproval of Virginia's regional haze program to a full approval and withdrawing the federal implementation plan (FIP) provisions addressing our prior limited disapproval. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: This final rule is effective on September 20, 2018. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID [[Page 42220]] Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0601. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://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 http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814-5787, or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 16, 2015, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) submitted a revision to its SIP to update the Commonwealth's regional haze plan and to meet the visibility requirements in section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA for the 2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. I. Background On March 1, 2018 (83 FR 8814), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) addressing SIP revisions from the Commonwealth. In the NPR, EPA proposed to take the following actions: (1) To approve Virginia's July 16, 2015 SIP submission that changed Virginia's reliance on CAIR to reliance on CSAPR for certain elements of Virginia's regional haze program; (2) to convert EPA's limited approval/limited disapproval \1\ of Virginia's regional haze program to a full approval; and (3) to approve portions of Virginia's June 18, 2014 infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and its July 16, 2015 infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS addressing the visibility provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA. EPA subsequently published a second, supplemental NPR proposing to remove the FIP for the Commonwealth that addressed the issues associated with the Agency's prior limited disapproval. 83 FR 20002 (March 1, 2018). The supplemental NPR also proposed approval of the provisions in Virginia's June 18, 2014 infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS addressing the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 77 FR 33642 (June 7, 2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis In order to correct the deficiencies identified in the June 7, 2012 limited disapproval of Virginia's regional haze program by EPA, the Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision to the Agency on July 16, 2015 to replace reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR in its regional haze SIP.\2\ Specifically, the July 16, 2015 SIP submittal changes the Virginia regional haze program to specify that the Commonwealth is relying on CSAPR in its regional haze SIP to meet the best available retrofit technology (BART) for certain electric generating units (EGUs) and reasonable progress requirements to support visibility improvement progress goals for Virginia's Class I areas, Shenandoah National Park and the James River Wilderness Area. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Virginia was included in the CSAPR federal trading programs on August 8, 2011. 76 FR 48208. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As did EPA's partial regional haze FIP for Virginia, the Commonwealth's July 16, 2015 regional haze SIP revision relies on CSAPR to address the deficiencies identified in EPA's June 2012 limited disapproval of Virginia's regional haze SIP. As discussed in the NPR in greater detail, EPA finds that this revision satisfies Virginia's BART requirements for its EGUs and reasonable progress requirements and therefore allows for a fully approvable regional haze program. With today's final approval, the Commonwealth has a SIP in place to address all of its regional haze requirements. EPA finds that Virginia's reliance in its SIP upon CSAPR for certain BART and reasonable progress requirements is in accordance with the CAA and regional haze rule requirements (including 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)), as EPA has recently affirmed that CSAPR remains an appropriate alternative to source- specific BART controls for EGUs participating in CSAPR.\3\ Because the deficiencies in Virginia's regional haze SIP associated with the Commonwealth's reliance on CAIR that were identified in EPA's prior limited disapproval are addressed through the Commonwealth's revised SIP, the Agency is now fully approving Virginia's regional haze SIP. Additionally, EPA finds that the prong 4 portions of Virginia's infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS are fully approvable as Virginia now has a fully approved regional haze SIP.\4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ See 82 FR 45481 (September 29, 2017) (affirming the validity to EPA's determination that participation in CSAPR satisfies the criteria for an alternative to BART following changes to the program.) \4\ Virginia's 2010 SO2 NAAQS and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submissions relied on the Commonwealth having a fully approved regional haze program to satisfy its prong 4 requirements. However, at the time of both infrastructure SIP submittals, Virginia did not have a fully approved regional haze program as the Agency had issued a limited disapproval of the Commonwealth's regional haze plan on June 7, 2012, due to its reliance on CAIR. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The specific details of Virginia's July 16, 2015 SIP revision and the rationale for EPA's approval are discussed in the NPR \5\ and supplemental NPR \6\ and will not be restated here. Thirteen public comments were submitted to the docket identified in EPA's proposed actions; however, none of the comments were specific to the rulemaking and thus are not addressed here. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ 83 FR 8814 (March 1, 2018). \6\ 83 FR 20002 (May 7, 2018). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Final Action EPA is taking the following actions: (1) Approving Virginia's July 16, 2015 SIP submission that changed Virginia's reliance on CAIR to reliance on CSAPR for certain elements of Virginia's regional haze program; (2) converting EPA's limited approval/limited disapproval of Virginia's regional haze program to a full approval; (3) withdrawing the FIP provisions that address the limited disapproval of Virginia's regional haze program; (4) approving the portions of Virginia's June 18, 2014 infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and its July 16, 2015 infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS addressing the visibility provisions of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i); (5) and approving the portion of Virginia's June 18, 2014 infrastructure SIP for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS addressing CAA section 110(a)(2)(J). 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 [[Page 42221]] discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and information about the content of those documents that are the product of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or environment; or (4) are required by law. On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents and information ``required by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of these programs could not be privileged because such documents and information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval.'' Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that ``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute, regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12, 1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since ``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.'' Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its program consistent with the federal requirements. In any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866. C. Paperwork Reduction Act This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities because small entities are not subject to the requirements of this rule. 83 FR 8814 (March 1, 2018) and 83 FR 20002 (May 7, 2018). E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, will result from this action. F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments. There are no Indian reservation lands in Virginia. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk. I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards. K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). L. Determination Under Section 307(d) Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(B), this action is subject to the requirements [[Page 42222]] of CAA section 307(d), as it revises a FIP under CAA section 110(c). M. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 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). N. 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 October 22, 2018. 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 may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See CAA section 307(b)(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Regional haze, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Visibility. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: August 8, 2018. Andrew R. Wheeler, Acting Administrator. 40 CFR part 52 is amended 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. Section 52.2420 is amended by revising the entries for ``Regional Haze Plan'', ``Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS'', and ``Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Particulate Matter NAAQS'' in the table in paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows: Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan. * * * * * (e) * * * (1) * * * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area submittal EPA approval date Additional explanation date -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * Regional Haze Plan................... Statewide.................... 7/16/15 8/21/18, [Insert Federal Register Full Approval. citation]. See Sec. Sec. 52.2452(g). * * * * * * * Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Statewide.................... 6/18/14 3/4/15, 80 FR 11557...................... Docket #2014-0522. This Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur action addresses the Dioxide NAAQS. following CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2) (A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) (PSD), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J) (consultation, notification, and PSD), (K), (L), and (M). 12/22/14 4/2/15, 80 FR 17695...................... Docket #2015-0040. Addresses CAA element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 7/16/15 8/21/18, [Insert Federal Register Docket #2017-0601. This citation]. action addresses the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(D)(I)(II) for visibility and 110(a)(2)(J) for visibility. * * * * * * * Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Statewide.................... 7/16/15 6/16/16, 81 FR 39210..................... Docket #2015-0838. This Requirements for the 2012 action addresses the Particulate Matter NAAQS. following CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II) (PSD), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). 7/16/15 8/21/18, [Insert Federal Register Docket #2017-0601. This citation]. action addresses the following CAA element: 110(a)(2)(D)(I)(II) for visibility. * * * * * * * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * 0 3. Section 52.2452 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) and by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: Sec. 52.2452 Visibility protection. * * * * * (g) EPA converts its limited approval/limited disapproval of Virginia's regional haze program to a full approval. This SIP revision changes Virginia's reliance from the Clean Air Interstate Rule to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule to meet the regional haze SIP best available retrofit technology [[Page 42223]] requirements for certain sources and to meet reasonable progress requirements. [FR Doc. 2018-17448 Filed 8-20-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 42219
TABLE 3—EPA-APPROVED ARIZONA STATUTES—NON-REGULATORY—Continued
State citation Title/subject State submittal date EPA approval date Explanation
* * * * * * *
49–104 subsections (A)(3) Powers and duties of the December 3, 2015 ............ August 21, 2018, [INSERT Arizona Revised Statutes
and (B)(1) only. department and director. Federal Register CITA- (Thomson Reuters,
TION]. 2015–16 Cumulative
Pocket Part). Adopted
by the Arizona Depart-
ment of Environmental
Quality on December 3,
2015.
* * * * * * *
■ 3. Section 52.121 is revised to read as § 52.121 Classification of regions.
follows: The Arizona plan is evaluated on the
basis of the following classifications:
Classifications
AQCR (constituent counties)
PM SOX NO2 CO O3
Maricopa Intrastate (Maricopa) ................................................................ I III III I I
Pima Intrastate (Pima) ............................................................................. I III III III I
Northern Arizona Intrastate (Apache, Coconino, Navajo, Yavapai) ........ I III III III III
Mohave-Yuma Intrastate (Mohave, Yuma) .............................................. I III III III III
Central Arizona Intrastate (Gila, Pinal) .................................................... I IA III III III
Southeast Arizona Intrastate (Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Santa
Cruz) ..................................................................................................... I IA III III III
■ 4. Section 52.123 is amended by December 27, 2012 are fully or partially ACTION: Final rule.
revising paragraphs (l) through (p), and disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA)
adding paragraphs (q) and (r) to read as elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), and (J) for SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
follows: all portions of the Arizona SIP. Agency (EPA) is approving a state
(q) 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS: implementation plan (SIP) revision
§ 52.123 Approval status. The SIPs submitted on January 18, 2013 submitted by the Commonwealth of
* * * * * and December 3, 2015 are fully or Virginia (the Commonwealth or
(l) 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The partially disapproved for CAA elements Virginia) on July 16, 2015. This SIP
SIPs submitted on October 14, 2009 and 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) for submittal changes Virginia’s reliance on
August 24, 2012 are fully or partially all portions of the Arizona SIP. the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to
disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA) (r) 2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS: The reliance on the Cross-State Air Pollution
elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), and (J) for SIPs submitted on July 23, 2013 and Rule (CSAPR) for certain elements of
all portions of the Arizona SIP. December 3, 2015 are fully or partially Virginia’s regional haze program. EPA is
(m) 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: The SIPs disapproved for CAA elements approving the visibility portion of
submitted on October 14, 2009 and 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) for Virginia’s infrastructure SIP submittals
August 24, 2012 are fully or partially all portions of the Arizona SIP. for the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA) 2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
[FR Doc. 2018–17931 Filed 8–20–18; 8:45 am]
elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(ii), (J) and (K) national ambient air quality standards
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
for all portions of the Arizona SIP. (NAAQS) and approving element (J) for
(n) 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: The SIPs visibility of Virginia’s infrastructure SIP
submitted on October 14, 2009 and submittal for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
August 24, 2012 are fully or partially EPA is also converting the Agency’s
AGENCY
disapproved for Clean Air Act (CAA) prior limited approval/limited
elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), 40 CFR Part 52 disapproval of Virginia’s regional haze
and (J) for all portions of the Arizona program to a full approval and
SIP. withdrawing the federal implementation
(o) 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS: The [EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0601; FRL–9982–
32—Region 3] plan (FIP) provisions addressing our
SIPs submitted on October 14, 2011, prior limited disapproval. This action is
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
December 27, 2012, and December 3, Air Plan Approval; Virginia; Regional being taken under the Clean Air Act
2015 are fully or partially disapproved Haze Plan and Visibility for the 2010 (CAA).
for Clean Air Act (CAA) elements Sulfur Dioxide and 2012 Fine
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), D(ii), and (J) for DATES: This final rule is effective on
Particulate Matter Standards September 20, 2018.
all portions of the Arizona SIP.
(p) 2008 Lead (Pb) NAAQS: The SIPs AGENCY: Environmental Protection ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
submitted on October 14, 2011 and Agency (EPA). docket for this action under Docket ID
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:40 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_42381/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 42221
discloses such violations to the program consistent with the federal F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Commonwealth and takes prompt and requirements. In any event, because This action does not have federalism
appropriate measures to remedy the EPA has also determined that a state implications. It will not have substantial
violations. Virginia’s Voluntary audit privilege and immunity law can direct effects on the states, on the
Environmental Assessment Privilege affect only state enforcement and cannot relationship between the national
Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, provides have any impact on federal enforcement government and the states, or on the
a privilege that protects from disclosure authorities, EPA may at any time invoke distribution of power and
documents and information about the its authority under the CAA, including, responsibilities among the various
content of those documents that are the for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 levels of government.
product of a voluntary environmental or 213, to enforce the requirements or
assessment. The Privilege Law does not prohibitions of the state plan, G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
extend to documents or information independently of any state enforcement and Coordination With Indian Tribal
that: (1) Are generated or developed effort. In addition, citizen enforcement Governments
before the commencement of a under section 304 of the CAA is This action does not have tribal
voluntary environmental assessment; (2) likewise unaffected by this, or any, state implications, as specified in Executive
are prepared independently of the audit privilege or immunity law. Order 13175. It will not have substantial
assessment process; (3) demonstrate a direct effects on tribal governments.
clear, imminent and substantial danger V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews There are no Indian reservation lands in
to the public health or environment; or Virginia. Thus, Executive Order 13175
(4) are required by law. A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: does not apply to this rule.
On January 12, 1998, the Regulatory Planning and Review
Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Attorney General provided a legal This action is not a ‘‘significant Children From Environmental Health
opinion that states that the Privilege regulatory action’’ under the terms of Risks and Safety Risks
law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, precludes Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
granting a privilege to documents and October 4, 1993) and is therefore not as applying only to those regulatory
information ‘‘required by law,’’ subject to review under Executive actions that concern environmental
including documents and information Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, health or safety risks that EPA has
‘‘required by federal law to maintain January 21, 2011). reason to believe may
program delegation, authorization or disproportionately affect children, per
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
federally authorized environmental action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Costs
programs in a manner that is no less Executive Order. This action is not
stringent than their federal This action is not an Executive Order subject to Executive Order 13045
counterparts. . . .’’ The opinion 13771 regulatory action because this because it does not concern an
concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198, action is not significant under Executive environmental health risk or safety risk.
therefore, documents or other Order 12866.
information needed for civil or criminal I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
enforcement under one of these C. Paperwork Reduction Act Concerning Regulations That
programs could not be privileged Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
This action does not impose an
because such documents and Distribution, or Use
information collection burden under the
information are essential to pursuing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction This action is not subject to Executive
enforcement in a manner required by Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22,
federal law to maintain program 2001)), because it is not a significant
delegation, authorization or approval.’’ D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) regulatory action under Executive Order
Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code 12866.
Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the I certify that this action will not have
extent consistent with requirements a significant economic impact on a J. National Technology Transfer and
imposed by federal law,’’ any person substantial number of small entities Advancement Act
making a voluntary disclosure of under the RFA. This action will not
This rulemaking does not involve
information to a state agency regarding impose any requirements on small
technical standards. Therefore, EPA is
a violation of an environmental statute, entities because small entities are not
not considering the use of any voluntary
regulation, permit, or administrative subject to the requirements of this rule.
consensus standards.
order is granted immunity from 83 FR 8814 (March 1, 2018) and 83 FR
administrative or civil penalty. The 20002 (May 7, 2018). K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Attorney General’s January 12, 1998 Actions To Address Environmental
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
opinion states that the quoted language Justice in Minority Populations and
(UMRA)
renders this statute inapplicable to Low-Income Populations
enforcement of any federally authorized This action does not contain any EPA believes that this action does not
programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be unfunded mandate as described in have disproportionately high and
afforded from administrative, civil, or UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does adverse human health or environmental
criminal penalties because granting not significantly or uniquely affect small effects on minority populations, low-
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
such immunity would not be consistent governments. This action does not income populations, and/or indigenous
with federal law, which is one of the impose additional requirements beyond peoples, as specified in Executive Order
criteria for immunity.’’ those imposed by state law. 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Therefore, EPA has determined that Accordingly, no additional costs to
Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity state, local, or tribal governments, or to L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
statutes will not preclude the the private sector, will result from this Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(B),
Commonwealth from enforcing its action. this action is subject to the requirements
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:40 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_42381/page/3.svg)
![42222 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
of CAA section 307(d), as it revises a FIP Court of Appeals for the appropriate PART 52—APPROVAL AND
under CAA section 110(c). circuit by October 22, 2018. Filing a PROMULGATION OF
petition for reconsideration by the IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
M. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
Administrator of this final rule does not
The Congressional Review Act, 5 affect the finality of this action for the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small purposes of judicial review nor does it
Business Regulatory Enforcement continues to read as follows:
extend the time within which a petition
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides for judicial review may be filed, and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
that before a rule may take effect, the shall not postpone the effectiveness of
agency promulgating the rule must such rule or action. This action may not Subpart VV—Virginia
submit a rule report, which includes a be challenged later in proceedings to
copy of the rule, to each House of the enforce its requirements. See CAA ■ 2. Section 52.2420 is amended by
Congress and to the Comptroller General section 307(b)(2). revising the entries for ‘‘Regional Haze
of the United States. EPA will submit a Plan’’, ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure
report containing this action and other List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur
required information to the U.S. Senate, Environmental protection, Air Dioxide NAAQS’’, and ‘‘Section
the U.S. House of Representatives, and pollution control, Incorporation by 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements
the Comptroller General of the United reference, Intergovernmental relations, for the 2012 Particulate Matter NAAQS’’
States prior to publication of the rule in Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, in the table in paragraph (e)(1) to read
the Federal Register. A major rule Regional haze, Reporting and as follows:
cannot take effect until 60 days after it recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
is published in the Federal Register. oxides, Visibility. § 52.2420 Identification of plan.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as * * * * *
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 8, 2018. (e) * * *
N. Judicial Review
Andrew R. Wheeler, (1) * * *
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Acting Administrator.
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
Applicable State
Name of non-regulatory SIP EPA approval Additional
geographic submittal
revision date explanation
area date
* * * * * * *
Regional Haze Plan ................ Statewide .......... 7/16/15 8/21/18, [Insert Federal Full Approval.
Register citation]. See §§ 52.2452(g).
* * * * * * *
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastruc- Statewide .......... 6/18/14 3/4/15, 80 FR 11557 ........ Docket #2014–0522. This action addresses
ture Requirements for the the following CAA elements, or portions
2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS. thereof: 110(a)(2) (A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II)
(PSD), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J)
(consultation, notification, and PSD), (K),
(L), and (M).
12/22/14 4/2/15, 80 FR 17695 ........ Docket #2015–0040. Addresses CAA element
110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
7/16/15 8/21/18, [Insert Federal Docket #2017–0601. This action addresses
Register citation]. the following CAA elements:
110(a)(2)(D)(I)(II) for visibility and
110(a)(2)(J) for visibility.
* * * * * * *
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastruc- Statewide .......... 7/16/15 6/16/16, 81 FR 39210 ...... Docket #2015–0838. This action addresses
ture Requirements for the the following CAA elements, or portions
2012 Particulate Matter thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II)
NAAQS. (PSD), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L),
and (M).
7/16/15 8/21/18, [Insert Federal Docket #2017–0601. This action addresses
Register citation]. the following CAA element:
110(a)(2)(D)(I)(II) for visibility.
* * * * * * *
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
* * * * * § 52.2452 Visibility protection. reliance from the Clean Air Interstate
* * * * * Rule to the Cross-State Air Pollution
■ 3. Section 52.2452 is amended by
(g) EPA converts its limited approval/ Rule to meet the regional haze SIP best
removing and reserving paragraphs (d),
limited disapproval of Virginia’s available retrofit technology
(e), and (f) and by adding paragraph (g)
regional haze program to a full approval.
to read as follows:
This SIP revision changes Virginia’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:40 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_42381/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 162 / Tuesday, August 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 42223
requirements for certain sources and to Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Therefore, EPA designated Etowah
meet reasonable progress requirements. Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that County as unclassifiable for the 2006 24-
[FR Doc. 2018–17448 Filed 8–20–18; 8:45 am] if at all possible, you contact the person hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Id.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION On March 22, 2018, Alabama
CONTACT section to schedule your submitted a request for EPA to
inspection. The Regional Office’s redesignate the Etowah County Area to
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION official hours of business are Monday unclassifiable/attainment for the 2006
AGENCY through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS now that there is
excluding Federal holidays. sufficient data to determine that the
40 CFR Part 81 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Area is in attainment. In a notice of
[EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0173; FRL–9982– Madolyn Sanchez, Air Regulatory proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published
71—Region 4] Management Section, Air Planning and on June 1, 2018 (83 FR 25422), EPA
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides proposed to approve the State’s
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality and Toxics Management Division, U.S. redesignation request. The details of
Designation; AL; Redesignation of the Environmental Protection Agency, Alabama’s submittal and the rationale
Etowah County Unclassifiable Area Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, for EPA’s actions are further explained
Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Sanchez can in the NPRM. EPA did not receive any
AGENCY: Environmental Protection be reached by telephone at (404) 562– adverse comments on the proposed
Agency (EPA). 9644 or via electronic mail at action.
ACTION: Final rule. sanchez.madolyn@epa.gov.
II. Final Action
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY: On March 22, 2018, the State EPA is approving Alabama’s
of Alabama, through the Alabama I. Background
redesignation request and redesignating
Department of Environmental On September 21, 2006, EPA revised the Etowah County Area from
Management (ADEM), submitted a the primary and secondary 24-hour unclassifiable to unclassifiable/
request for the Environmental NAAQS for PM2.5 at a level of 35 attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), NAAQS.2
the Etowah County, Alabama fine based on a 3-year average of the annual
particulate matter (PM2.5) unclassifiable 98th percentile of 24-hour PM2.5 III. Statutory and Executive Order
area (hereinafter referred to as the concentrations. See 71 FR 61144 Reviews
‘‘Etowah County Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to (October 17, 2006). EPA established the Under the CAA, redesignation of an
attainment for the 2006 primary and standards based on significant evidence area to unclassifiable/attainment is an
secondary 24-hour PM2.5 national and numerous health studies action that affects the status of a
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). demonstrating that serious health effects geographical area and does not impose
EPA is approving the State’s request and are associated with exposures to any additional regulatory requirements
redesignating the Area to unclassifiable/ particulate matter. on sources beyond those imposed by
attainment for the 2006 primary and The process for designating areas state law. A redesignation to
secondary 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based following promulgation of a new or unclassifiable/attainment does not in
upon valid, quality-assured, and revised NAAQS is contained in section and of itself create any new
certified ambient air monitoring data 107(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). requirements. Accordingly, this action
showing that the PM2.5 monitor in the EPA and state air quality agencies merely redesignates an area to
Area is in compliance with the 2006 initiated the monitoring process for the unclassifiable/attainment and does not
primary and secondary 24-hour PM2.5 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 1999, and impose additional requirements. For
NAAQS. deployed all air quality monitors by that reason, this action:
January 2001. On October 8, 2009, EPA
DATES: This rule will be effective • Is not a significant regulatory action
September 20, 2018. designated areas across the country as
subject to review by the Office of
nonattainment, unclassifiable, or
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a Management and Budget under
unclassifiable/attainment 1 for the 2006
docket for this action under Docket Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– quality monitoring data from these October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
2018–0173. All documents in the docket monitors for calendar years 2006–2008. January 21, 2011);
are listed on the www.regulations.gov See 74 FR 58688. The monitor in the • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
website. Although listed in the index, Etowah County Area had incomplete FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
some information may not be publicly data for the 2006–2008 timeframe. action because redesignations are
available, i.e., Confidential Business exempted under Executive Order 12866;
Information or other information whose 1 For the initial PM area designations in 2009 (for • does not impose an information
disclosure is restricted by statute. the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS), EPA used a collection burden under the provisions
Certain other material, such as designation category of ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
for areas that had monitors showing attainment of
copyrighted material, is not placed on the standard and were not contributing to nearby
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
the internet and will be publicly violations and for areas that did not have monitors • is certified as not having a
available only in hard copy form. but for which EPA had reason to believe were likely significant economic impact on a
Publicly available docket materials are attaining the standard and not contributing to substantial number of small entities
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
nearby violations. EPA used the category
available either electronically through ‘‘unclassifiable’’ for areas in which EPA could not
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at determine, based upon available information, 2 Although Alabama requested redesignation of
the Air Regulatory Management Section, whether or not the NAAQS was being met and/or the Area to ‘‘attainment,’’ EPA is redesignating the
Air Planning and Implementation EPA had not determined the area to be contributing area to ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ because, as
to nearby violations. EPA reserves the ‘‘attainment’’ noted above, EPA reserves the ‘‘attainment’’
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics category for when EPA redesignates a category for when EPA redesignates a
Management Division, U.S. nonattainment area that has attained the relevant nonattainment area that has attained the relevant
Environmental Protection Agency, NAAQS and has an approved maintenance plan. NAAQS and has an approved maintenance plan.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:40 Aug 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_42381/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-08-21 00:06:48
Document Modified: 2018-08-21 00:06:48
| 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 | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This final rule is effective on September 20, 2018. | |
| Contact | Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814-5787, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 42219 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Particulate Matter; Regional Haze; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Sulfur Oxides and Visibility |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR