Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area Revision to Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets |
|---|
|
W.C. Early
October 29, 2012
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 209 (Monday, October 29, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65490-65493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26403]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0444; FRL-9746-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area Revision to
Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Virginia's State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) on September 26, 2011. The SIP
revision updates the 2009 and 2015 motor vehicle emission budgets
(MVEBs) in the Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area
(Fredericksburg Area) by replacing the previously approved MVEBs with
budgets developed using EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator
emissions model (MOVES2010a). The revised MVEBs continue to demonstrate
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS) for ozone. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
DATES:
Effective Date: This final rule is effective on November 28, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0444. All documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State
submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by
email at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On August 6, 2012 (77 FR 46672), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR proposed
approval of the Virginia SIP revision that updates the 2009 and 2015
MVEBs in the Fredericksburg Area by replacing the previously approved
MVEBs with budgets developed using MOVES2010a. By EPA's finalizing the
proposed approval, the newly submitted MOVES2010a MVEBs will replace
the existing, MOBILE6.2-based budgets in Virginia's SIP and must then
be used in future transportation conformity analyses for the
Fredericksburg Area according to the transportation conformity rule.
See 40 CFR 93.118. The previously approved budgets will no longer be
applicable for transportation conformity purposes. Additionally, with
the approval of the MOVES2010a-based MVEBs, the regional transportation
conformity grace period for not using MOVES2010a for the pollutants
included in these budgets will end for the Fredericksburg Area on the
effective date of this final approval. See 75 FR 9411, 9414 (March 2,
2010) for
[[Page 65491]]
background on MOVES2010a and Section II.C for details. EPA received no
comments on the NPR to approve Virginia's SIP revision.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On September 26, 2011, the Commonwealth of Virginia through VADEQ
submitted a SIP revision with MVEBs based on MOVES2010a for the years
2009 and 2015 to help ensure that the Fredericksburg Area can
demonstrate transportation conformity using MOVES2010a MVEBs once the
grace period expires as discussed in more detail in the NPR.
States that revise their existing SIPs to include MVEBs based on
MOVES2010a must show that the SIP continues to meet applicable
requirements with the new level of motor vehicle emissions contained in
the budgets. EPA has determined that the Fredericksburg Area
maintenance plan continues to serve its intended purpose with the
MOVES2010a-based MVEBs and that the budgets meet the adequacy criteria
in the conformity rule at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the MOVES2010a-based MVEBs submitted by Virginia
for use in determining transportation conformity in the Fredericksburg
Area because the submitted budgets will continue to keep emissions
below the attainment level and maintain air quality and continue to
demonstrate maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On the
effective date of this rulemaking, the submitted MOVES2010a-based MVEBs
will replace the existing, MOBILE6.2-based budgets in the
Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan and will be used in future
transportation conformity analyses for the Fredericksburg Area. The
previously approved MOBILE6.2-based budgets will no longer be
applicable for transportation conformity purposes. The following table
compares the nitrogen oxide (NOX) MVEBs developed using
MOBILE6.2 to the inventories developed using MOVES2010a.
Fredericksburg Maintenance Area Mobile Source Emissions Comparison Tons
NOX Per Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOBILE6.2
Year MVEB* MOVES2010a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004.................................... 19.742 24.064
2009.................................... 13.062 17.615
2015.................................... 7.576 9.933
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes conformity buffers.
IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts* * *.'' The opinion concludes
that ``[r]egarding 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 Virginia 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
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
[[Page 65492]]
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).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
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 December 28, 2012. 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 Virginia's 2009 and 2015 MVEBs in the
Fredericksburg 8-Hour Area using MOVES2010a 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: October 11, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR 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) is amended by revising
the entry for the 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the Fredericksburg
VA Area. The amendments read as follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) EPA-approved nonregulatory and quasi-regulatory material.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of non- regulatory SIP Applicable submittal EPA approval date Additional
revision geographic area date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for Spotsylvania and 9/26/11 10/29/12 [Insert Revised 2009 and
the Fredericksburg VA Area. Stafford Counties; page number where 2015 motor vehicle
City of the document emission budgets
Fredericksburg. begins]. for NOX.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 52.2424 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2424 Motor vehicle emissions budgets.
* * * * *
(c) EPA approves the following revised 2009 and 2015 motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone
Maintenance Area submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality (VADEQ) on September 26, 2011:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tons per day
Applicable geographic area Year (TPD) NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fredericksburg Area (Spotsylvania and 2009 17.615
Stafford Counties and City of
Fredericksburg)........................
Fredericksburg Area (Spotsylvania and 2015 9.933
Stafford Counties and City of
Fredericksburg)........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 65493]]
[FR Doc. 2012-26403 Filed 10-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P