17692 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

boards per section 128 of the CAA for 

the 2008 8-hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards. 

(b) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2015–07349 Filed 4–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0040; FRL–9925–46– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

State Boards Requirements; 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2008 Lead and Ozone and 2010 

Nitrogen Dioxide and Sulfur Dioxide 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Virginia State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The revisions consist of adding a 

new regulation from the Virginia 

Administrative Code and a revised 

regulation which includes new, 

associated definitions. This rulemaking 

action also approves an infrastructure 

element directly related to the 

regulations being added for several 

previously submitted infrastructure SIPs 

for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the 

2008 Ozone (O3) NAAQS, the 2010 

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and 

the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. 

EPA is approving these revisions in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on June 1, 

2015 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse written comment by 

May 4, 2015. If EPA receives such 

comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0040 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0040, 

Marilyn Powers, Acting Associate 

Director, Office of Air Program 

Planning, Air Protection Division, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0040. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., 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 in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy 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: 

Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814–5787, or by 

email at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Section 128 of the CAA requires SIPs 

to include certain requirements 

regarding State Boards; section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the CAA also 

references these requirements. Section 

128(a) requires SIPs to contain 

provisions that: (1) Any board or body 

which approves permits or enforcement 

orders under the CAA shall have at least 

a majority of its members represent the 

public interest and not derive any 

significant portion of their income from 

persons subject to permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA; and 

(2) any potential conflict of interest by 

members of such board or body or the 

head of an executive agency with 

similar powers be adequately disclosed. 

On December 22, 2014, the Virginia 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ) submitted a formal revision to 

its SIP for the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. The SIP revision consists of 

adding a new regulation, 9VAC5–170– 

210(A), and adding new, associated 

definitions to 9VAC5–170–20, all of 

which pertain to the conflict of interest 

requirements of CAA sections 128 and 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for all criteria pollutants 

of the NAAQS. 

In addition, this rulemaking action 

approves the section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

infrastructure element from the 

following Virginia infrastructure SIP 

submittals for each identified NAAQS: 

March 9, 2012 for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, 

July 23, 2012 for the 2008 O3 NAAQS, 

May 30, 2013 for 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 

and June 23, 2014 for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS (collectively, the Four 

Submittals). For the Four Submittals, 

EPA had previously approved those 

submittals as addressing certain 

requirements in section 110(a)(2) and 

specifically stated EPA would take later, 

separate action on the requirements in 

section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) (which requires a 

state’s SIP to meet the requirements of 

CAA section 128) for each of the 

NAAQS addressed. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

Virginia’s December 22, 2014 SIP 

revision submittal consists of adding the 

new regulation, 9VAC5–170–210(A), 

and two new related definitions, 

‘‘Disclosure form’’ and ‘‘Potential 

conflict of interest,’’ to 9VAC5–170–20. 

Regulation 9VAC5–170–210(A) requires 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 17693 

1EPA has also taken separate action to approve 

the prevention of significant deterioration portions 

of section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) for the 

Virginia submittals for three of these NAAQS. See 

79 FR 10377 (February 25, 2014) (2008 Pb NAAQS) 

and 79 FR 58682 (September 30, 2014) (2008 O3

NAAQS and 2010 NO2 NAAQS). 

2As noted previously, the Virginia SIP already 

includes a provision which addresses section 

128(a)(1). See 76 FR 62635. 

that the board (referring to the State Air 

Pollution Control Board (SAPCB) or its 

designated representative) and the 

director (referring to the director of the 

VADEQ or a designated representative) 

shall adequately disclose any potential 

conflicts of interest. The regulation also 

requires that such disclosure be made 

annually, as required by section 2.2– 

3114 of the Code of Virginia, and 

through the applicable disclosure forms 

set forth in sections 2.2–3117 and 2.2– 

3118 of the Code of Virginia. The added 

regulation also states that all terms used 

in the disclosure forms shall retain their 

meaning as set forth under the Virginia 

State and Local Conflict of Interests Act 

(section 2.2–3100 et seq. of the Code of 

Virginia) which includes the disclosure 

forms previously described in sections 

2.2–3117 and 2.2–3118 of the Code of 

Virginia. In the Commonwealth of 

Virginia, only the SAPCB and the 

director of VADEQ (or their respective 

designated representatives) have the 

power to approve CAA permits and 

enforcement orders. 

III. The State Boards Requirements and 

EPA’s Analysis of Virginia’s Submittals 

As previously stated, section 128 of 

the CAA requires that SIPs include 

provisions which provide: (1) Any 

board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders under the CAA 

have at least a majority of its members 

represent the public interest and not 

derive any significant portion of their 

income from persons subject to permits 

or enforcement orders under the CAA; 

and (2) any potential conflict of interest 

by members of such board or body or 

the head of an executive agency with 

similar powers be adequately disclosed. 

For section 128(a)(1), Virginia 

previously submitted the provisions of 

Section 10.1–1302 of the Code of 

Virginia as a SIP revision on June 11, 

2010; this SIP revision was 

subsequently approved by EPA on 

October 11, 2011. See 76 FR 62635. 

To address requirements in section 

128(a)(2), Virginia submitted the 

provisions of 9VAC5–170–210 on 

December 22, 2014. This regulation 

requires members of the SAPCB (or 

designated representatives) and the 

director of VADEQ (or a designated 

representative) to disclose any potential 

conflicts of interest. Virginia’s 

regulation includes the board and the 

director (or their respective designated 

representatives) because only the 

SAPCB and the director have the 

authority to approve permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA in 

Virginia. The regulation also requires 

that such disclosures be made annually 

through the applicable forms set forth in 

section 2.2–3100 et seq. of the Code of 

Virginia. Additionally, the SIP revision 

adds the terms ‘‘Disclosure form’’ and 

‘‘Potential conflict of interest’’ to 

9VAC5–170–20. ‘‘Disclosure form’’ is 

defined as the financial statement 

required by section 2.2–3114 of the 

Code of Virginia, which requires 

nonsalaried members of all policy and 

supervisory boards (including the 

SAPCB) and other persons occupying 

offices or positions of trust or 

employment in state government 

(including the director of VADEQ) to 

file the relevant disclosure form set 

forth in sections 2.2–3117 and 2.2–3118 

in the Code of Virginia. 

‘‘Potential conflict of interest’’ is also 

newly defined in 9VAC5–170–20 as a 

‘‘personal interest’’ per section 2.2–3101 

of the Code of Virginia, which defines 

‘‘personal interest’’ as a financial benefit 

or liability accruing to an officer, 

employee, or an immediate family 

member which includes: (1) Three 

percent or more ownership in a 

business, (2) annual income exceeding 

$5,000 from ownership in a property or 

business, (3) salary, other compensation, 

fringe benefits, or benefits from using 

the property paid by a business or 

governmental agency that exceed $5,000 

annually, (4) ownership of a property 

exceeding $5,000 in value, excluding 

ownership in a business, income, salary, 

other compensation, fringe benefits, or 

benefits from using the property, (5) 

personal liability incurred on behalf of 

a business exceeding three percent of 

the business’s asset value, or (6) an 

option for ownership of a business or 

property if the ownership will consist of 

numbers (1) or (4) above. 

EPA finds that 9VAC5–170–210 and 

the revised definitions in 9VAC5–170– 

20 require members of Virginia’s board 

and the head of Virginia’s executive 

agency (both of which have powers to 

approve CAA permits or enforcement 

orders) to adequately disclose potential 

conflicts of interest. Thus, the December 

22, 2014 SIP submittal addresses the 

requirements in section 128(a)(2). 

IV. Infrastructure Requirements and 

EPA’s Analysis of Virginia’s Submittals 

Whenever new or revised NAAQS are 

promulgated, the CAA requires states to 

submit a plan for the implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of such 

NAAQS. The plan is required to address 

basic program elements including, but 

not limited to, regulatory structure, 

monitoring, modeling, legal authority, 

and adequate resources necessary to 

assure attainment and maintenance of 

the standards. These elements are 

referred to as infrastructure 

requirements. In particular, the 

infrastructure requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) require that each state’s 

SIP meet the requirements of section 

128. 

On the following dates, and for the 

applicable NAAQS, Virginia submitted 

infrastructure SIP submittals to meet the 

requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2): 

March 9, 2012 for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, 

July 23, 2012 for the 2008 O3 NAAQS, 

May 30, 2013 for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 

and June 23, 2014 for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. 

EPA has approved these submittals as 

meeting certain requirements or 

elements in section 110(a)(2) for the 

applicable NAAQS but has stated in 

each of these approvals that EPA would 

take later, separate action for 

requirements in section 110(a)(2)(E)

(ii).1 See 78 FR 58462 (September 24, 

2013) (2008 Pb NAAQS), 79 FR 17043 

(March 27, 2014) (2008 O3 NAAQS), 79 

FR 15012 (March 18, 2014) (2010 NO2

NAAQS), and 80 FR 11557 (March 4, 

2015) (2010 SO2 NAAQS). See EPA’s 

proposed approvals of Virginia’s 

infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 O3

NAAQS and the 2010 NO2 and SO2

NAAQS for a discussion of EPA’s 

approach to reviewing infrastructure 

SIPs, including EPA’s longstanding 

interpretation of the following: 

Requirements for section 110(a)(1) and 

(2); EPA’s interpretation that the CAA 

allows states to make multiple SIP 

submissions separately addressing 

infrastructure SIP elements in section 

110(a)(2) for a specific NAAQS; and the 

interpretation that EPA has the ability to 

act on separate elements of 110(a)(2) for 

a NAAQS in separate rulemaking 

actions. 78 FR 39671 (July 2, 2013) 

(2008 O3 NAAQS), 78 FR 47264 (August 

5, 2013) (2010 NO2 NAAQS), and 79 FR 

49731 (August 22, 2014) (2010 SO2

NAAQS). 

With the December 22, 2014 SIP 

submittal from Virginia, EPA finds that 

the Virginia SIP adequately addresses 

all requirements in CAA section 128 

and section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).2 Thus, EPA 

is now approving the section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) infrastructure element 

for the Four Submittals for the 2008 Pb, 

2008 O3, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2

NAAQS. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
17694 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving Virginia’s December 

22, 2014 SIP revision that addresses the 

requirements of sections 128 and 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the CAA for all criteria 

pollutants of the NAAQS. EPA is also 

specifically approving the following 

Virginia submittals as addressing the 

requirements in section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

of the CAA: The March 9, 2012 

submittal for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, the 

July 23, 2012 submittal for the 2008 O3

NAAQS, the May 30, 2013 submittal for 

the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and the June 23, 

2014 submittal for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. EPA is publishing this rule 

without prior proposal because EPA 

views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comment. However, in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of today’s Federal 

Register, EPA is publishing a separate 

document that will serve as the proposal 

to approve the SIP revision if adverse 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective on June 1, 2015 without further 

notice unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by May 4, 2015. If EPA 

receives adverse comment, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. EPA 

will address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so at this time. Please note that 

if EPA receives adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

VI. 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 § 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. 

10.1–1199, 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. 

VII. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is finalizing the 

incorporation by reference of 9VAC5– 

170–210 and related definitions of 

9VAC5–170–20 (both regarding 

disclosure of conflict of interests), with 

a state effective date of November 19, 

2014. These regulations are discussed in 

section III of this preamble. The EPA 

has made, and will continue to make, 

these documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

VIII. 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 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 17695 

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 June 1, 2015. 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. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking 

action. This action, approving 

regulations meeting section 128 and 

approving the infrastructure element 

E(ii) for four Virginia NAAQS 

submittals, 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, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: March 13, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended 

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: 

■ a. In the table in paragraph (c), revise 

the entry for ‘‘Section 5–170–20.’’ 

■ b. In the table in paragraph (c), add 

the heading ‘‘Part IX Conflict of 

Interest’’ and the entry for ‘‘Section 5– 

170–210’’ in numerical order. 

■ c. In the table in paragraph (e), revise 

the entries for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 

Lead NAAQS,’’ ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 

Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS,’’ ‘‘Section 

110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS,’’ and 

‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur 

Dioxide NAAQS.’’ 

The revisions and addition reads as 

follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date Explanation [former SIP citation] 

*******

9 VAC 5, Chapter 170 Regulation for General Administration 

Part I Definitions 

*******

5–170–20 ...................................... Terms Defined .. 11/19/14 4/2/15 

[Insert Federal 

Register citation] 

Docket #2015–0040. Revised to add the terms disclosure form and potential conflict of interest. 

*******

Part IX Conflict of Interest 

5–170–210 .................................... General ............. 11/19/14 4/2/15 

[Insert Federal 

Register citation] 

Docket #2015–0040. Does not include subsection B 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
17696 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date Explanation [former SIP citation] 

*******

* * * * * (e) * * * 

Name of 

non-regulatory 

SIP revision 

Applicable 

geographic area 

State submittal 

date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2008 Lead 

NAAQS.

Statewide ............... 3/9/12 9/24/13, 78 FR 

58462.

Docket #2012–0451. This action addresses the following 

CAA elements or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) 

(for enforcement and regulation of minor sources), 

(D)(i)(I), (D)(i)(II) (for the visibility protection portion), 

(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). 

3/9/12 2/25/14, 79 FR 

10377.

Docket #2011–0927. This action addresses the following 

CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), 

and (J) with respect to the PSD elements. 

12/22/14 4/2/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].Docket #2015–0040. Addresses CAA element 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 

* * * * * * * 

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS.

Statewide ............... 5/30/13 3/18/14, 79 FR 

15012.

Docket #2013–0510. This action addresses the following 

CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2) (A), (B), (C), 

(D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M) with the exception of PSD elements. 

5/30/13 9/30/14, 79 FR 

58686.

Docket #2013–0510. This action addresses the following 

CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), 

and (J) with respect to the PSD elements. 

12/22/14 4/2/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].Docket #2015–0040. Addresses CAA element 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2008 Ozone 

NAAQS.

Statewide ............... 7/23/12 3/27/14, 79 FR 

17043.

Docket #2013–0211. This action addresses the following 

CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2) (A), (B), (C), 

(D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M) with the exception of PSD elements. 

7/23/12 9/30/14, 79 FR 

58686.

Docket #2013–0211. This action addresses the following 

CAA elements, or portions thereof: 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), 

and (J) with respect to the PSD elements. 

12/22/14 4/2/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].Docket #2015–0040. Addresses CAA element 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 

* * * * * * * 

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS.

Statewide ............... 6/18/14 3/4/15, 80 FR 

11557.

Docket #2014–0522. This action addresses the 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 [Insert Federal Register citation].Docket #2015–0040. Addresses CAA element 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii). 

[FR Doc. 2015–07372 Filed 4–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES