5400 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule 

involves establishment of a temporary 

safety zone. An environmental analysis 

checklist and a categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T05–1166 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T05–1166 Safety Zone; Atlantic 

Intracoastal Waterway, Vicinity of Marine 

Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, NC. 

(a) Regulated Area. The following area 

is a safety zone: specified waters of the 

Captain of the Port Sector North 

Carolina zone, as defined in 33 CFR 

3.25–20, in the vicinity of the Atlantic 

Intracoastal Waterway between position 

34°32′51′′ N/077°19′36′′ W and 

34°34′15′′ N/077°16′16′′ W (NAD 1983). 

(b) Definition: For the purposes of this 

part, Captain of the Port Representative 

means any U.S. Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

who has been authorized by the Captain 

of the Port, Sector North Carolina, North 

Carolina to act on his behalf. 

(c) Regulations: (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 165.23 of 

this part, entry into this zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Sector North 

Carolina or his designated 

representatives. 

(2) The operator of any vessel in the 

immediate vicinity of this safety zone 

shall: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon 

being directed to do so by any 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

on shore or on board a vessel that is 

displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. 

(ii) Proceed as directed by any 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

on shore or on board a vessel that is 

displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. 

(3) The Captain of the Port, Sector 

North Carolina can be reached through 

the Sector Duty Officer at Sector North 

Carolina in Wilmington, North Carolina 

at telephone Number 910–343–3880. 

(4) The Coast Guard Representatives 

enforcing the safety zone can be 

contacted on VHF–FM marine band 

radio channel 13 (165.65Mhz) and 

channel 16 (156.8 MHz). 

(d) Enforcement Period: This 

regulation will be enforced from 7 a.m. 

until 11 a.m., and from 12:01 p.m. until 

4 p.m. on February 6, 2012; from 7 a.m. 

until 11 a.m., and from 12:01 p.m. until 

4 p.m. on February 7, 2012. 

Dated: January 20, 2012. 

Anthony Popiel, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector North Carolina. 

[FR Doc. 2012–2390 Filed 2–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0731; FRL–9625–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Amendments to Virginia’s Regulation 

Regarding the Sulfur Dioxide National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia (Virginia). This revision 

pertains to amendments of Virginia’s 

regulations regarding the 2010 1-hour 

primary national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide 

(SO2). This action is being taken under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective on March 5, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 5401 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0731. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the http://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 

http://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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by 

email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. On October 14, 2011 (76 FR 

63859), EPA published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPR) for Virginia. 

The NPR proposed approval of 

amendments to Virginia’s regulation 

regarding the SO2 NAAQS. The formal 

SIP revision was submitted by Virginia 

on July 12, 2011. Additional background 

information behind this SIP revision is 

discussed in detail in the NPR. EPA 

received no comments on this NPR. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

In June 2010, EPA revised the primary 

SO2 NAAQS, establishing a 1-hour 

standard at the level of 75 parts per 

billion (ppb). The amendments to 

Virginia’s regulations include the 

adoption of the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS and the nullification of the 

existing annual and 24-hour primary 

SO2 NAAQS one year after area 

designations for the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS. These 

amendments can be found under 

Regulation 9VAC5–30–30. There were 

also administrative changes regarding 

these amendments. These changes 

include updates to documents 

incorporated by reference under 40 CFR 

Part 50, as well as administrative 

changes regarding those updates. These 

changes can be found under Regulation 

9VAC5–20–21.E.1. 

III. 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 (1) 

that are generated or developed before 

the commencement of a voluntary 

environmental assessment; (2) that are 

prepared independently of the 

assessment process; (3) that demonstrate 

a clear, imminent and substantial 

danger to the public health or 

environment; or (4) that are required by 

law. 

On January 12, 1998, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 

Attorney General provided a legal 

opinion that states that the Privilege 

Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, 

precludes granting a privilege to 

documents and information ‘‘required 

by law,’’ including documents and 

information ‘‘required by Federal law to 

maintain program delegation, 

authorization or approval,’’ since 

Virginia must ‘‘enforce Federally 

authorized environmental programs in a 

manner that is no less stringent than 

their Federal counterparts. * * *’’ The 

opinion concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding 

§ 10.1–1198, therefore, documents or 

other information needed for civil or 

criminal enforcement under one of these 

programs could not be privileged 

because such documents and 

information are essential to pursuing 

enforcement in a manner required by 

Federal law to maintain program 

delegation, authorization or approval.’’ 

Virginia’s Immunity Law, Va. Code 

Sec. 10.1–1199, 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. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving the Virginia SIP 

revision that adopts the 2010 1-hour 

primary SO2 NAAQS under Regulation 

9VAC5–30–30 and updates documents 

incorporated by reference found under 

40 CFR Part 50 under Regulation 

9VAC5–20–21.E.1. 

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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
5402 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

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 April 3, 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 pertaining to amendments 

of Virginia’s regulations regarding the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: January 17, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 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 

■ 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry for 

Section 5–30–30. The table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry for 

Documents Incorporated by Reference 

after the thirteenth existing entry for 

Documents Incorporated by Reference. 

The amendments read 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 30—Ambient Air Quality Standards [Part III] 

*******

5–30–30 .................... Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide) .............................. 5/25/11 2/3/12 [Insert page number where the document begins].Addition of paragraphs 

A.2 through A.4; revisions to paragraphs 

A.1, C. and D. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * (e) * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 23 / Friday, February 3, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 5403 

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable 

geographic area 

State 

submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Documents Incorporated by Reference (9 VAC 

5–20–21, Section E.1.a.(1)).

Statewide ..................... 5/25/11 2/3/12 [Insert page 

number where the 

document begins].

Addition of paragraphs 

(1)(a) and (1)(u). The 

citations of all other 

paragraphs are revised. 

*******

[FR Doc. 2012–2334 Filed 2–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

45 CFR Part 670 

Conservation of Antarctic Animals and 

Plants 

AGENCY: National Science Foundation. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Antarctic 

Conservation Act of 1978, The National 

Science Foundation (NSF) is amending 

its regulations to reflect newly 

designated Antarctic Specially Protected 

Areas (ASPA), Antarctic Specially 

Managed Areas (ASMA) and Historical 

Sites or Monuments (HSM). These 

additions reflect measures already 

adopted by the Antarctic Treaty Parties 

at recent Antarctic Treaty Consultative 

Meetings (ATCM). Finally, the 

regulation is being revised to correct 

some typographical and numbering 

errors. 

DATES: Effective February 3, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bijan Gilanshah, Office of the General 

Counsel, (703) 292–8060. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, as 

amended (‘‘ACA’’) (16 U.S.C. 2401, et 

seq.) implements the Protocol on 

Environmental Protection to the 

Antarctic Treaty (‘‘the Protocol’’). Annex V contains provisions for the 

protection of specially designated areas 

specially managed areas and historic 

sites and monuments. Section 2405 of 

title 16 of the ACA directs the Director 

of the National Science Foundation to 

issue such regulations as are necessary 

and appropriate to implement Annex V 

to the Protocol. 

The Antarctic Treaty Parties, which 

includes the United States, periodically 

adopt measures to establish additional 

specially protected areas, specially 

managed areas and historical sites or 

monuments in Antarctica. This rule is 

being revised to reflect three newly 

added Antarctic specially protected 

areas (ASPAs 168–171), one specially 

managed area (ASMA 7) and five 

historical sites and monuments in 

Antarctica (HSM 83–87). 

Public Participation 

The addition of these areas and sites 

merely reflects decisions already made 

by the Antarctic Treaty Parties at 

various international ATCM meetings. 

Because these amendments involve a 

foreign affairs function, the provisions 

of Executive Order 12866 and the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553), requiring notice of proposed 

rulemaking, opportunity for public 

participation, and delay in effective 

date, are inapplicable. Further, because 

no notice of proposed rulemaking is 

required for this rule, the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) does 

not apply. Although this rule is exempt 

from the Regulatory Flexibility Act, it 

has nonetheless been determined that 

this rule will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

businesses. Finally, as the agency has 

determined that this action pertains to 

the foreign affairs function of the United 

States it accordingly is not a ‘‘rule’’ as 

that term is used by the Congressional 

Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801–808). 

Therefore, the reporting requirement of 

5 U.S.C. 801 does not apply. 

Environmental Impact 

This final rule makes conforming 

changes to the National Science 

Foundation’s regulations to reflect the 

substantive outcomes of recent 

Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings. 

The actions taken by the Antarctic 

Treaty Parties to specially protect and 

manage these new Antarctic areas and 

historic resources will result in added 

protection of the Antarctic environment 

and its historic resources. 

No Takings Implications 

The Foundation has determined that 

the final rule will not involve the taking 

of private property pursuant to E.O. 

12630. 

Civil Justice Reform 

The Foundation has considered this 

final rule under E.O. 12988 on civil 

justice reform and determined the 

principles underlying and requirements 

of E.O. 12988 are not implicated. 

Federalism and Consultation and 

Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

The Foundation has considered this 

final rule under the requirements of E.O. 

13132 on federalism and has 

determined that the final rule conforms 

with the federalism principles set out in 

this E.O.; will not impose any 

compliance costs on the States; and will 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, the relationship between the 

Federal government and the States, or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, the 

Foundation has determined that no 

further assessment of federalism 

implications is necessary. 

Moreover, the Foundation has 

determined that promulgation of this 

final rule does not require advance 

consultation with Indian Tribal officials 

as set forth in E.O. 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments. 

Energy Effects 

The Foundation has reviewed this 

final rule under E.O. 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. The Foundation 

has determined that this final rule does 

not constitute a significant energy action 

as defined in the E.O. 

Unfunded Mandates 

Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538), the Foundation has 

assessed the effects of this final rule on 

State, local, and Tribal governments and 

the private sector. This final rule will 

not compel the expenditure of $100 

million or more by any State, local, or 

Tribal government or anyone in the 

private sector. Therefore, a statement 

under section 202 of the act is not 

required. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES