32794 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

1 ‘‘Information on the Interstate Transport ‘‘Good 

Neighbor’’ Provision for the 2012 Fine Particulate 

Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),’’ 

Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, EPA 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

(March 17, 2016). A copy is included in the docket 

for this rulemaking action. 

any state or local fair housing law, or in 

any licensing or regulatory proceeding 

conducted by a federal, state, or local 

government agency, to have committed 

two or more discriminatory housing 

practices and the adjudications were 

made during the 7-year period 

preceding the date of filing of the 

charge. 

* * * * * 

PART 3282—MANUFACTURED HOME 

PROCEDURAL AND ENFORCEMENT 

REGULATIONS 

■ 18. The authority citation for part 

3282 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 1 note; 28 U.S.C. 2461 

note; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d) and 5424. 

■ 19. Revise § 3282.10 to read as 

follows: 

§ 3282.10 Civil and criminal penalties. 

Failure to comply with these 

regulations may subject the party in 

question to the civil and criminal 

penalties provided for in section 611 of 

the Act, 42 U.S.C. 5410. The maximum 

amount of penalties imposed under 

section 611 of the Act shall be $2,852 

for each violation, up to a maximum of 

$3,565,045 for any related series of 

violations occurring within one year 

from the date of the first violation. 

Dated: July 8, 2018. 

J. Paul Compton, Jr., 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15116 Filed 7–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0337; FRL–9980– 

68—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Interstate Transport Requirements for 

the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter 

Standard 

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). This revision pertains to the 

infrastructure requirement for interstate 

transport of pollution with respect to 

the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). EPA is approving this 

revision in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 15, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0337. 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: 

Joseph Schulingkamp, (215) 814–2021, 

or by email at schulingkamp.joseph@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On May 9, 2018 (83 FR 21233), EPA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the 

Commonwealth of Virginia. In the NPR, 

EPA proposed approval of Virginia’s 

submittal to address the infrastructure 

requirements under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS. The formal SIP revision 

was submitted by Virginia through the 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ) on May 16, 2017. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

Virginia’s May 16, 2017 SIP submittal 

includes a summary of annual 

emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOX) 

and sulfur dioxide (SO2), both of which 

are precursors of PM2.5. The emissions 

summary shows that emissions from 

Virginia sources have been steadily 

decreasing for sources that could 

potentially contribute, with respect to 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance of, any other state. The 

submittal also included currently 

available air quality monitoring data for 

PM2.5, and its precursors SO2 and NO2, 

which Virginia alleged show that PM2.5

levels continue to be below the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in Virginia. 

Additionally, Virginia described in its 

submittal several existing SIP-approved 

measures and other federally 

enforceable source-specific measures, 

pursuant to permitting requirements 

under the CAA, that apply to sources of 

PM2.5 and its precursors within Virginia. 

Virginia concludes that the 

Commonwealth does not significantly 

contribute to, nor interfere with the 

maintenance of, another state for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

A detailed summary of Virginia’s 

submittal and EPA’s review and 

rationale for approval of this SIP 

revision as meeting CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS may be found in the NPR and 

Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

this rulemaking action, which are 

available online at www.regulations.gov, 

Docket number EPA–R03–OAR–2017– 

0337. 

EPA used the information in the 2016 

PM2.5 Memorandum1 and additional 

information for the evaluation and came 

to the same conclusion as Virginia. As 

discussed in greater detail in the TSD, 

EPA identified the potential downwind 

nonattainment and maintenance 

receptors identified in the 2016 PM2.5

Memorandum, and then evaluated them 

to determine if Virginia’s emissions 

could potentially contribute to 

nonattainment and maintenance 

problems in 2021, the attainment year 

for moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas. 

EPA concluded Virginia was not 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment nor interfering with 

maintenance with 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

by any other state. 

III. Public Comments 

Two anonymous public comments 

were received on the NPR. The first 

comment generally discussed 

greenhouse gases and climate change 

and was determined to not be relevant 

nor specific to this rulemaking action. 

Thus, no response is provided for this 

comment. The second comment 

expressed that the commenter would 

not like to see particulate pollution from 

Virginia or any state degrade Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania’s air. As 

explained in the proposed rulemaking 

in detail, EPA determined that 

Virginia’s emission sources do not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment, nor interfere with 

maintenance, of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in another state. EPA also concluded 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 32795 

that Allegheny County, Pennsylvania 

was likely to attain the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS without the need for further 

emission reductions. Thus, EPA does 

not expect emissions from Virginia to 

degrade Allegheny County, 

Pennsylvania’s air quality. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving the May 16, 2017 

SIP revision addressing the interstate 

transport requirements for the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS to the Virginia SIP 

because the submittal adequately 

addresses section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the 

CAA. 

V. 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 § 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. 

VI. 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866. 

• 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 

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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land as defined 

in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area 

where EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

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 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
32796 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 136 / Monday, July 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

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 September 14, 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, addressing Virginia’s 

interstate transport for the 2012 PM2.5

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, Particulate matter. 

Dated: July 2, 2018. 

Cosmo Servidio, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

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, the table in paragraph 

(e)(1) is amended by adding a second 

entry for Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2012 Particulate 

Matter NAAQS after the first entry to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e)* * * 

(1)* * * 

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 2012 

Particulate Matter NAAQS.

Statewide .......... 05/16/17 7/16/2018, [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Docket 2017–0337. This action addresses the 

infrastructure element of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–15049 Filed 7–13–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0637; FRL–9980– 

70—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; MD; 

Emissions Statement Requirement for 

the 2008 Ozone Standard 

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 State of Maryland. 

This SIP revision fulfills Maryland’s 

emissions statement requirement for the 

2008 ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). EPA is approving 

these revisions in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 15, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0637. 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: Erin 

Trouba, (215) 814–2023, or by email at 

trouba.erin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On February 20, 2018 (83 FR 7124), 

EPA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the State of 

Maryland. In the NPR, EPA proposed 

approval of Maryland’s certification that 

Maryland’s emissions statement 

regulation meets the emissions 

statement requirement of section 

182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. The formal SIP revision 

(#17–02) was submitted by Maryland, 

through the Maryland Department of the 

Environment (MDE), on September 25, 

2017. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

In Maryland’s September 25, 2017 SIP 

revision submittal, Maryland states that 

the existing COMAR 26.11.01.05–1 

‘‘Emissions Statements’’ rule satisfies 

CAA section 182(a)(3)(B) for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. Under CAA section 

182(a)(3)(B), states are required to have 

an emission statements rule for 

nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. In addition, states in the ozone 

transport region are required to have an 

emission statement rule statewide, 

including for attainment areas. See CAA 

sections 182(a)(3)(B), 182(f), and 

184(b)(2). EPA previously approved 

Maryland’s emissions statement rule for 

the 1979 1-hour ozone standard, 

COMAR 26.11.01.05–1, into the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES