62626 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

et seq.). Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law

and does not impose any additional

enforceable duty beyond that required

by state law, it does not contain any

unfunded mandate or significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, as

described in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).

For the same reason, this rule also does

not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely

approves a state rule implementing a

Federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s

role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the

absence of a prior existing requirement

for the State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

to disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the

requirements of section 12(d) of the

National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.

272 note) do not apply. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this rule, EPA has taken the necessary

steps to eliminate drafting errors and

ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,

and provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct. EPA has complied

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the

takings implications of the rule in

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of

Unanticipated Takings’ issued under the

executive order. This rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

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 rule 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).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by December 18,

2000. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This action may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone.

Dated: September 15, 2000.

Mindy S. Lubber,

Regional Administrator, EPA-New England.

Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the

Code of Federal Regulations is amended

as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart H—Connecticut

2. Section 52.377 is added to subpart

H to read as follows:

§ 52.377 Control strategy: Ozone.

Revisions to the State Implementation

Plan submitted by the Connecticut

Department of Environmental Protection

on December 30, 1997 and January 7,

1998. These revisions are for the

purpose of satisfying the rate of progress

requirement of section 182(c)(2) through

1999, and the contingency measure

requirements of sections 172(c)(9) and

182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act, for the

Greater Hartford serious ozone

nonattainment area, and the

Connecticut portion of the NY–NJ–CT

severe ozone nonattainment area.

3. Section 52.384 is amended by

revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 52.384 Emission inventories.

(a) The Governor’s designee for the

State of Connecticut submitted the 1990

base year emission inventories for the

Connecticut portion of the New YorkNew Jersey-Connecticut severe ozone

nonattainment area and the Greater

Hartford serious ozone nonattainment

area on January 13, 1994 as revisions to

the State’s SIP. Revisions to the

inventories were submitted on February

3, 1994, February 16, 1995, and

December 30, 1997. The 1990 base year

emission inventory requirement of

section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as

amended in 1990, has been satisfied for

these areas.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–26750 Filed 10–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[VA109–5050; FRL–6887–7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;

Approval of Removal of TSP Ambient

Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to

the Commonwealth of Virginia’s State

Implementation Plan (SIP). The

revisions consist of the removal of

references to total suspended

particulates (TSP) from sections of the

Commonwealth’s regulations regarding

ambient air quality standards and air

pollution episode prevention. These

revisions were submitted by the

Commonwealth of Virginia, Department

of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) as a

revision to its SIP on April 21, 2000.

DATES: This rule is effective on

December 18, 2000 without further

notice, unless EPA receives adverse

written comment by November 20,

2000. 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: Written comments should

be mailed to Mr. Denis Lohman, Acting

Chief, Technical Assessment Branch,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62627

Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19103. Copies of the documents relevant

to this action are available 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;

Virginia Department of Environmental

Quality, 629 East Main Street,

Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ruth E. Knapp, (215) 814–2191, or by email at knapp.ruth@epa.gov. While

questions may be submitted via e-mail,

any comments on this rulemaking

action must be submitted, in writing, as

indicated above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever

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

EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is EPA Approving?

II. What are the Provisions of the Revised

Regulation?

III. What are the Environmental Effects of this

Action?

IV. Special Provisions Related to Virginia.

V. EPA Rulemaking Action.

VI. Administrative Requirements.

I. What is EPA Approving?

We are approving, as a SIP revision,

the removal of references to TSP

ambient standards from Virginia’s

regulations found at Title 9 VAC 5

Chapters 30 and 70. Chapter 30 is

entitled, Ambient Air Quality

Standards, and Chapter 70 is entitled,

Air Pollution Episode Prevention.

II. What are the Provisions of the

Revised Regulation?

In 1987, EPA replaced the National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS) for TSP with NAAQS for

particulate matter less than 10

micrometers in diameter (PM10). At that

time, we determined that smaller

particles (PM10) were responsible for

health and welfare effects. Unlike larger

particles, the smaller particles are able

to enter the respiratory system. On July

1, 1988, the Commonwealth adopted the

Federal NAAQS for PM10 at 9 VAC 5–

30–60. Likewise, Virginia adopted

references to PM10 ambient levels in 9

VAC 5–70–40 ‘‘Episode determination.’’

The SIP revision consists of the repeal

of the entire text of 9 VAC 5–30–20

‘‘Particulate matter (TSP)’’ to delete all

references to TSP as a primary and

secondary ambient standard. In

addition, references to TSP ambient

standards in 9 VAC 5–70–40 ‘‘Episode

determination’’ are also being deleted.

Although, these references to TSP

ambient standards are being removed,

the Commonwealth’s regulations

continue include the appropriate

references to PM10.

III. What are the Environmental Effects

of this Action?

The Commonwealth’s regulations

governing the control of fugitive dust of

all sizes, including TSP, from various

types of sources such as sand and gravel

processing remain in effect. The

removal of references to the former TSP

ambient standards from 9 VAC -5–30–20

and 5–70–40 do not amend the

Commonwealth’s fugitive dust

regulations. Therefore, no adverse

environmental effects occur as the result

of this SIP revision.

IV. Special Provisions Related to

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

demonstrates a clear, imminent and

substantial danger to the public health

or environment; or (4) that are required

by law.

On January 12, 1997, 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

‘‘regarding section 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, 1997

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

Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act is likewise

unaffected by this, or any, state audit

privilege or immunity law.

V. EPA’s Rulemaking Action

We are approving revisions to the

Virginia SIP submitted on April 21,

2000. The revisions remove references

to TSP ambient air quality standards

and levels previously found at 9 VAC 5–

30–20 and 9 VAC 5–70–40. We are

publishing this action without prior

proposal because we view this as a

noncontroversial revision and anticipate

62628 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

no adverse comments. However, in a

separate document in the ‘‘Proposed

Rules’’ section of today’s Federal

Register, we are 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 December 18, 2000 without

further notice unless we receive adverse

comment by November 20, 2000.

Should we receive such comments, we

will publish a timely withdrawal in the

Federal Register informing the public

that the rule will not take effect. We will

address all public comments in a

subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule. We will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

must do so at this time.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. General Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

therefore is not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget. This

action merely approves state law as

meeting Federal requirements and

imposes no additional requirements

beyond those imposed by state law.

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies

that this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.). Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law

and does not impose any additional

enforceable duty beyond that required

by state law, it does not contain any

unfunded mandate or significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, as

described in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).

For the same reason, this rule also does

not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely

approves a state rule implementing a

Federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant. In reviewing

SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to

approve state choices, provided that

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air

Act. In this context, in the absence of a

prior existing requirement for the State

to use voluntary consensus standards

(VCS), EPA has no authority to

disapprove a SIP submission for failure

to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the

requirements of Section 12(d) of the

National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.

272 note) do not apply. As required by

Section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this rule, EPA has taken the necessary

steps to eliminate drafting errors and

ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,

and provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct. EPA has complied

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the

takings implications of the rule in

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of

Unanticipated Takings’ issued under the

executive order. This rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

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 rule 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. This rule 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 Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by December 18,

2000. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule 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 regarding the

removal of references to TSP ambient

standards and levels from 9 VAC 5–30–

20 and 9 VAC 5–70–40 of the

Commonwealth of Virginia’s regulations

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, Particulate matter,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: October 5, 2000.

Bradley M. Campbell,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401et seq.

Subpart VV—Virginia

2. In § 52.2420, the entries for 9 VAC

5, Chapter 30, subsection 5–30–20 and

Chapter 70, subsection 5–70–40 in the

‘‘EPA Approved Regulations in the

Virginia SIP’’ table in paragraph (c) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) EPA approved regulations.

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE VIRGINIA SIP

State citation (9 VAC 5) Title/subject State effective

date EPA approval date Explanation[former SIP citation]

*******

Chapter 30 .............................. Ambient Air Quality Standards (Part III)

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 62629

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE VIRGINIA SIP—Continued

State citation (9 VAC 5) Title/subject State effective

date EPA approval date Explanation[former SIP citation]

*******

5–30–20 .................................. Particulate Matter (TSP) ........ 4/1/99 Type: 10/19/00 ....................... This section is being

removed.

*******

Chapter 70 .............................. Air Pollution Episode Prevention (Part VII)

*******

5–70–40 .................................. Episode Determination .......... 4/1/99 Type: 10/19/00 ....................... References to TSP are being

removed.

*******

[FR Doc. 00–26908 Filed 10–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–301066; FRL–6748–2]

RIN 2070–AB78

Norflurazon; Extension of Tolerances

for Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation extends timelimited tolerances for combined

residues of the herbicide norflurazon

and its desmethl metabolite in or on

bermudagrass forage and hay at 2 and 3

parts per million (ppm) respectively, for

an additional 2–year period. These

tolerances will expire and are revoked

on November 30, 2002. This action is in

response to EPA’s granting of an

emergency exemption under section 18

of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,

and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)

authorizing use of the pesticide on

bermudagrass. Section 408(l)(6) of the

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

(FFDCA) requires EPA to establish a

time-limited tolerance or exemption

from the requirement for a tolerance for

pesticide chemical residues in food that

will result from the use of a pesticide

under an emergency exemption granted

by EPA under section 18 FIFRA.

DATES: This regulation is effective

October 19, 2000. Objections and

requests for hearings, identified by

docket control number OPP–301066,

must be received by EPA on or before

December 18, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests may be submitted by

mail, in person, or by courier. Please

follow the detailed instructions for each

method as provided in Unit III. of the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure

proper receipt by EPA, your objections

and hearing requests must identify

docket control number OPP–301066 in

the subject line on the first page of your

response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Libby Pemberton, Registration

Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide

Programs, Environmental Protection

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20460; telephone

number:703 308–9364; and e-mail

address: pemberton.libby@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action if

you are an agricultural producer, food

manufacturer, or pesticide

manufacturer. Potentially affected

categories and entities may include, but

are not limited to:

Categories NAICS

codes

Examples of Potentially Affected Entities

Industry 111 Crop production

112 Animal production

311 Food manufacturing

32532 Pesticide manufacturing

This listing is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

affected by this action. Other types of

entities not listed in the table could also

be affected. The North American

Industrial Classification System

(NAICS) codes have been provided to

assist you and others in determining

whether or not this action might apply

to certain entities. If you have questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the person

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Additional

Information, Including Copies of this

Document and Other Related

Documents?

1. Electronically. You may obtain

electronic copies of this document, and

certain other related documents that

might be available electronically, from

the EPA Internet Home Page at http://

www.epa.gov/. To access this

document, on the Home Page select

‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations

and Proposed Rules,’’ then look up the

entry for this document under the

‘‘Federal Register—Environmental

Documents.’’ You can also go directly to

the Federal Register listings at http://

www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

2. In person. The Agency has

established an official record for this

action under docket control number

OPP–301066. The official record

consists of the documents specifically

referenced in this action, and other

information related to this action,

including any information claimed as

Confidential Business Information (CBI).

This official record includes the

documents that are physically located in

the docket, as well as the documents

that are referenced in those documents.

The public version of the official record

does not include any information

claimed as CBI. The public version of

the official record, which includes

printed, paper versions of any electronic

comments submitted during an

applicable comment period is available

for inspection in the Public Information

and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB),

Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson

Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8:30

a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB

telephone number is (703) 305–5805.