### 63878 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register

. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 24, 2013. 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 Delaware’s section 110(a)(2) infrastructure elements for the 2010 NO 2 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: September 24, 2013. W.C. Early, Acting 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 I—Delaware**

■ 2. In § 52.420, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an entry for Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS at the end of the table to read as follows:

**§ 52.420 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(e) * * *

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic or nonattainment

area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation

******* Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure

Requirements for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS. Statewide ........ 3/27/13 10/25/13 [ Insert Federal Registerpage number where the document begins and date ]. This action addresses the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).

[FR Doc. 2013–25025 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0594; FRL–9901–80– Region 3]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;**  **Revised Ambient Air Quality Standards for Fine Particulate Matter** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule. **SUMMARY :**  EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions add ambient air quality standards and associated reference conditions for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5 ) that are consistent with the 2013 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM 2.5 . EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  This rule is effective on December 24, 2013 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by November 25, 2013. 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–2013–0594 by one of the following methods:

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0594, Cristina Fernandez, 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


### 63879 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2013– 0594. 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. Summary of SIP Revision On July 26, 2013, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted formal revisions to its SIP. The SIP revisions consist of adding section 9VAC5–30–67 as well as minor language revisions in section 9VAC5–30–15. Sections 9VAC5–30–67 and 9VAC5–30–15 contain the 2013 PM 2.5 NAAQS and the associated reference conditions, respectively. On January 15, 2013, EPA revised the NAAQS for PM 2.5 . See 78 FR 3086. The annual arithmetic mean concentration has been set at 12 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m 3 ), and the standard for the 24-hour concentration is being retained
at 35 mg/m 3

. II. 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.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving these revisions to add the 2013 PM 2.5 NAAQS to the Virginia SIP. 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


### 63880 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

comments are filed. This rule will be effective on December 24, 2013 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 25, 2013. 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. IV. 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 affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register

. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 24, 2013. 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, adding the 2013 PM 2.5 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, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: September 20, 2013. W.C. Early, Acting, 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 (c) is amended by revising the entry for Section 5–30–15, and adding an entry for Section 5–30–67 after the existing entry for Section 5–30–66. The revised and added text reads as follows:

**§ 52.2420 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(c) * * *



### EPA-A PPROVED 

### V IRGINIA 

### R EGULATIONS 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]**


### 63881 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

EPA-A PPROVED 

### V IRGINIA 

### R EGULATIONS AND 

### STATUTES

### —Continued

State citation Title/subject State effective date EPA approval date Explanation [former SIP citation]

******* 5–30–15 ... Reference Conditions ...................... 5/22/13 10/25/13 [ Insert page number where the document begins ]. Revised to include Section 5–30– 67.

* * * * * * * 5–30–67 ... Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) ................ 5/22/13 10/25/13 [ Insert page number where the document begins ]. Added Section.

*******

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2013–25043 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0769; FRL–9901–81– Region 3]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Pennsylvania; Determinations of Attainment of the 1997 Annual Fine** **Particulate Standards for the Liberty Clairton Nonattainment Area** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is making two separate and independent determinations regarding the Liberty-Clairton, Pennsylvania 1997 annual fine particulate (PM2.5 ) nonattainment area (the Liberty-Clairton Area). First, EPA is determining that the Liberty-Clairton Area attained the 1997 PM 2.5 annual national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date, December 31, 2011. This determination is based on quality assured and certified ambient air quality date for the 2009–2011 monitoring period. Second, EPA is determining that the Liberty-Clairton Area has continued to attain the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS, based on quality-assured and certified ambient air quality data for the 2010– 2012 monitoring period. The latter ‘‘clean data determination’’ suspends the requirement for the Liberty-Clairton Area to submit an attainment demonstration, reasonably available control measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP), and contingency measures related to attainment of the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS for so long as the area continues to attain the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS. These determinations do not constitute a redesignation to attainment. The Liberty-Clairton Area will remain designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such time asEPA determines that the LibertyClairton Area meets the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for redesignation to attainment, including an approved maintenance plan. These actions are being taken under the CAA.

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on November 25, 2013.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0769. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Maria A. Pino, (215) 814–2181, or by email at pino.maria@epa.gov

. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

The Liberty-Clairton Area is comprised of the boroughs of Lincoln, Glassport, Liberty, and Port Vue and the City of Clairton, all in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. See 40 CFR 81.339. The Liberty-Clairton Area is surrounded by, but separate and distinct from, the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley PM 2.5 nonattainment area.

On July 23, 2013 (78 FR 44070), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In the July 23, 2013 rulemaking action, EPAproposed to determine that the LibertyClairton Area attained the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date, December 31, 2011. EPA also proposed to make a clean data determination, finding that the Liberty-Clairton Area has continued to attain the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS. No comments were received on the July 23, 2013 NPR. II. Summary of Rulemaking Actions

These actions do not constitute a redesignation of the Liberty-Clairton Area to attainment for the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS under CAA section 107(d)(3). Neither determination of attainment involves approving amaintenance plan for the LibertyClairton Area, nor determines that the Liberty-Clairton Area has met all the requirements for redesignation under the CAA, including that the attainment be due to permanent and enforceable measures. Therefore, the designation status of the Liberty-Clairton Area will remain nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS until such time as EPA takes final rulemaking action to determine that the Liberty-Clairton Area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment. A. Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date

Pursuant to section 188(b)(2) of the CAA, EPA is making a determination that the Liberty-Clairton Area attained the 1997 annual PM 2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date, December 31, 2011. This determination is based upon quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2009–2011 monitoring period that shows the area has monitored attainment of the 1997 PM 2.5 annual NAAQS as of its attainment date. The effect of this final determination of attainment by the Liberty-Clairton Area’s attainment date is to discharge EPA’s obligation under CAA section 181(b)(2) to determine, based on the Liberty-Clairton Area’s air quality as of