53746 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2005–22383; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–102–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by October 27, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) Accomplishing the requirements of 

paragraph (f) of this AD terminates the 

corresponding inspection requirements for 

the upper deck tension tie as required by 

paragraphs (c) and (d) of AD 2004–07–22, 

amendment 39–13566, as those paragraphs 

apply to inspections of SSI F–19A, as 

identified in Boeing Document No. D6–

35022, ‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection 

Document,’’ Revision G, dated December 

2000. All other requirements of AD 2004–07–

22 continue to apply. 

Applicability: (c) This AD applies to 

Boeing Model 747–100B SUD, 747–300, 747–

400, and 747–400D series airplanes; and 

Model 747–200 series airplanes having a 

stretched upper deck; certificated in any 

category; as identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated April 

21, 2005. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from new reports of 

severed tension ties, as well as numerous 

reports of cracked tension ties, broken 

fasteners, and cracks in the frame, shear web, 

and shear ties adjacent to tension ties for the 

upper deck. We are issuing this AD to detect 

and correct cracking of the tension ties, shear 

webs, and frames of the upper deck, which 

could result in rapid decompression of the 

airplane. 

Compliance: (e) You are responsible for 

having the actions required by this AD 

performed within the compliance times 

specified, unless the actions have already 

been done. 

Repetitive Inspections and Corrective 

Actions 

(f) Do repetitive detailed and high 

frequency eddy current inspections, as 

applicable, for cracking or discrepancies of 

the fasteners in the tension ties, shear webs, 

and frames at body stations 1120 through 

1220, and related investigative and corrective 

actions as applicable, by doing all actions in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, except 

as provided by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this 

AD. Do the initial and repetitive Stage 1 and 

Stage 2 inspections at the applicable times 

specified in Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

the service bulletin, except as provided by 

paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this AD. 

Any applicable investigative and corrective 

actions must be done before further flight. 

Doing the initial Stage 2 inspection ends the 

repetitive Stage 1 inspections. 

(1) For any airplane not identified in and 

subject to inspections in accordance with 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53–2483: Do the 

initial Stage 1 inspection in accordance with 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507 

before the accumulation of 8,000 total flight 

cycles, or within 1,500 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever is later. 

(2) Where Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

the service bulletin specifies a compliance 

time relative to the original issue date of the 

service bulletin, this AD requires compliance 

before the specified compliance time after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(3) For any airplane that reaches the 

applicable compliance time for the initial 

Stage 2 inspection (as specified in Table 1, 

Compliance Recommendations, under 

paragraph 1.E. of the service bulletin) before 

reaching the applicable compliance time for 

the initial Stage 1 inspection: Doing the 

initial Stage 2 inspection eliminates the need 

to do the Stage 1 inspection. 

Exception to Corrective Action Instructions 

(g) If any discrepancy; including but not 

limited to cracking, or broken, loose, or 

missing fasteners; is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2507, dated 

April 21, 2005, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action: Before further flight, 

repair the discrepancy using a method 

approved in accordance with paragraph (i) of 

this AD. 

No Reporting Requirement 

(h) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2507, dated April 21, 2005, specifies 

reporting inspection findings to the 

manufacturer, this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make those findings. For a repair method to 

be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

24, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–17979 Filed 9–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007;FRL–7966–6 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; VA; 

Redesignation of the City of 

Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, 

and Stafford County Ozone 

Nonattainment Area to Attainment and 

Approval of the Area’s Maintenance 

Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a redesignation request and a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. Virginia is requesting that the 

city of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania 

County, and Stafford County (the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area) be 

redesignated as attainment for the eighthour ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). The 

Commonwealth’s SIP revision 

establishes a maintenance plan for the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area that 

provides requirements for continued 

attainment of the eight-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the next 10 years. EPA is 

proposing approval of the redesignation 

request and revision to the Virginia SIP 

in accordance with the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Regional Material in 

EDocket (RME) ID Number R03–OAR–

2005–VA–0007 by one of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Agency Web site: http:// 

www.docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME, 

EPA’s electronic public docket and 

comment system, is EPA’s preferred 

method for receiving comments. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov. 

Mail: R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007, 

David Campbell, Chief, Air Quality 

Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

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

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 53747 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

RME ID No. R03–OAR–2005–VA–0007. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 

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 RME, 

regulations.gov or e-mail. The EPA RME 

and the Federal regulations.gov Web 

sites are 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 

e-mail 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 RME 

index at http://www.docket.epa.gov/ 

rmepub/. 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 RME 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: 

Amy Caprio, (215) 814–2156, or by email at caprio.amy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 2, 

2005, Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality (VADEQ) 

formally submitted a redesignation 

request for the Fredericksburg 

Nonattainment Area to attainment of the 

eight-hour NAAQS for ozone. On May 4, 

2005, Virginia submitted a maintenance 

plan for the Fredericksburg 

Nonattainment Area as a SIP revision, to 

assure continued attainment over the 

next 10 years. 

I. Background 

The Fredericksburg Nonattainment 

Area was designated as moderate eighthour ozone nonattainment status on 

April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on 

its exceedance of the health-based 

standards for ozone. Under section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, the following 

five criteria must be met for an ozone 

nonattainment area to be redesignated to 

attainment: 

1. The area must meet the ozone 

NAAQS. 

2. The area must have a fully 

approved SIP under section 110(k). 

3. The area must show improvement 

in air quality due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions. 

4. The area must meet all 

requirements applicable under section 

110 and part D. 

5. The area must have a fully 

approved maintenance plan under 

section 175A of the CAA. 

II. Summary of Virginia’s Submittal 

The following is a description of how 

the Commonwealth of Virginia’s May 2, 

2005 and May 4, 2005 submittals satisfy 

the five requirements of section 

107(d)(3)(E). EPA will discuss its 

evaluation of the maintenance plan 

under its analysis of the redesignation 

request. A more detailed description of 

the state submittal and EPA’s evaluation 

are included in a Technical Support 

Document (TSD) prepared in support of 

this rulemaking action. A copy of the 

TSD is available, upon request from the 

EPA Regional Office listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this document. 

A. Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS in 

the Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area 

Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA states 

that the EPA Administrator shall 

determine whether an area has achieved 

the ozone standard based on the design 

value of that area. The design value for 

an area is based on the three-year 

average (2002–2004) of the monitored 

annual fourth-highest daily maximum 

eight-hour average ozone concentration. 

In the Fredericksburg Nonattainment 

Area, there is one ozone monitor, 

located in Stafford County, that 

measures air quality with respect to 

ozone. According to the Code of Federal 

Regulations, 40 CFR part 50, Appendix 

I, which establishes the procedure for 

interpreting ozone monitoring data, the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area 

attained the ozone standard for the most 

recent three-year period, 2002–2004. 

The data collected at the Stafford 

County monitor satisfies the CA 

requirement that the three-year average 

of the annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum eight-hour average ozone 

concentration is less than or equal to 

0.08 parts per million (ppm). The 

Commonwealth of Virginia’s request for 

redesignation for the Fredericksburg 

Nonattainment Area indicates that the 

data was quality assured in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 58. The VADEQ uses 

the Aerometric Information Retrieval 

System (AIRS) as the permanent 

database to maintain its data and quality 

assures the data transfers and content 

for accuracy. 

B. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP 

Under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

Stafford County is the only locality of 

the three in the Fredericksburg 

Nonattainment Area that was subject to 

Federal ozone requirements for an onehour ozone nonattainment area. Stafford 

County was a part of the Northern 

Virginia Ozone Nonattainment Area, 

therefore, subject to SIP requirements 

for serious (section 182(c) of the CAA) 

and severe (section 182(d) of the CAA) 

ozone nonattainment areas. Certain 

control measures developed to meet the 

severe nonattainment area requirements 

will continue to apply in Stafford 

County. 

Sections 182(a) through 182(d) of the 

CAA establish specific requirements for 

nonattainment areas and for areas 

located in the Ozone Transport Region 

(OTR). As mentioned, Stafford County is 

the only jurisdiction in the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area that 

was subject to these provisions. 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA has previously approved as part of 

the Commonwealth of Virginia’s SIP 

regulations and other measures that 

fully satisfy the requirements of section 

182(a) through 182(d), as described 

below: 

1. Section 182(d) Requirements for 

Areas Designated Severe and Above 

a. Requirements for annual emissions 

statements from industries; 

b. Preconstruction review (permit) 

program for new industry and 

expansions; 

c. General conformity requirements; 

d. Case-by-case control technology 

determinations for all major volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen 

oxides (NOx) sources not covered by an 

53748 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

EPA control technology guideline 

(CTG); 

e. Requirement for vapor recovery 

controls for emissions from filling 

vehicles with gasoline (Stage II); 

f. Enhanced monitoring (source 

emissions) program: photochemical 

assessment monitoring stations (PAMS); 

g. National Low Emissions Vehicle 

(NLEV); 

h. Oxygenated fuels program; 

i. Requirement for controls for all 

major (25 tons per year (tpy)) VOC 

sources; 

j. Requirement for controls for all 

major (25 tpy)) NOX sources; and, 

k. Requirement for major sources to 

pay a penalty fee. 

2. Section 184(b) (Areas Located in 

OTR) 

a. Regulations requiring reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) 

with respect to all sources of VOC 

covered by a CTG; 

b. VOC controls on landfills; 

c. Corrections to existing regulatory 

program requiring controls for certain 

source types; 

d. The inclusion of Stafford County in 

the enhanced inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) program; 

e. VOC controls (Ozone Transport 

Commission rules); and, 

f. NSR for the OTR. 

3. Additional Plan Submittals 

In addition to the above, the 

Commonwealth’s SIP contains the 

following previously approved elements 

that support Virginia’s attainment plan 

for the Fredericksburg Nonattainment 

Area. 

a. Comprehensive inventory of 

emissions; 

b. Proposed SIP revision to achieve a 

15 percent reduction in VOC emissions 

for the Washington DC–MD–VA 

nonattainment area; 

c. Final SIP revision to achieve a 15 

percent reduction in VOC emissions for 

the Washington DC–MD–VA 

nonattainment area; 

d. Final SIP revision, Phase I 

attainment plan, and revision to the SIP 

to achieve a 15 percent reduction in 

VOC emissions and revision to the 1990 

base year emissions inventory for the 

Washington DC–MD–VA nonattainment 

area; 

e. Final SIP revision to the SIP to 

achieve a 15 percent reduction in VOC 

emissions for the Washington DC–MD–

VA nonattainment area; 

f. Revised SIP revision, Phase I 

attainment plan for the Washington DC–

MD–VA nonattainment area/ 

appendices; and, 

g. Open burning regulations. 

C. Demonstration of Permanent and 

Enforceable Improvement 

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC 

emissions were reduced by 1.5 tons per 

day (tpd) NOX emissions were reduced 

by 2.7 tpd, due to the following 

permanent and enforceable measures 

implemented or in the process of being 

implemented in the Fredericksburg 

Nonattainment Area: 

1. Programs Current by in Effect 

a. NLEV; 

b. Open burning restrictions for 

Stafford County only; 

c. CTG RACT requirements for 

Stafford County only; 

d. Non-CTG RACT requirements for 

Stafford County only; 

e. Stage I and Stage II vapor recovery 

requirements for Stafford County only; 

f. Reformulated gasoline requirements 

for Stafford County only; 

g. Area source VOC regulations 

concerning portable fuel containers; 

mobile vehicle refinishing; architectural 

and industrial maintenance coatings; 

solvent cleaning; and, consumer 

product for Stafford County only; 

h. Motor vehicle fleet turnover with 

new vehicles meeting the Tier 2 

standards; and, 

i. Low-sulfur gasoline. 

2. Other Mobile Programs 

Additionally, the following programs 

are in place and are either effective or 

due to become effective: 

a. Heavy-duty diesel on-road (2004/ 

2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006); 

final EPA approval January 18, 2001 (66 

FR 5002); and 

b. Non-road emission standards 

(2008) and off-road diesel fuel (2007/ 

2010); final EPA approval June 29, 2004 

(69 FR 39858). 

3. Additional Air Quality Improvements 

Lastly, to further improve air quality 

and to provide room for industrial and 

population growth while maintaining 

emissions in the area to less then 2004 

levels, the Commonwealth of Virginia 

has initiated rulemaking to implement 

the following programs. 

a. Implement the Stage I requirements 

in Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania; 

b. Implement the open burning 

restriction requirements in 

Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania; and, 

c. Implement existing source CTG 

RACT requirements in Fredericksburg 

and Spotsylvania. 

In addition to the permanent and 

enforceable measures, the NOX Budget 

Training Program regulations took effect 

in 2003. There are currently no subject 

sources located in the Fredericksburg 

area, but this area can reasonably expect 

to indirectly benefit in terms of 

improved regional air quality due to this 

program. Additionally, the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR), final EPA 

approval May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161), 

should have positive impacts on the 

Commonwealth’s air quality by the 

years 2009 and 2015. 

D. Section 110 and Part D Requirements 

Stafford County is the only locality in 

the Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area 

that has been subject to Federal ozone 

requirements. Prior to the eight-hour 

nonattainment area designations, 

Stafford County was a part of the 

Northern Virginia Ozone Nonattainment 

Area and thus subject to SIP 

requirements for serious and severe 

ozone nonattainment areas. Therefore, 

Stafford County is the only area to be 

subject to section 110(a)(2) and Part D 

requirements that were applicable prior 

to the redesignation submittal. There are 

multiple similarities within these 

requirements. 

1. Section 110 Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA contains 

general requirements for nonattainment 

plans. Most of the provisions of this 

section are the same as those contained 

in the pre-amended CAA. The 

Commonwealth of Virginia has already 

fulfilled all pre-amendment CAA 

requirements pertaining to Stafford 

County, which is the only county in the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area that 

is affected by these requirements. 

2. Part D Requirements 

Virginia’s existing SIP satisfies the 

requirements of Part D of the CAA. Key 

elements of the Part D submittals are 

contained in Subpart 1 (Nonattainment 

Areas in General) and Subpart 2 

(Additional Provisions for Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas). 

a. Subpart 1. Section 172(c), 

Nonattainment Plan Provisions, has 

been met by a previous SIP revision, 

and its requirements are identical to 

those found in section 110(a)(2) and Part 

D. Section 172(c) requirements are as 

follows: 

1. Provisions for implementation of 

all reasonably available control 

measures; 

2. Demonstration of reasonable further 

progress; 

3. Comprehensive inventory of 

emissions; 

4. Identification and quantification of 

new source emissions; 

5. Permits for new and modified 

sources; 

6. Enforceable emissions limitations; 

7. Contingency measures; 

8. Section 173(a) contains 

requirements for issuing permits, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 53749 

including offsets and the application of 

the lowest achievable emission rate 

(LAER); and 

9. Section 176 requires the state to 

develop transportation and general 

conformity procedures to be submitted 

as a SIP revision. 

b. Subpart 2. The specific 

requirements of section 182(a) through 

(d) have been met by the 

Commonwealth’s SIP. These sections 

require that specific control measures 

and other requirements be adopted and 

implemented. These requirements were 

addressed above in section B. In 

addition to sections 182(a) thru 182(d) 

requirements, Virginia had to 

demonstrate that it would achieve a 

VOC emission reduction of 15 percent. 

Finally, the SIP had to include an 

attainment demonstration supported by 

photochemical modeling. 

3. Conformity Process 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

states to establish criteria and 

procedures to ensure that Federally 

supported or funded projects conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. The requirements to 

determine conformity applies to 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects developed, funded or approved 

under Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal 

Transit Act (‘‘transportation 

conformity’’) as well as to all other 

Federally supported or funded projects 

(‘‘general conformity’’). Section 176 

further provides that state conformity 

revisions must be consistent with the 

Federal conformity regulations that the 

CAA required EPA to promulgate. 

Although Federal conformity rule 

changes are still pending, EPA believes 

that it is reasonable to interpret 

conformity requirements as not 

applying for purposes of evaluating a 

redesignation request under section 

107(d) so that EPA may approve an 

ozone redesignation request 

notwithstanding the lack of a fully 

approved conformity SIP. The rationale 

for this is based on a combination of two 

factors. First, Federal conformity rules 

require performance of conformity 

analysis even in the absence of 

Federally approved states rules. Second, 

conformity provisions of the CAA 

continue to apply after redesignation 

because areas are subject to a 

maintenance plan which requires 

compliance with mobile budgets. 

Therefore, because areas are subject to 

the conformity requirements regardless 

of whether they are redesignated to 

attainment and must implement 

conformity under Federal rules if state 

rules are not approved, EPA believes it 

is reasonable to view these requirements 

as not applying for purposes of 

evaluating a redesignation request. 

Virginia submitted procedures to 

determine if systems-level highway 

plans and other Federally-financed 

projects are in conformity with air 

quality plans (‘‘transportation 

conformity’’) to EPA on January 20, 

1997 and were deemed complete by 

operation. The EPA has not yet taken 

action on this submittal. In the 

meantime, EPA is in the process of 

incorporating these changes to the state 

regulation. Pending EPA approval of the 

state regulation, Virginia will continue 

to make transportation conformity 

determinations under the provision of 

40 CFR part 93, subpart A. 

The Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan 

Planning Organization (FAMPO) along 

with the Virginia Department of Motor 

Vehicles (DMV) provided 2002 mobile 

source input parameters for the 

development of all future year 

inventories. As part of the SIP process, 

the recently submitted maintenance 

plan will establish an emission budget 

to be used for transportation conformity 

purposes. This mobile source emissions 

budget represents the level of mobile 

emissions that can be emitted in the 

area while supporting the air quality 

plan. 

E. Maintenance Plan for the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area 

1. Maintenance Plan Requirements 

A maintenance plan is a SIP revision 

that provides maintenance of the 

relevant NAAQS in the area for at least 

10 years after redesignation. A 

maintenance plan consists of the 

following requirements as outlined in 

section 175A of the CAA: (a) An 

attainment inventory; (b) a maintenance 

demonstration; (c) a monitoring 

network; (d) verification of continued 

attainment; and, (e) a contingency plan. 

a. Attainment Inventory. An 

attainment inventory includes the 

emissions during the time period 

associated with the monitoring data 

showing attainment. VADEQ 

determined that the appropriate 

attainment inventory year is 2004. That 

year establishes a reasonable year 

within the three-year block of 2002–

2004 as a baseline and accounts for 

reductions attributed to implementation 

of the CAA requirements to date. This 

inventory is based on actual emission 

for a ‘‘typical summer day’’ and consist 

of a list of sources and their associated 

emissions. 

b. Maintenance Demonstration. 

VADEQ’s calculations of future 

emissions of VOC and NOX from 

stationary and mobile sources 

demonstrate that future emissions will 

not exceed the level of Virginia’s 

attainment inventory for a 10-year 

period following redesignation (see 

Tables 1 and 2). Future emissions levels 

must continue to remain at or below 

attainment levels for a period of 10 

years after EPA redesignates the area 

from nonattainment to attainment. The 

VADEQ’s planning horizon for the 

maintenance plan is 2015. 

TABLE 1.—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS FOR 2004–2015 

Source category 

2004 NOX

emissions 

(tpd) 

2015 NOX

emissions 

(tpd) 

Mobile1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 11 .298 5 .734 

Nonroad ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 .304 2 .231 

Area 2 ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 .070 15 .303 

Point ............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .602 0 .7824 

Total ...................................................................................................................................................... 29 .274 24 .0504 

1 Includes transportation conformity provisions. 

2 Includes vehicle refueling emissions and the benefits of selected local controls (Stage I, CTG RACT, and open burning). 

3 Includes selected local controls (open burning). 

53750 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2.—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS FOR 2004–2015 

Source category 

2004 NOX

emissions 

(tpd) 

2015 NOX

emissions 

(tpd) 

Mobile1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 19 .742 7 .326 

Nonroad ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 .601 2 .195 

Area 3 ........................................................................................................................................................... 3 .465 4 .742 

Point ............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .179 0 .0258 

Total ...................................................................................................................................................... 26 .987 14 .2888 

1 Includes transportation conformity provisions. 

2 Includes vehicle refueling emissions and the benefits of selected local controls (Stage I, CTG RACT, and open burning). 

3 Includes selected local controls (open burning). 

c. Monitoring Network. VADEQ will 

continue to operate its current air 

quality monitor in accordance with 40 

CFR 58. Should measured mobile source 

parameters change significantly over 

time, the Commonwealth will perform a 

saturation monitoring study to 

determine the need for, and location of, 

additional permanent monitors. 

d. Verification of Continued 

Attainment. The Commonwealth of 

Virginia has the legal authority to 

implement and enforce specified 

measures necessary to attain and 

maintain the NAAQS. Key regulatory 

requirements that VADEQ will keep in 

place to maintain attainment include 

expanding CTG RACT, Stage I controls, 

and open burning restrictions to the City 

of Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania 

County. 

Virginia will track the progress of the 

maintenance demonstration by 

periodically updating the emissions 

inventory. This tracking will consist of 

annual and periodic evaluations. The 

annual evaluation will consist of checks 

on key emissions trend indicators such 

as the annual emissions update of 

stationary sources, the Highway 

Performance Monitoring System 

(HPMS) vehicle miles traveled data 

reported to the Federal Highway 

Administration, and other growth 

indicators. These indicators will be 

compared to the growth assumptions 

used in the plan to determine if the 

predicted versus the observed growth 

remains relatively constant. The State 

will also develop and submit to EPA 

comprehensive tracking inventories 

every three years during the 

maintenance plan period, beginning in 

2005. For purpose of performing this 

tracking function for point sources, the 

Commonwealth will retain the annual 

emission statement requirements for the 

maintenance area (9 VAC 5–20–160). 

Virginia will report the results of this 

tracking program to EPA every three 

years. 

e. Contingency Measures. According 

to the CAA, states that wish to 

redesignate nonattainment areas to 

attainment must include in their 

submittal to EPA contingency measures 

which will automatically take effect 

should violations of the NAAQS occur 

in the former nonattainment area. 

Contingency plan measures to be 

considered for implementation of 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area for 

VOC and NOx emissions above the 

regional emissions budget or two 

recorded ozone exceedances include the 

preparation of a complete VOC and NOx

emission inventory (for exceeding the 

regional emissions budget scenario 

only) and the implementation of one or 

more regulations concerning area source 

VOC controls. These control measures 

consist of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 

42 Emission Standards for Portable Fuel 

Container Spillage; 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, 

Article 48 Emission Standards for 

Mobile Equipment Repair and 

Refinishing Operations; 9 VAC 5 

Chapter 40, Article 49 Emission 

Standards for Architectural and 

Industrial Maintenance Coatings; and 9 

VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 50 Emission 

Standards for Consumer Products. 

In the event that a ozone violation 

occurs at the Stafford County monitor, 

the remaining area source VOC controls 

will be implemented. In the event that 

a violation of the ozone standard occurs 

following the implementation of VOC 

controls, and in any subsequent ozone 

season, NOx and VOC RACT will be 

implemented for sources emitting above 

100 tpy that are located in Spotsylvania 

and Fredericksburg. 

Regardless of the number of 

exceedances or violations noted, the 

regulations controlling VOC emissions 

from area sources (9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, 

Article 42; 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 

48; 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 49; and 

9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 50) will be 

expanded to Fredericksburg and 

Spotsylvania County such that these 

regulations will take effect in 2008, or 

as expeditiously as possible thereafter in 

order to provide additional air quality 

benefits. 

2. Requirement for Continued 

Maintenance 

Section 175A(b) of the CAA will also 

require The Commonwealth of Virginia 

to submit a revision to the SIP eight 

years after the original redesignation 

request is approved to provide for 

maintenance of the NAAQS in the 

Fredericksburg Nonattainment Area for 

an additional 10 years following the first 

10-year period. 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 53751 

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 

extend 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, 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. 

IV. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

Commonwealth of Virginia’s May 2, 

2005 request for the Fredericksburg 

ozone nonattainment area to attainment 

of the eight-hour NAAQS for ozone 

because the requirements for approval 

have been satisfied. EPA is also 

proposing to approve the associated 

maintenance plan for this area as 

required under 175A of the CAA, as a 

revision to the Virginia SIP, which was 

submitted on May 4, 2005. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001)). This action merely proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 

proposed 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 proposes to 

approve pre-existing 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 

(Pub. L. 104–4). This proposed rule also 

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, as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will 

it 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 

proposes to approve 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 proposed 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, 1966), in issuing 

this proposed 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 proposing to approve the 

redesignation of the Fredericksburg 

Ozone Nonattainment Area to 

attainment and to approve the 

associated maintenance plan, does not 

impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

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

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Nitrogen Oxides, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, National Parks, 

Wilderness Areas. 

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

53752 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 175 / Monday, September 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: September 1, 2005. 

Richard J. Kampf, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 05–17928 Filed 9–9–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 372 

[TRI–2005–0004; FRL–7532–7] 

RIN 2025–AA17 

Addition of Diisononyl Phthalate 

Category; Community Right-to-Know 

Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; 

Notice of Data Availability; Extension 

of Comment Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule, notice of data 

availability, extension of comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: On June 14, 2005, EPA issued 

a notice of data availability concerning 

a proposed rule to add a diisononyl 

phthalate (DINP) category to the list of 

toxic chemicals subject to the reporting 

requirements of section 313 of the 

Emergency Planning and Community 

Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and section 

6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act 

(PPA). The notice of data availability 

made available for public comment a 

revised hazard assessment for DINP. 

The purpose of this action is to inform 

interested parties that, in response to a 

request for an extension, EPA is 

extending the comment period by 30 

days until October 12, 2005. The 

comment period for the notice of data 

availability was previously scheduled to 

close on September 12, 2005. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. TRI–2005–

0004, by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web site: http:// 

www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: oei.docket@epa.gov. 

• Mail: Office of Environmental 

Information (OEI) Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention 

Docket ID No. TRI–2005–0004. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 

(EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20004, telephone: 202–566–1744, 

Attention Docket ID No. TRI–2005–

0004. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Docket’s normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. TRI–2005–0004. EPA’s 

policy is that all comments received 

will be included in the public docket 

without change and may be made 

available online at http://www.epa.gov/ 

edocket, 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 EDOCKET, 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA 

EDOCKET and the federal 

regulations.gov Web sites are 

‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

EDOCKET or 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 docket 

are listed in the EDOCKET index at: 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. 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 EDOCKET or in hard 

copy at the OEI Docket, EPA/DC, EPA 

West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

202–566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the OEI Docket is 202–566–

1752. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel R. Bushman, Toxics Release 

Inventory Program Division, Office of 

Information Analysis and Access 

(2844T), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number: 202–566–0743; fax number: 

202–566–0741; e-mail: 

bushman.daniel@epamail.epa.gov, for 

specific information on this proposed 

rule, or for more information on EPCRA 

section 313, the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right-to-Know Hotline, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

Code 5101, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460, Toll free: 

1–800–424–9346, in Virginia and 

Alaska: 703–412–9810 or Toll free TDD: 

1–800–553–7672. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does This Notice Apply to Me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this notice if you manufacture, process, 

or otherwise use DINP. Potentially 

affected categories and entities may 

include, but are not limited to: 

Category Examples of potentially affected entities 

Industry ................................. SIC major group codes 10 (except 1011, 1081, and 1094); 12 (except 1241); or 20 through 39; or industry codes 

4911 (limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for distribution in 

commerce); or 4931 (limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for 

distribution in commerce); or 4939 (limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce); or 4953 (limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, subtitle C, 42 U.S.C., section 6921 et seq.); or 5169; or 5171; or 7389 (limited to facilities primarily engaged in solvent recovery services on a contract or fee basis). 

Federal Government ............ Federal facilities.