[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 4 (Friday, January 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 790]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL12-19-000]

FirstEnergy Solutions Corp., Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC
v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on December 28, 2011, pursuant to section 206 and
306 of the Federal Power Act, Rule 206 of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedures, 18 CFR
385.206, FirstEnergy Solutions Corp., Allegheny Energy Supply Company,
LLC (Complainants), collectively filed a formal complaint against PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C. (Respondent) alleging that provisions of The
Respondent's Open Access Transmission Tariff and Operating Agreement
(OA), as related to the rules governing the funding of Financial
Transmission Rights (FTR), are unjust, unreasonable, unduly
discriminatory and preferential. The Complainants request that the
Commission direct the Respondent to revise the Tariff and OA prior to
the start of the Auction Revenue Rights allocation process in March
2012 to eliminate the references to the real-time market in the
calculation of congestion charges that FTR holders receive and direct
the Respondent to allocate incremental real-time transmission
congestion charges to all customers of the transmission system on a pro
rata basis.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for PJM as listed on the Commission's list of Corporate
Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 13, 2012.

    Dated: December 29, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-7 Filed 1-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


MEMORANDUM

DATE:		July 14, 2014

TO:		Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602

FROM:	Anna Phillips, EPA/OITA

SUBJECT:	July 8, 2014 Meeting Regarding Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY

      A meeting was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on July 8, 2014 to discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants. The Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.        ATTENDEES

Marcin Korolec                 Secretary of State                           Polish Ministry of Environment

Krzysztof Bolesta              Political Adviser                               Polish Ministry of Environment

Katarzyna Czop                 Economic Adviser          Embassy of Poland


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53883-53884]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21663]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL12-100-000]

Benjamin Riggs v. Rhode Island Public Utility Commission; Notice
of Complaint

    Take notice that on August 22, 2012, pursuant to Rule 206 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure and Rule 206 of the Federal Power Act, Benjamin Riggs
(Complainant) filed a formal complaint against the Rhode Island Public
Utility Commission (Respondent) alleging that the Respondent approved a
20-year Purchase Power Agreement between Deepwater Wind Block Island,
LLC and National Grid on August 16, 2010, as directed by the Rhode
Island General Assembly; which appears to constitute a violation of the
Federal Power Act, to include 16 U.S.C. 791 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 824, and
the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts for the Respondent as listed on the Commission's list
of Corporate Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.

    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 12, 2012.

    Dated: August 28, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-21663 Filed 8-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10377-10385]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03640]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0927; FRL-9906-67-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New
Source Review; Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
revisions to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by
the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) on August 25,
2011. The revisions pertaining to Virginia's Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program are being fully approved. EPA is granting
limited approval to the revisions pertaining to Virginia's
nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) program. In both cases, the
revisions incorporate preconstruction permitting regulations for fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) into the Virginia SIP. In
addition, EPA is approving these revisions and portions of other
related submissions for the purpose of determining that Virginia has
met its statutory obligations with respect to the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) which relate to Virginia's PSD
permitting program and are necessary to implement, maintain, and
enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the
2008 lead NAAQS. EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with
the requirements of the CAA. A previous PSD program approval of
Virginia's Chapter 80, Article 8 regulations was provided to the
Commonwealth as a ``limited approval'' for reasons that do not impact
the

approval of the August 25, 2011 submission. A correction related to
that prior limited approved is also included in this action.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 27, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0927. 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. 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: David Talley,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 1, 2012 (77 FR 45523), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Commonwealth of Virginia. In the NPR, EPA
proposed approval of amendments to Virginia's major NSR permitting
regulations under the Virginia Administrative Code (VAC) to incorporate
requirements for PM2.5. Additionally, EPA proposed to
approve these revisions and portions of other related submissions for
the purpose of determining that Virginia has met its statutory
obligations with respect to the infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a) which relate to Virginia's PSD permitting program and
are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the
2008 lead NAAQS. The formal SIP revision request was submitted by
Virginia on August 25, 2011.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    Virginia's August 25, 2011 SIP submittal included revisions to the
general definitions under Chapter 10 of 9VAC5 (specifically 9VAC5-10-
30), as well as revisions to Articles 8 (PSD) and 9 (nonattainment NSR)
under Chapter 80 of 9VAC5. The following regulations under Article 8
are revised: 9VAC5-80-1615 (Definitions); 9VAC5-80-1635 (Ambient Air
Increments); 9VAC5-80-1695 (Exemptions); 9VAC5-80-1715 (Source Impact
Analysis); and 9VAC5-80-1765 (Sources Affecting Federal Class I Areas--
Additional Requirements). Under Article 9, the regulations at 9VAC5-80-
2010 (Definitions) and 9VAC5-80-2120 (Offsets) are amended.
    As discussed in the NPR, in light of litigation EPA proposed to
take no action with regard to the Significant Impact Level (SIL)
regulation at paragraph A(2) of 9VAC5-80-1715 (See, 77 FR 45523). On
January 22, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in Sierra Club v. EPA (705 F.3d 458,
469), issued a judgment that, inter alia, vacated and remanded the
provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(k)(2), which were promulgated as part of
the October 20, 2010 ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration for
Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)--
Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring
Concentrations (SMC),'' (2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule).\1\ These
provisions were the Federal counterparts to Virginia's PM2.5
SIL regulations at paragraph A(2) of 9VAC5-80-1715. Additionally, the
court vacated the provisions at section 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c), which were
the Federal counterparts to Virginia's PM2.5 SMC regulations
at paragraph E(1) of 9VAC5-80-1695 (See, Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d
at 469). EPA proposed approval of Virginia's PM2.5 SMC
provisions in our NPR. In light of the court's decision, by letter
dated February 13, 2013, Virginia officially withdrew from the August
25, 2011 submittal the PM2.5 SIL regulation at paragraph
A(2) of 9VAC5-80-1715, and the portion of paragraph E(1) of 9VAC5-80-
1695 pertaining to the PM2.5 SMC. Accordingly, EPA is not
finalizing approval of these provisions. Therefore, EPA's approval with
respect to sections 5-80-1695 and 5-80-1715 is limited to the remaining
revisions which were not impacted by the court decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 75 FR 64864 (October 12, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequent to publication of the NPR, on January 4, 2013, the D.C.
Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA,\2\ issued a
decision that remanded the EPA's 2007 and 2008 rules implementing the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. The court's remand of EPA's 2008
implementation rule, ``Implementation of New Source Review (NSR)
Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers
(PM2.5)'' (referred to herein as ``the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule''),\3\ is relevant to this final rulemaking. This
rule promulgated NSR requirements for implementation of
PM2.5 in both nonattainment areas (nonattainment NSR) and
attainment/unclassifiable areas (PSD). The court found that EPA erred
in implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general
implementation provisions of subpart 1 of part D of title I of the CAA,
rather than pursuant to the additional implementation provisions
specific to particulate matter nonattainment areas in subpart 4. The
court ordered the EPA to ``repromulgate these rules pursuant to Subpart
4 consistent with this opinion,'' (Id. at 437). Although the court
declined to establish a deadline for EPA's response to the remand, EPA
intends to promulgate new generally applicable implementation
regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the
requirements of subpart 4. In the interim, however, states and EPA
still need to proceed with implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS
in a timely and effective fashion in order to meet statutory
obligations under the CAA and to assure the protection of public health
intended by those NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
    \3\ See 73 FR 28321 (May 16, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the NPR, VADEQ's August 25, 2011 SIP submittal
included revisions to Virginia's nonattainment NSR program consistent
with the provisions promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule.
Specifically, under Article 9, the state submitted amendments to the
regulations at 9VAC5-80-2010 (Definitions) and 9VAC5-80-2120 (Offsets)
for approval into the SIP, including the PM2.5 significant
emission rates (SERs), regulation of certain PM2.5
precursors (SO2 and NOX), the regulation of
PM10 and PM2.5 condensable emissions, and the
emissions offset requirements. In light of the D.C. Circuit's remand of
the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule and for the reasons explained below,
EPA is not prepared at this time to grant full approval to VADEQ's
August 25, 2011 submittal as to these elements.
    EPA is in the process of evaluating the requirements of subpart 4
as they pertain to nonattainment NSR. In particular, subpart 4 includes
section 189(e) of the CAA, which requires the control of major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors (and hence under the
court decision, PM2.5 precursors) ``except where the
Administrator determines that such sources do not contribute
significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the standard in
the area.''

The evaluation of which precursors need to be controlled to achieve the
standard in a particular area is typically conducted in the context of
the state's preparing and the EPA's reviewing of an area's attainment
plan SIP. In this case, there is only one designated PM2.5
nonattainment area in the State, the Virginia portion of the
Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Virginia submitted an attainment plan for this
area on April 4, 2008.
    On January 12, 2009, EPA finalized a clean data determination for
the area, (74 FR 1146), which suspended the requirement for the state
to submit, among other things, an attainment plan SIP for the area.
Accordingly, on January 23, 2012, Virginia withdrew the attainment plan
SIP, and it is no longer before EPA. As EPA does not have before it the
state's analysis as to which precursors need to be controlled in the
area as contained in the attainment plan SIP, it cannot fully approve
as complying with the CAA a nonattainment NSR SIP that only addresses a
subset of the scientific PM2.5 precursors recognized by EPA.
    On the other hand, while VADEQ's submittal may not yet contain all
of the elements necessary to satisfy the CAA requirements when
evaluated under subpart 4, the revisions represent a considerable
strengthening of Virginia's currently approved nonattainment NSR SIP
which does not address PM2.5 at all. Therefore, EPA is
granting limited approval to the nonattainment NSR provisions in
VADEQ's August 25, 2011 submittal.
    For the reasons explained above, EPA is not evaluating at this time
whether Virginia's submittal will require additional revisions to
satisfy the subpart 4 requirements. Once EPA re-promulgates the Federal
PM2.5 regulations with respect to nonattainment NSR
permitting in response to the court's remand, EPA will consider whether
a limited disapproval should also be finalized. Moreover, Virginia has
submitted a request to redesignate the nonattainment area, which, if
granted, would absolve the State of any further obligation to comply
with the subpart 4 requirements for nonattainment NSR as to this area.
Alternatively, VADEQ can obtain full approval by, if necessary,
revising its regulations accordingly to address EPA's revised
regulations and submitting them to EPA as a formal SIP revision.
    As previously discussed, VADEQ's August 25, 2011 SIP submittal also
includes revisions to Virginia's PSD program consistent with the
provisions promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule.
Specifically, under Article 8, the following regulations are revised
(with the previously noted exceptions): 9VAC5-80-1615 (Definitions);
9VAC5-80-1635 (Ambient Air Increments); 9VAC5-80-1695 (Exemptions);
9VAC5-80-1715 (Source Impact Analysis); and, 9VAC5-80-1765 (Sources
Affecting Federal Class I Areas--Additional Requirements). As the
requirements of subpart 4 only pertain to nonattainment areas, it is
EPA's position that the portions of the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule
that address requirements for PM2.5 attainment and
unclassifiable areas are not affected by the D.C. Circuit's opinion in
NRDC v. EPA. Moreover, EPA does not anticipate the need to revise any
PSD requirements promulgated in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule in
order to comply with the court's decision. Accordingly, EPA's approval
of Virginia's SIP as to the PSD requirements promulgated by the 2008
NSR PM2.5 Rule does not conflict with the court's opinion.
    Similarly, in the NPR, EPA also proposed to approve portions of
related infrastructure (or CAA Section 110(a)(2)) SIP submissions, for
the purpose of determining that Virginia has met its statutory
obligations with respect to the PSD-related infrastructure requirements
of CAA section 110(a) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 lead NAAQS.
Virginia submitted the related infrastructure SIP revisions on the
following dates: November 13, 2007, December 13, 2007, July 10, 2008,
September 2, 2008, April 1, 2011, and March 9, 2012. For the reasons
explained above, it is also EPA's position that EPA's approval of the
portions of the above identified Virginia's infrastructure SIPs which
relate to compliance with the PSD requirements set forth in Sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) does not conflict with the court's
remand of the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The court's decision with respect to the nonattainment NSR
requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule also
does not affect the EPA's proposed approval of the present
infrastructure action. The EPA interprets the Act to exclude
nonattainment area requirements, including requirements associated
with a nonattainment NSR program, from infrastructure SIP
submissions due 3 years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS.
Instead, these elements are typically referred to as nonattainment
SIP or attainment plan elements, which would be due by the dates
statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part D,
extending as far as 10 years following designations for some
elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the proposed approval of the PSD portions of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), EPA stated in the NPR that: ``Because Virginia has
met its obligations with respect to the visibility requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) by virtue of its regional haze SIP, which
EPA took final action to approve on March 23, 2012 (77 FR 16397), EPA
is also proposing to approve the portions of Virginia's previous
infrastructure submittals related to the visibility requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5,
2006 PM2.5, and 2008 lead NAAQS.''
    As discussed in Section III, below, EPA has already taken separate
and final action to approve the portions of these identified SIP
submittals which relate to the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) visibility
requirements for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5, 2006
PM2.5, and 2008 lead NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is taking no
action on the proposed approval of the visibility requirements for
these identified SIP submittals.\5\ EPA is only taking final action to
approve the portions of the above identified infrastructure SIPs which
relate to Virginia's PSD program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA also notes there was an inadvertent, incorrect citation
to the Virginia regional haze SIP approval in the NPR. The correct
citation to EPA's approval of the Virginia regional haze SIP is 77
FR 35287 (June 13, 2012) (effective July 13, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other specific requirements of Virginia's August 25, 2011 SIP
submittal and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in
the NPR and will not be restated here.

III. EPA's Response to Comments Received on the Proposed Action

    EPA received two sets of comments on the August 1, 2012 NPR. A full
set of these comments is provided in the docket for today's final
action. A summary of the comments and EPA's responses are provided
herein.
    Comment: The first commenter asserted simply that the Federal
government should not be involved in state affairs.
    EPA Response: As Congress has recognized, the regulation of air
pollution in Virginia is not a ``state affair'' for which Virginia
bears sole responsibility. The CAA establishes a partnership between
state and Federal entities for the protection and improvement of the
nation's air quality. Under CAA section 109, EPA is required to
establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the
protection of public health and welfare. Subsequent to the promulgation
(or revision) of a NAAQS, states are required by CAA section 110 to
adopt and submit to EPA for approval, a SIP which provides for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. Virginia's
August 25, 2011 SIP

submittal met that requirement. In addition, section 110(a)(2)(C)
specifically requires that state plans include a PSD and nonattainment
NSR permit program as required in parts C and D of Title I of the Clean
Air Act. The action being finalized today consistent with EPA's
responsibilities under CAA section 110.
    A second commenter submitted two substantive comments. First, the
commenter raised concerns regarding EPA's determination that Virginia
has met its obligations with respect to the visibility requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) by virtue of its regional haze SIP. Second,
the commenter raised several concerns about the legality of SILs and
SMCs, as well as Virginia's adoption of them.
    Comment 1: The commenter claimed that Virginia's regional haze SIP
is insufficient to ensure compliance with visibility requirements under
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). The commenter stated that Virginia's
regional haze SIP only received limited approval due to its reliance on
the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) for best available retrofit
technology (BART) for electric generating units. The commenter alleged
that EPA cannot rely on Virginia's regional haze SIP for satisfying
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(ii) because it did not receive full approval,
because CAIR has been remanded by the D.C. Circuit, and because EPA
provided no explanation for how the regional haze SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as they relate to the 1997
ozone NAAQS, the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008
lead NAAQS. The commenter stated that EPA should either revoke its
approval of the Virginia regional haze SIP or, at a minimum, provide an
explanation for how the regional haze SIP ensures visibility will be
protected for the aforementioned NAAQS.
    Response 1: In the NPR for this rulemaking, EPA proposed to approve
the following infrastructure SIP submittals as meeting the
infrastructure requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (visibility
protection): The November 13, 2007 Virginia submittal for the 1997 8-
hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS; the December 13, 2007 Virginia
submittal for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS; the July 10, 2008 and
September 2, 2008 Virginia submittals for the 1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS; the
April 1, 2011 Virginia submittal for the 2006 p.m.2.5 NAAQS; and, the
March 9, 2012 Virginia SIP submittal for the 2008 lead NAAQS. The
August 2012 NPR was not the first or the most recent proposed
rulemaking issued by EPA relating to Virginia's compliance with the
visibility requirements set forth in Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
    On June 13, 2012, EPA issued a final rule granting limited approval
to the Virginia regional haze SIP (See, 77 FR 35287). In that final
rulemaking action, EPA also approved Virginia's regional haze SIP as
satisfying the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and (J), as they relate to the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Subsequently, on
September 24, 2013, when acting upon Virginia's infrastructure SIP for
the 2008 lead NAAQS, EPA approved that SIP as meeting the
infrastructure requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and (J).
(See, 78 FR 58462 (Sept. 24, 2013)). Most recently, EPA has proposed to
approve Virginia's infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 ozone and 2010
NO2 NAAQS as meeting the infrastructure requirements in
sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and (J) (See, 78 FR 39651 (July 2, 2013)
(2008 ozone NAAQS) and 78 FR 47264 (August 5, 2013) (2010
NO2 NAAQS)).
    Therefore, as part of the August 2012 NPR for this rulemaking, EPA
inadvertently proposed to approve Virginia's previously submitted
infrastructure SIPs as meeting the infrastructure requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Since final action had been taken
for this requirement during June 2012, further action was not required.
As to EPA's approval of Virginia's compliance with the 110(a)(2)
requirements for visibility (set forth in sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
and (J)) for the 2008 lead NAAQS, subsequent to the August 2012 NPR,
EPA issued a final rulemaking on such requirements on September 24,
2013. Because EPA has already taken separate proposed and final
rulemaking actions to approve these elements of the Virginia SIP, EPA
is taking no further action on its proposed approval of the visibility
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as they relate to the
aforementioned NAAQS.\6\ Additionally, EPA received and responded to
similar comments as part of some or all of these previous rulemakings.
Therefore, EPA is not responding to the comment that Virginia's
regional haze SIP is insufficient to ensure compliance with visibility
requirements under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), as we have already
responded to similar comments in our other actions (See, 77 FR 35287;
78 FR 34970; 78 FR 39651; and 78 FR 47263). As a result, EPA sees no
need for further action or response as part of this final rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA also notes there was an inadvertent, incorrect citation
to its approval of the Virginia regional haze SIP in the NPR. The
correct citation to EPA's approval of the Virginia regional haze SIP
is 77 FR 35287 (June 13, 2012) (effective July 13, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 2: The same commenter argued that ``Virginia's regulations
establishing SILs and SMCs are illegal under the CAA and should be
disapproved by EPA'' (See, Sierra Club Comments at 4). Here the
commenter took issue with both EPA's establishing SILs and SMCs
generally, and with the PM2.5 SILs proposed by Virginia
specifically. First, citing to the litigation in Sierra Club v. EPA
(D.C. Circuit, No. 10-1413), the commenter asserts that EPA lacks the
authority to establish SILs and SMCs because they improperly allow
sources to avoid otherwise applicable CAA requirements. The commenter
asserted that, therefore, EPA should disapprove those portions of
Virginia's SIP submittal pertaining to the PM2.5 SILs and
SMCs, rather than approving the SMCs and taking no action on the SILs,
as proposed.
    Secondly, the commenter asserted that the specific SILs at 9VAC5-
80-1715A and B should be disapproved because they do not provide VADEQ
with sufficient discretion to require a cumulative impact analysis
regardless of whether a source's impact is below the SIL. In addition,
the commenter asserts that the SIL values in paragraphs A(2) and B(1)
of section 5-80-1715 are set at different levels and could lead to
confusion. Moreover, the commenter asserted that the SIL values in
paragraph 5-80-1715B(1) are not sufficiently protective of Class I
areas because, unlike the SIL values in paragraph A, paragraph B does
not distinguish different SIL values based on area classifications.
Finally, the commenter asserts that the thresholds in paragraph 5-80-
1715B(1) are improperly incorporated into Virginia's SIP because they
have as their basis Appendix S of 40 CFR part 51, which applies in
situations where EPA has not approved a state's preconstruction review
program.
    EPA Response 2: As previously discussed, in light of the D.C.
Circuit's vacatur of 40 CFR 51.166(k)(2) and (i)(5)(i)(c), Virginia has
officially withdrawn the corresponding state rules with which the
commenter takes issue from the August 25, 2011 SIP submittal. Thus,
there is no need to further consider the commenter's assertion that EPA
should disapprove those provisions in this rulemaking because Virginia
no longer asks that EPA consider them for approval as part of its SIP.

    As to any apparent conflict between the two SIL provisions in
Virginia's SIP submission, paragraph A(2) of 9VAC5-80-1715 has been
withdrawn and thus the commenter's concern regarding any potential for
confusion between the two provisions is addressed by withdrawal of one
provision from the SIP submission.
    As to the SILs in paragraph B(1), the commenter is incorrect in the
claim that these SIL values were only intended to apply in states
without an EPA-approved PSD program. While it is true that those SIL
values are published in Appendix S of 40 CFR part 51, they are also
published in section 51.165(b)(2). Section 51.165(b) implements section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA and applies to sources or modifications
locating in attainment or unclassifiable areas that would cause or
contribute to a violation of any NAAQS in any area. This is the basis
for their inclusion in Virginia's SIP. These SILs establish the
threshold at or above which a new major stationary source or major
modification will be considered to cause or contribute to a violation
of an ambient air quality standard, and thus subject to the
requirements in 40 CFR 51.165(b). EPA has recognized that the values in
section 51.165(b)(2) may also be used in the PSD program to support the
demonstration required by 40 CFR 51.165(k)(1) and section 165(a)(3) of
the CAA that proposed construction will not cause or contribute to a
violation of the NAAQS. However, contrary to the commenter's assertion,
the Federal regulations set forth at section 51.165(b) do not impede a
permitting authority's discretion to require a cumulative impact
analysis to make the showing required by section 51.166(k)(1) and
section 165(a)(3) of the CAA where the source's impact is below a SIL
value in section 51.165(b). Similarly, the corresponding state
regulation at 9VAC5-80-1715B(1) does not impede the state's permitting
authority discretion. Both provisions address the threshold above which
a source will be considered to cause or contribute to a NAAQS
violation. However, the provisions do not preclude a determination that
a source may be considered to cause and contribute to a NAAQS violation
even when the impact is below a SIL value set forth in 40 CFR
51.165(b)(2) which is utilized by the permitting authority. In fact,
the court in Sierra Club v. EPA (705 F.3d 458, 469), declined to vacate
the PM2.5 SIL value at section 51.165(b)(2) because the
court explicitly found that, unlike section 51.166(k)(2), this
provision does not improperly restrict permitting authorities'
discretion (See 705 F.3d at 465-66). There is nothing in section 9VAC5-
80-1715B(1) that would preclude VADEQ from imposing additional
requirements on any sources necessary to show that a source does not
cause or contribute to a NAAQS violation, including those sources
impacting Class I areas. Therefore, except for the exceptions noted,
EPA is finalizing the proposal to grant approval to Virginia's August
25, 2011 submittal.

IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec.  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 PSD and nonattainment
NSR programs 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.

V. Final Action

    EPA is approving Virginia's August 25, 2011 submittal as a revision
to the Virginia SIP, with the exception of paragraph A(2) of 9VAC5-80-
1715, and the portion of paragraph E(1) of 9VAC5-80-1695 pertaining to
PM2.5 which were withdrawn by Virginia on February 13, 2013.
EPA is finalizing a limited approval of the amendments to the
nonattainment NSR regulations set forth at 9VAC5-80-2010 (Definitions)
and 9VAC5-80-2120 (Offsets). EPA is also approving the August 25, 2011
SIP submittal and the relevant portions of the above identified
infrastructure SIP submittals which relate to the PSD requirements set
forth in CAA sections

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) for the 1997 PM2.5, 2006
PM2.5, and 2008 lead NAAQS. EPA is also approving the
relevant portion of Virginia's infrastructure submittal relating to the
PSD permit program pursuant to CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS. As previously discussed, EPA is not taking final
action on its proposal to approve the portions of the Virginia
infrastructure SIP submittals (which were identified in the NPR and are
identified above) related to the visibility requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5, 2006
PM2.5, and 2008 lead NAAQS, because a final rulemaking
action has previously been taken.
    Additionally, on December 20, 2012 (77 FR 75380), EPA approved
revisions to Articles 8 and 9 of 9VAC5, chapter 80. Neither that action
nor the current action removes the pre-existing limited approval status
of Virginia's PSD and nonattainment programs (See, Section III: General
Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals from the Commonwealth of
Virginia, 77 FR 75380-81, and Section IV, herein). However, the
December 20, 2012 revisions to the table in paragraph 52.2420(c)
inadvertently omitted reference to the limited approval status. In the
interest of clarity, EPA is correcting that omission in this action.
EPA is also adding a citation for the revised 9VAC5-80-1935 to the
table in paragraph 52.2420(c). This revision was discussed in both the
proposed and final rulemaking actions, but was inadvertently omitted
from the table itself.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 April 28, 2014. 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 Virginia's PSD and nonattainment NSR
programs 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: January 28, 2014.
Shawn M. Garvin,
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 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:

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

Subpart VV--Virginia

0
2. In Sec.  52.2420:
0
a. The table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entries for
Sections 5-10-30, 5-80-1615, 5-80-1625, 5-80-1635, 5-80-1695, 5-80-
1715, 5-80-1765, 5-80-1915, 5-80-1925, 5-80-1935, 5-80-1945, 5-80-1955,
5-80-1965, 5-80-2010, 5-80-2020, 5-80-2120, 5-80-2140, 5-80-2195, 5-80-
2200, 5-80-2210, 5-80-2220, 5-80-2230, and 5-80-2240.
0
b. The table in paragraph (e) is amended by revising the entries for
section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS, section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and adding section 110(a)(2)
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS immediately
following the previous entries.
    The amendments read as follows:

Sec.  52.2420  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Virginia Regulations and Statutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State                           Explanation [former
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date      SIP citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
9VAC5, Chapter 10................                           General Definitions [Part I]

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-10-30..........................  Abbreviations......         8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised.
                                                                         page number where
                                                                         the document
                                                                         begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
9VAC5, Chapter 80................                    Permits for Stationary Sources [Part VIII]

                                                  * * * * * * *
Article 8........................       Permits--Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications Located in
                                                    Prevention of Significant Deterioration Areas

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-1615........................  Definitions........         8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. Limited
                                                                         page number where    approval remains
                                                                         the document         in effect.
                                                                         begins].
5-80-1625........................  General............         7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                                                         75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-1635........................  Ambient Air                 8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. Limited
                                    Increments.                          page number where    approval remains
                                                                         the document         in effect.
                                                                         begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-1695........................  Exemptions.........         8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. The
                                                                         page number where    portion of
                                                                         the document         paragraph E(1)
                                                                         begins].             that relates to
                                                                                PM2.5 is not in
                                                                                the SIP. Limited
                                                                                approval remains
                                                                                in effect.

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-1715 (Except paragraph A(2))  Source impact               8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. Paragraph
                                    analysis.                            page number where    A(2) is not in the
                                                                         the document         SIP. Limited
                                                                         begins].             approval remains
                                                                                in effect.

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-1765........................  Sources affecting           8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. Limited
                                    Federal class I                      page number where    approval remains
                                    areas--additional                    the document         in effect.
                                    requirements.                        begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-1915........................  Actions to combine          7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      New. Limited
                                    permit terms and                     75380.               approval.
                                    conditions.
5-80-1925........................  Actions to change           7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    permits.                             75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-1935........................  Administrative              7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    permit amendments.                   75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-1945........................  Minor permit                7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    amendments.                          75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-1955........................  Significant                 7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    amendment                            75380.               approval remains
                                    procedures.                                               in effect.
5-80-1965........................  Reopening for cause         7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                                                         75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.

                                                  * * * * * * *
Article 9........................       Permits--Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications Located in
                                                  Nonattainment Areas or the Ozone Transport Region

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-2010........................  Definitions........         8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. Limited
                                                                         page number where    approval of 9/1/06
                                                                         the document         and 8/17/11
                                                                         begins].             amendments.
5-80-2020........................  General............         7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                                                         75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-2120........................  Offsets............         8/17/11  2/25/14 [Insert      Revised. Limited
                                                                         page number where    approval of 9/1/06
                                                                         the document         and 8/17/11
                                                                         begins].             amendments.

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-2140........................  Exemptions.........         7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                                                         75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.

                                                  * * * * * * *
5-80-2195........................  Actions to combine          7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      New. Limited
                                    permit terms and                     75380.               approval.
                                    conditions.
5-80-2200........................  Actions to change           7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    permits.                             75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-2210........................  Administrative              7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    permit amendments.                   75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-2220........................  Minor permit                7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    amendments.                          75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.
5-80-2230........................  Significant                 7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                    amendment                            75380.               approval remains
                                    procedures.                                               in effect.
5-80-2240........................  Reopening for cause         7/23/09  12/20/12, 77 FR      Revised. Limited
                                                                         75380.               approval remains
                                                                                in effect.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Name of non-regulatory SIP          Applicable           State                                Additional
             revision                geographic area    submittal date   EPA approval date       explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure   Statewide..........   12/10/07, 12/  10/11/11; 76 FR      This action
 Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour                       13/07, 6/8/10,   62635.               addresses the
 Ozone NAAQS.                                                   6/9/10                        following CAA
                                                                                elements or
                                                                                portions thereof:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(A), (B),
                                                                                (C), (D)(ii), (E),
                                                                                (F), (G), (H),
                                                                                (J), (K), (L), and
                                                                                (M).
                                   ...................   11/13/07, 12/  2/25/14 [Insert      This action
                                                        13/07, 8/25/11   Federal Register     addresses the PSD
                                                                         page number where    related elements
                                                                         the document         of the following
                                                                         begins].             CAA requirements:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)
                                                                                (II).
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure   Statewide..........   7/10/08, 9/2/  10/11/11; 76 FR      This action
 Requirements for the 1997 PM2.5                        08, 6/8/10, 6/   62635.               addresses the
 NAAQS.                                                   9/10, 4/1/08                        following CAA
                                                                                elements or
                                                                                portions thereof:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(A), (B),
                                                                                (C), (D)(ii), (E),
                                                                                (F), (G), (H),
                                                                                (J), (K), (L), and
                                                                                (M).
                                   ...................  11/13/07, 7/10/ 2/25/14 [Insert      This action
                                                        08, 9/2/08, 8/   Federal Register     addresses the PSD
                                                                 25/11   page number where    related elements
                                                                         the document         of the following
                                                                         begins].             CAA requirements:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(C),
                                                                                (D)(i)(II), and
                                                                                (J).
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure   Statewide..........   8/30/10, 4/1/  10/11/11; 76 FR      This action
 Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5                                    11   62635.               addresses the
 NAAQS.                                                                                following CAA
                                                                                elements or
                                                                                portions thereof:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(A), (B),
                                                                                (C), (D)(ii), (E),
                                                                                (F), (G), (H),
                                                                                (J), (K), (L), and
                                                                                (M).
                                   ...................   4/1/11, 8/25/  2/25/14 [Insert      This action
                                                                    11   Federal Register     addresses the PSD
                                                                         page number where    related elements
                                                                         the document         of the following
                                                                         begins].             CAA requirements:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(C),
                                                                                (D)(i)(II), and
                                                                                (J).
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure   Statewide..........          3/9/12  9/24/13, 78 FR       This action
 Requirements for the 2008 Lead                                          58462.               addresses the
 NAAQS.                                                                                following CAA
                                                                                elements or
                                                                                portions thereof:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(A), (B),
                                                                                (C) (for
                                                                                enforcement and
                                                                                regulation of
                                                                                minor sources),
                                                                                (D)(i)(I),
                                                                                (D)(i)(II) (for
                                                                                the visibility
                                                                                protection
                                                                                portion), (D)(ii),
                                                                                (E)(i), (E)(iii),
                                                                                (F), (G), (H),
                                                                                (J), (K), (L), and
                                                                                (M).
                                   ...................         8/25/11  2/25/14 [Insert      This action
                                                                         Federal Register     addresses the PSD
                                                                         page number where    related elements
                                                                         the document         of the following
                                                                         begins].             CAA requirements:
                                                                                110(a)(2)(C),
                                                                                (D)(i)(II), and
                                                                                (J).

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2014-03640 Filed 2-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 60628]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23954]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-210-000]

ENGIE 2020 ProjectCo-NH1, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
ENGIE 2020 ProjectCo-NH1 LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 16, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 27, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-23954 Filed 11-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 7, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26351-26354]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11699]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0399; FRL-9963-25-Region 9]

Air Plan Approval; Nevada, Lake Tahoe; Second 10-Year Carbon
Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve revisions to the State of Nevada's (``State'') April
3, 2012 state implementation plan (SIP) submission and the State's
August 26, 2016 supplement to their 2012 submittal. The State submitted
these two SIP revisions for the Lake Tahoe, Nevada carbon monoxide (CO)
area to address the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirement to submit by the
eighth year of the first maintenance plan a second 10-year maintenance
plan.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 7, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0399. All

documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not
publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Kelly, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4151<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On March 10, 2017 (82 FR 13235), the EPA published a direct final
rule (DFR) approving two SIP revisions submitted by the Nevada Division
of Environmental Protection. On April 3, 2012, the State submitted to
the EPA a CO maintenance plan as a SIP revision. This 2012 maintenance
plan was intended to meet the CAA requirement (see CAA section 175A(b))
to submit a second maintenance plan. The CAA requires that, in the
eighth year of an area's first 10-year maintenance plan, a second
maintenance plan be submitted covering an additional ten years beyond
the first 10-year period. Subsequently, on August 26, 2016, the State
submitted a supplement to their 2012 submittal.
    In the March 10, 2017 DFR, the EPA also approved a surrogate
monitoring method for the State to monitor ambient levels of CO in the
area. This surrogate monitoring method was described in both the 2012
submittal and 2016 supplement, with the 2016 supplement containing the
State's final intended method.
    In the March 10, 2017 DFR, the EPA stated that if adverse comments
were received by April 10, 2017, the EPA would publish a timely
withdrawal and address the comments in a subsequent final rule based on
the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR), also published on March 10,
2017 (82 FR 13269).
    In this instance, the EPA received an adverse comment on the
alternative monitoring strategy and attempted to withdraw the DFR prior
to the effective date of May 9, 2017. However, the EPA inadvertently
did not withdraw the DFR prior to that date and the rule prematurely
became effective on May 9, 2017, revising the State's SIP to include
the 2012 submittal and 2016 supplement on that date.
    In today's final rule, the EPA is responding to the comment
submitted on the EPA's proposed approval of revisions to the State's
SIP, is approving the 2012 SIP submittal and 2016 supplement into the
SIP, and is amending the effective date of the regulations' inclusion
in the SIP to correct our failure to withdraw the DFR (after the EPA
received an adverse public comment) prior to the May 9, 2017 effective
date of the DFR.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and the EPA's Analysis

    As described in the DFR, the State's 2012 submittal was a limited
maintenance plan (LMP). A LMP is appropriate for CO areas that are
below 85 percent of the 8-hour CO national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). The following are the key elements of a LMP for CO:
Attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring network,
verification of continued attainment, contingency plan, and conformity
determinations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See DFR footnote 1 for a further discussion of LMP
requirements (82 FR 13235, March 10, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2012 plan contains the following sections to address these
elements: (1) An introductory section containing a general discussion
of plan approvals for the area and its redesignation to attainment; (2)
a maintenance plan section including subsections on monitoring data for
the area, air quality trends and background on the State's intention to
discontinue monitoring CO at the only remaining gaseous CO ambient
monitor in the Lake Tahoe basin located at Harvey's Resort and Hotel in
Stateline, Nevada (hereinafter, the ''Harvey's monitor''); (3) a
section titled ''Verification of Continued Attainment'' that addresses
population change, traffic volumes, meteorology and the State's
surrogate monitoring method; (4) contingency measures for the area; and
(5) transportation conformity requirements.
    The 2016 supplement revises several sections of the 2012 plan and
contains an emissions inventory. The DFR describes our evaluation of
the 2012 plan and 2016 supplement as they pertain to each of the
required LMP elements.\2\ Although we approved the State's surrogate
monitoring method in the DFR, we took no action on the State's monitor
shutdown request and anticipate acting on the request in a separate
action after we review the State's annual network plan and finalize
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the DFR we also noted that for this area, the initial
maintenance period extended through 2014 and that the second 10-year
maintenance period therefore extends through 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in the DFR, this action incorporates the 2012 plan, as
amended by the 2016 supplement, and specific portions of the 2016
supplement itself, into the federally enforceable SIP. Together, these
two submittals meet the applicable CAA requirements, and the EPA has
determined they are sufficient to provide for maintenance of the CO
NAAQS over the course of the second 10-year maintenance period through
2024.

III. Public Comment and the EPA's Response

    The EPA received an adverse comment from an anonymous commenter
(``commenter'') on March 14, 2017.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ We note that, although we did receive another comment
(regarding ``chemtrails''), we believe the comment is immaterial to
the purpose of this action, and we are not addressing the comment in
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment Summary: The commenter noted their support for the EPA's
action, stating that it would have a positive effect on the environment
and would benefit the public. However, the commenter went on to comment
adversely on the EPA's approval of the State's surrogate monitoring
method, because monitoring methods are important to safeguard against a
possible return of high levels of CO occurring in the region again, and
the plan the EPA was approving did not offer any scenarios for
reinstating monitoring.
    Response: The EPA acknowledges the commenter's support. However, we
disagree with some of the assertions and conclusions in the comment.
First, the text the commenter quoted from our action was taken from the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The text the commenter quoted was
that monitoring may be discontinued if the monitor in question has not
measured violations of the applicable NAAQS in the previous five years.
This text is not something that the EPA was proposing to approve in our
action, but rather is text from the existing CFR (40 CFR part 58),
that, in a general sense, describes the circumstances that the EPA
evaluates in determining whether to allow discontinuation of a monitor.
We are not acting on a general policy regarding the circumstances under
which ambient monitoring may be discontinued, nor are we acting on a
specific instance of a monitor's discontinuation. Rather, we said in
the DFR that we are not taking action on the State's request to shut
down the Harvey's monitor, and that the EPA would respond to the
State's

request in a separate action. We are instead approving a surrogate
monitoring method for the State to use in the area.
    In addition, we believe the commenter is factually incorrect in
stating that nothing is offered to reinstate ambient CO monitors ``if
CO were ever to plague the region again.'' To the contrary, the EPA
explained in the DFR the circumstances under which ambient monitoring
would be re-started. The surrogate monitoring method is a method of
monitoring that relies on indirect indicators (traffic counts) to be
monitored during the entire second maintenance period, and that have in
fact already commenced. The EPA has already received several years'
worth of traffic count reports from the State. The surrogate monitoring
method using traffic counts is an ongoing effort of the State,
performed at two locations in the area. Further, if the traffic counts
rise above trigger levels, the State will re-start ambient monitoring.
Lastly, once ambient monitoring is triggered, specific stringent
conditions must be met to discontinue ambient CO monitoring. This will
be the case even if the EPA, in a separate future action, approves the
State's 2012 request to discontinue ambient CO monitoring. That is,
even if the EPA approves the shutdown of the Harvey's ambient CO
monitor per the State's 2012 request, a triggered re-start of the
monitor (``triggered monitoring'') would set in motion specific
requirements before triggered monitoring could be discontinued.
Regardless of the status of ambient CO monitoring, the State's traffic
counts at two locations remain in place and are required by today's
action to be continued throughout the maintenance period, through the
end of 2024. The commenter did not provide any data or rationale for
why monitoring methods should be addressed further.

IV. Final Action

    The EPA is approving revisions to the Nevada SIP. The revisions
incorporate the 2012 maintenance plan and 2016 supplement. The EPA is
also amending the effective date of the inclusion of these revisions to
the State's SIP because the revisions were added to the SIP prematurely
on May 9, 2017, when the EPA did not withdraw its DFR after receiving a
comment on our approval of the State's two SIP submittals. This rule
responds to the comment received, finalizes our approval and corrects
the effective date for inclusion of the State's two submittals into the
SIP.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     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 the 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 the 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, that includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The 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 August 7, 2017. 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 approving the revisions to the State of Nevada's SIP
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 23, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart DD--Nevada

0
2. Section 52.1470, paragraph (e) is amended by adding, under the table
heading ``Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada,''
two entries ``2012 Revision to the Nevada State Implementation Plan for
Carbon Monoxide, April 2012'' and ``2016 Supplement to Nevada's 2nd 10-
Year CO Limited Maintenance Plan at Lake Tahoe, August 26, 2016'' after
the entry ``Addendum to the October 27, 2003 letter of transmittal of
the redesignation request and maintenance plan,'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                   EPA-Approved Nevada Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Applicable
     Name of SIP provision          geographic or         State       EPA approval date        Explanation
                                 nonattainment area  submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           AIR QUALITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE STATE OF NEVADA \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
2012 Revision to the Nevada      Nevada portion of         4/3/2012  [INSERT Federal     Adopted on 4/3/2012.
 State Implementation Plan for    Lake Tahoe Basin--                  Register            Approval excludes
 Carbon Monoxide, April 2012.     portions of                         CITATION] (6/7/     sections 3.2.4 and 4.
                                  Carson City,                        2017).              With 2016 supplement,
                                  Douglas and                                             fulfills requirement
                                  Washoe counties.                                        for second ten-year
                                                                                maintenance plan.
2016 Supplement to Nevada's 2nd  Nevada portion of        8/26/2016  [INSERT Federal     Adopted on 8/26/2016.
 10-Year CO Limited Maintenance   Lake Tahoe Basin--                  Register            Approval includes
 Plan at Lake Tahoe, August 26,   portions of                         CITATION] (6/7/     revised sections 3.2.4
 2016.                            Carson City,                        2017).              and 4 (alternative CO
                                  Douglas and                                             monitoring strategy
                                  Washoe counties.                                        and contingency plan),
                                                                                2011 emissions
                                                                                inventory and 2024
                                                                                projected emissions
                                                                                inventory (Attachment
                                                                                A), evidence of public
                                                                                participation
                                                                                (Attachment B) and
                                                                                revised table of
                                                                                contents for 2012
                                                                                submittal (Attachment
                                                                                F). Excludes
                                                                                Attachments C, D and
                                                                                E.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * * * * * * *
\1\ The organization of this table generally follows from the organization of the State of Nevada's original
  1972 SIP, which was divided into 12 sections. Nonattainment and maintenance plans, among other types of plans,
  are listed under Section 5 (Control Strategy). Lead SIPs and Small Business Stationary Source Technical and
  Environmental Compliance Assistance SIPs are listed after Section 12 followed by nonregulatory or quasi-
  regulatory statutory provisions approved into the SIP. Regulatory statutory provisions are listed in 40 CFR
  52.1470(c).

[FR Doc. 2017-11699 Filed 6-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


During our look at comments and the new science assessment related to a recent study by Burnett and colleagues in multiple Canadian cities ( 2004), some questions came up about the peak values and the PM analysis. I spoke with Dr. Burnett by phone on July 6th to see if we could some additional information, and he sent the following.

John Bachmann U. S. EPA C404 04 Research Triangle Park, NC27711 Voice 919 541 5359 Fax 919 541 2464 email Bachmann. JohnD@ epa. gov  Forwarded by Johnd Bachmann/ RTP/ USEPA/ US on 07/ 09/ 2006 12: 13 AM

Rick Burnett < Rick_ Burnett@ hc sc. gc. ca>

07/ 07/ 2006 04: 22 PM T o Johnd Bachmann/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA c c S u b j e c t Re: Canadian TEOM data attached is the distribution of the PM2.5 TEOM data from jan 1, 1998 to dec 31, 2000 for each of the 11 cities also, the TEOM PM2.5 coefficient ( in a single pollutant model) from the AEH paper is 1.13% with a standard error of 0.466% ( this is not included in the paper  do not know why  just getting old I guess)

hope this helps, any other info you need please email