[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51581-51585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-25012]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[VA-T5-2001-01a; FRL-7073-6]


Clean Air Act Full Approval of Operating Permit Program; Virginia

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to fully approve the 
operating permit program of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Virginia's 
operating permit program was submitted in response to the Clean Air Act 
(CAA) Amendments of 1990 that required States to develop, and submit to 
EPA, programs for issuing operating permits to all major stationary 
sources and to certain other sources within the States' jurisdiction. 
The EPA granted final interim approval of Virginia's operating permit 
program on June 10, 1997, as corrected on March 19, 1998. Virginia 
amended its operating permit program to address deficiencies identified 
in the interim approval action and this action approves those 
amendments. Any parties interested in commenting on this action 
granting full approval of Virginia's title V operating permit program 
should do so at this time. A more detailed description of Virginia's 
submittal and EPA's evaluation are included in a Technical Support 
Document (TSD) 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.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 26, 2001 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by November 9, 
2001. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to Makeba Morris, Chief, 
Permits and Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP11, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the documents relevant to 
this action are available for public inspection during normal business 
hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 
and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, 
Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Campbell, Permits and Technical 
Assessment Branch at (215) 814-2196 or by e-mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 20, 2000, the Commonwealth of 
Virginia submitted amendments to its State operating permit program. 
These amendments are the subject of this document and this section 
provides additional information on the amendments by addressing the 
following questions:

What is the State operating permit program?
What are the State operating permit program requirements?
What is being addressed in this document?
What is not being addressed in this document?
What changes to Virginia's operating permit program is EPA 
approving?
How does Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law 
affect its operating permit program?
What action is being taken by EPA?

What Is the State Operating Permit Program?

    The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 required all States to develop 
operating permit programs that meet certain federal criteria. When 
implementing the operating permit programs, the States require certain 
sources of air pollution to obtain permits that contain all of their 
applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The focus of the 
operating permit program is to improve enforcement by issuing each 
source a permit that consolidates all of its applicable CAA 
requirements into a federally-enforceable document. By consolidating 
all of the applicable requirements for a given air pollution source 
into an operating permit, the source, the public, and the State 
environmental agency can more easily understand what CAA requirements 
apply and how compliance with those requirements is determined.
    Sources required to obtain an operating permit under this program 
include ``major'' sources of air pollution and certain other sources 
specified in the CAA or in the EPA's implementing regulations. For 
example, all sources regulated under the acid rain program, regardless 
of size, must obtain operating permits. Examples of ``major'' sources 
include those that have the potential to emit 100 tons per year or more 
of volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide, 
nitrogen oxides, or particulate matter (PM10); those that emit 10 tons 
per year of any single hazardous air pollutant (HAP) specifically 
listed under the CAA; or those that emit 25 tons per year or more of a 
combination of HAPs. In areas that are not meeting the national ambient 
air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide, or 
particulate matter, major sources are defined by the gravity of the 
nonattainment classification. For example, in the counties and cities 
in northern Virginia that are part of the metropolitan Washington, DC 
serious ozone nonattainment area, major sources include those with the 
potential of emitting 50 tons per year or more of volatile organic 
compounds or nitrogen oxides.

[[Page 51582]]

What Are the State Operating Permit Program Requirements?

    The minimum program elements for an approvable operating permit 
program are those mandated by title V of the Clean Air Act Amendments 
of 1990 and established by EPA's implementing regulations at title 40, 
part 70--``State Operating Permit Programs'' in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (40 CFR part 70). Title V required state and local air 
pollution control agencies to develop operating permit programs and 
submit them to EPA for approval by November 15, 1993. Under title V, 
State and local air pollution control agencies that implement operating 
permit programs are called ``permitting authorities''.
    Where an operating permit program substantially, but not fully, met 
the program approval criteria outlined at 40 CFR part 70, EPA granted 
interim approval contingent on the permit authority revising its 
program to correct those programmatic deficiencies that prevented full 
approval. Virginia's original operating permit program substantially, 
but not fully, met the requirements of 40 CFR part 70. Therefore, EPA 
granted final interim approval of the program in a rulemaking published 
on June 10, 1997, as corrected on March 19, 1998. [See 62 FR 31516 and 
63 FR 13346.] The interim approval notice identified six outstanding 
deficiencies that had to be corrected in order for Virginia's program 
to receive full approval. On November 20, 2000, the Commonwealth of 
Virginia submitted amendments to its operating permit program to EPA to 
address its outstanding program deficiencies.
    Virginia's November 20, 2000 submittal satisfies the Commonwealth's 
requirement to submit program amendments to EPA by June 1, 2001. This 
deadline was established by EPA in order to allow for time for EPA 
review and action on program amendments such that operating permit 
programs with interim approval status could be considered for full 
approval by December 1, 2001. After December 1, 2001, those 
jurisdictions lacking fully-approved operating permit programs will, by 
operation of law, be subject to a federal operating permit program 
implemented by EPA under 40 CFR part 71. [See 65 FR 32035.]

What Is Being Addressed in This Document?

    On November 20, 2000, Virginia submitted amendments to its 
currently EPA-approved title V operating permit program. In general, 
Virginia amended its operating permit program regulations to address 
deficiencies identified by EPA when it granted final interim approval 
of Virginia's program in 1997. In the November 20, 2000 submittal, 
Virginia also provided revisions to its existing program to improve 
certain aspects and to make minor regulatory corrections. These 
additional revisions are the subject of a separate rulemaking action as 
more fully discussed below.

What Is Not Being Addressed in This Document?

    As part of its November 20, 2000 submittal, Virginia also submitted 
additional revisions to its currently EPA-approved title V operating 
permit program which are unrelated to the interim approval 
deficiencies. These program revisions are comprised of technical and 
administrative corrections which do not bear on the program's ability 
to fully meet the substantive requirements of 40 CFR part 70. These 
revisions were submitted pursuant to 40 CFR 70.4(i) which authorizes 
States with approved programs to initiate program revisions. Since 
these revisions do not directly affect the approval status of 
Virginia's program according to 40 CFR 70.4(d) and 40 CFR 70.4(e), they 
will be considered in a separate rulemaking action.
    On December 11, 2000, EPA announced a 90-day comment period for 
members of the public to identify deficiencies they perceive exist in 
State and local agency operating permits programs. [See 65 FR 77376.] 
The public was able to comment on all currently-approved operating 
permit programs, regardless of whether they have been granted full or 
interim approval. The December 11, 2000 notice instructed the public to 
not include in their comments any program deficiencies that were 
previously identified by EPA when the subject program was granted 
interim approval. Since those program deficiencies have already been 
identified and permitting authorities have been working to correct 
them, EPA will solicit comments when taking action on those corrective 
measures.
    The EPA stated that it will consider information received from the 
public pursuant to the December 11, 2000 notice and determine whether 
it agrees or disagrees with the purported deficiencies. Where EPA 
agrees there is a deficiency, it will publish a notice of deficiency 
consistent with 40 CFR 70.4(i) and 40 CFR 70.10(b). The Agency will at 
the same time publish a notice identifying any alleged problems that we 
do not agree are deficiencies. For programs that have not yet received 
full approval, such as Virginia's program, EPA will publish these 
notices by December 1, 2001.
    The EPA received numerous comments in response to the December 11, 
2000 notice announcing the start of the 90-day public comment period. 
As part of those comments, EPA Region III received comments germane to 
Virginia's currently-approved operating permit program. The Agency will 
respond to those comments in a separate notice(s) by December 1, 2001 
as required by the December 11, 2000 notice.
    The EPA is not addressing any comments received pursuant to the 
December 11, 2000 notice in this document. As mentioned above, comments 
provided in accordance with the December 11, 2000 notice were to 
address shortcomings that had not previously been identified by EPA as 
deficiencies necessitating interim, rather than full, approval of a 
state's operating permit program. This action granting full approval of 
Virginia's operating permit program only addresses program deficiencies 
identified when EPA granted interim approval to Virginia's program in 
1997. Therefore, any persons wishing to comment on this action should 
do so at this time.

What Changes to Virginia's Program Is EPA Approving?

    The EPA has reviewed Virginia's November 20, 2000 program 
amendments in conjunction with the portion of Virginia's program that 
was earlier approved on an interim basis. Based on this review, EPA is 
granting full approval of Virginia's amended operating permit program. 
The EPA has determined that the amendments to Virginia's operating 
permit program adequately address the six deficiencies identified by 
EPA in its June 10, 1997 rulemaking action granting interim approval. 
Virginia's operating permit program, including the amendments submitted 
on November 20, 2000 to address the six program deficiencies, fully 
meets the minimum requirements of 40 CFR part 70. The following 
describes the changes made to Virginia's operating permit program to 
address the six deficiencies.

Changes to Virginia's Program That Correct Interim Approval 
Deficiencies

1. Units Emitting Up to 100 Tons Per Year (TPY) of Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Inappropriately Considered To Be Insignificant

    Virginia's regulations originally defined any emission unit 
emitting less than 100 tons per year (TPY) of carbon monoxide (CO) as 
an insignificant activity. Virginia amended 9 VAC 5-80-720 B 3 to state 
that any emission unit

[[Page 51583]]

emitting less than five TPY of CO may be considered an insignificant 
activity. This amendment is consistent with 40 CFR part 70 and with 
what EPA has required of other similar insignificant activities 
regulations.

2. Applications Not Required To Include Sufficient Information To 
Identify All Applicable Requirements for Emission Units Deemed 
Insignificant

    Virginia's original program inappropriately included a provision in 
the applicability section of the operating permit regulations, at 9 VAC 
5-80-50 F, which states that ``[t]he provisions of 9 VAC 5-80-90 
concerning application requirements shall not apply to insignificant 
activities designated in 9 VAC 5-80-720 with the exception of the 
requirements of 9 VAC 5-80-90 D 1 and 9 VAC 5-80-710.'' A similar 
provision is provided in the applicability section of the acid rain 
operating permit regulations at 9 VAC 5-80-360 E. As originally worded, 
permittees were required to provide only emissions information for 
insignificant activities, but not any additional information which 
might be required to identify applicable requirements when emissions 
information alone is not sufficient.
    Virginia amended 9 VAC 5-80-50 F and 9 VAC 5-80-360 E by removing 
the language cited above in its entirety. By removing this language, 
permittees are obligated to provide any additional information 
necessary to identify applicable requirements. These amendments are 
consistent with 40 CFR part 70 and with what EPA has required of other 
similar regulations.

3. Permits Not Required To Include Applicable Requirements for Emission 
Units Deemed Insignificant

    Virginia's original program contained an inappropriate provision at 
9 VAC 5-80-110 A 1 which stated that ``For major sources subject to 
this rule, the board shall include in the permit all applicable 
requirements for all emission units in the major source except those 
deemed insignificant in Article 4 (9 VAC 5-80-710 et. seq.) of this 
part.'' Virginia's acid rain operating permit regulations essentially 
repeated this deficiency at 9 VAC 5-80-490 A 1.
    Virginia amended 9 VAC 5-80-110 A 1 and 9 VAC 5-80-490 A 1 by 
removing the exception provided to insignificant emission units of the 
requirement to include all applicable requirements in the permit. The 
amended regulations simply require all applicable requirements for all 
emission units to be included in the permit. These amendments are 
consistent with 40 CFR part 70 and with what EPA has required of other 
similar regulations.

4. Emergency or Standby Compressors, Pumps, and/or Generators 
Inappropriately Defined as Insignificant

    In its original insignificant activities regulations at 9 VAC 5-80-
720 C 4, Virginia designated ``Internal combustion powered compressors 
and pumps used for emergency replacement or standby service, operating 
at 500 hours per year or less'' as insignificant emission units. The 
regulations also cited emergency generators of various horsepower 
ratings, depending on whether or not the generators are gasoline, 
diesel, or natural gas powered. As originally worded, 9 VAC 5-80-720 C 
4 was confusing because it defined emergency or standby compressors or 
pumps as insignificant, and then further qualified the units considered 
insignificant by discussing various sizes of emergency generators. 
Furthermore, the engines and generators of the sizes provided by the 
original version of the regulations would likely be large enough to 
trigger applicable requirements or emit pollutants in significant 
amounts.
    Virginia amended 9 VAC 5-80-720 C 4 to clarify its insignificant 
activity provisions for emergency pumps, compressors, or generators and 
also reduced the horsepower size designations sufficiently to exclude 
any units which would likely trigger an applicable requirement or emit 
pollutants in significant amounts. These amendments are consistent with 
40 CFR part 70 and with what EPA has required of other similar 
insignificant activities regulations.

5. ``Off-Permit Changes'' Defined as Including Changes Subject to 
Requirements Under Title IV

    The EPA was concerned with two provisions in the Commonwealth's 
original acid rain operating permit regulations. According to 40 CFR 
70.4(b)(14), permittee's are allowed to make certain so-called ``off-
permit'' changes that are not addressed or prohibited by the permit 
without obtaining a permit revision. However, 40 CFR 70.4(b)(15) does 
not extend this flexibility to changes that are modifications under 
title I of the CAA or those that are subject to any of the acid rain 
requirements under title IV of the CAA. Virginia's regulations allowed 
``off-permit'' changes at 9 VAC 5-80-280 C 1 and 5-80-680 C 1, however, 
they failed to exclude from eligibility changes that are subject to 
requirements under title IV.
    Virginia amended 9 VAC 5-80-280 C 1 and 5-80-680 C 1 to exclude 
changes that are subject to requirements under title IV from being 
eligible for ``off-permit'' changes. These amendments are consistent 
with 40 CFR part 70 and with what EPA has required of other similar 
regulations.

6. Affirmative Defense of Emergency Provisions Deficient

    In its operating permit program, Virginia uses the term 
``malfunction'' instead of ``emergency.'' Virginia's definition of this 
term is consistent with how EPA defines ``emergency.'' However, 
Virginia's original operating permit regulations at 9 VAC 5-80-250 B 4 
and 5-80-650 B 4 allowed sources to claim the affirmative defense for 
malfunctions which last less than one hour, but did not require the 
permittee to notify the Commonwealth of these malfunctions. 
Malfunctions lasting longer than one hour were required to be reported. 
Virginia's affirmative defense provisions were less stringent than 40 
CFR 70.6(g) which requires the demonstration of the affirmative defense 
of an malfunction, including the prompt notification of the permitting 
authority of the malfunction. A demonstration is required for all 
malfunctions seeking an affirmative defense, including those 
malfunctions lasting less than one hour.
    Virginia amended 9 VAC 5-80-250 B 4 and 5-80-650 B 4 to expand the 
requirement to report malfunctions of any duration, not only those that 
occurred for one hour or more. The amended regulations also require the 
prompt notification of malfunctions within two working days of their 
occurrence. These amendments are consistent with 40 CFR part 70 and 
with what EPA has required of other similar regulations.

How Does Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege 
Law Affect Its State Operating Permit Program?

    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

[[Page 51584]]

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 environment; or (4) that are required by law.
    On January 12, 1997, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the 
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege 
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents 
and information ``required by federal law to maintain program 
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce 
federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less 
stringent than their federal counterparts. * * *'' The opinion 
concludes that ``[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, 
1997 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute 
inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since 
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal 
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with 
federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and 
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its 
operating permit program consistent with the federal requirements. In 
any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege 
and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any 
impact on federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke 
its authority under the Clean Air Act, including, for example, sections 
113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions 
of the state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In 
addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 of the Clean Air Act is 
likewise unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity 
law.

What Action Is Being Taken by EPA?

    The Commonwealth of Virginia has satisfactorily addressed the six 
program deficiencies identified when EPA granted final interim approval 
of its operating permit program on June 10, 1997, as corrected on March 
19, 1998. The operating permit program amendments submitted by Virginia 
on November 20, 2000 considered together with that portion of 
Virginia's operating permit program that was earlier approved on an 
interim basis fully satisfy the minimum requirements of 40 CFR part 70 
and the Clean Air Act. Therefore, EPA is granting full approval of the 
Commonwealth of Virginia's title V operating permit program.
    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's 
Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve 
as the proposal to approve the operating permit program if adverse 
comments are filed relevant to the issues discussed in this action. 
This rule will be effective on November 26, 2001 without further notice 
unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 9, 2001. If EPA 
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take 
effect. The EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final 
rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting 
must do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse 
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that 
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an 
adverse comment.

Administrative Requirements

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. 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 approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and 
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves 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 (Public Law 104-4). This 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 approves a State rule implementing a Federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 
because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing State operating permit program 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 State operating permit

[[Page 51585]]

program submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a State 
operating permit program submission, to use VCS in place of a State 
operating permit program submission that otherwise satisfies the 
provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of 
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this 
rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors 
and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal 
standard for affected conduct. The EPA has complied with Executive 
Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings 
implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney General's 
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 
Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order. This rule 
does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a 
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 10, 2001. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action fully approving Virginia's title V 
operating permit program may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 25, 2001.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.


    Appendix A of part 70 of title 40, chapter I, of the Code of 
Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 70--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows:

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

    2. Appendix A to part 70 is amended by adding paragraph (b) in the 
entry for Virginia to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 70--Approval Status of State and Local Operating 
Permits Programs

* * * * *

Virginia

* * * * *
    (b) The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality submitted 
operating permit program amendments on November 20, 2000. The rule 
revisions contained in the November 20, 2000 submittal adequately 
addressed the conditions of the interim approval effective on March 
12, 1998. The Commonwealth is hereby granted final full approval 
effective on November 26, 2001.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-25012 Filed 10-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P