[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10451-10458]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04087]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0006; FRL-9907-10-Region-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing
approval of a revision to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia through the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Virginia's SIP revision
addresses requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's rules that
require states to submit periodic reports describing progress towards
reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a
determination of the adequacy of the Commonwealth's existing SIP
addressing regional haze (regional haze SIP). EPA is proposing approval
of Virginia's SIP revision on the basis that it addresses the progress
report and adequacy determination requirements for the first
implementation period for regional haze.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 27, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2014-0006, by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: [email protected].
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0006, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director,
[[Page 10452]]
Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0006. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of Virginia's
submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irene Shandruk, (215) 814-2166, or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Requirements for the Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs and
Adequacy Determinations
III. EPA's Analysis of Virginia's Regional Haze Progress Report SIP
and Adequacy Determination
IV. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
V. EPA's Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
States are required to submit a progress report in the form of a
SIP revision every five years that evaluates progress towards the RPGs
for each mandatory Class I Federal area within the state and in each
mandatory Class I Federal area outside the state which may be affected
by emissions from within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). States are
also required to submit, at the same time as the progress report, a
determination of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze
SIP. See 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report SIP is due five
years after submittal of the initial regional haze SIP. On October 4,
2010, Virginia DEQ submitted the Commonwealth's first regional haze SIP
in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On June 13, 2012, EPA finalized a limited approval of
Virginia's October 4, 2010 regional haze SIP to address the first
implementation period for regional haze (77 FR 35287). In a separate
action, published on June 7, 2012 (77 FR 33642), EPA finalized a
limited disapproval of the Virginia regional haze SIP because of the
Commonwealth's reliance on the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to
meet certain regional haze requirements, which EPA replaced in
August 2011 with the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) (76 FR
48208, August 8, 2011). In the aforementioned June 7, 2012 action,
EPA finalized a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Virginia to
replace the Commonwealth's reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR.
Following these EPA actions, the DC Circuit issued a decision in EME
Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012),
cert. granted 133 U.S. 2857 (2013) vacating CSAPR and keeping CAIR
in place pending the promulgation of a valid replacement rule. EPA
believes that the EME Homer City decision impacts the reasoning that
formed the basis for EPA's limited disapproval of Virginia's
regional haze SIP based on Virginia's reliance upon CAIR and expects
to propose an appropriate action regarding the limited approval and
limited disapproval of the regional haze SIP upon final resolution
of EME Homer City.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 8, 2013, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted, as a
SIP revision (progress report SIP), a report on progress made in the
first implementation period towards RPGs for Class I areas in the
Commonwealth and Class I areas outside the Commonwealth that are
affected by emissions from Virginia's sources. This progress report SIP
and accompanying cover letter also included a determination that the
Commonwealth's existing regional haze SIP requires no substantive
revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility
improvement and emissions reduction goals for 2018. EPA is proposing to
approve Virginia's progress report SIP on the basis that it satisfies
the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 51.308(h).
II. Requirements for the Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs and
Adequacy Determinations
Under 40 CFR 51.308(g), states must submit a regional haze progress
report as a SIP revision every five years and must address, at a
minimum, the seven elements found in 40 CFR 51.308(g). As described in
further detail in section III of this rulemaking action, 40 CFR
51.308(g) requires: (1) A description of the status of measures in the
approved regional haze SIP; (2) a summary of emissions reductions
achieved; (3) an assessment of visibility conditions for each Class I
area in the state; (4) an analysis of changes in emissions from sources
and activities within the state; (5) an assessment of any significant
changes in anthropogenic emissions within or outside the state that
have limited or impeded progress in Class I areas impacted by the
state's sources; (6) an assessment of the sufficiency of the approved
regional haze SIP; and (7) a review of the state's visibility
monitoring strategy.
Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are required to submit, at the same
time as the progress report SIP, a determination of the adequacy of
their existing regional haze SIP and to take one of four possible
actions based on information in the progress report. As described in
further detail in section III of this rulemaking action, 40 CFR
51.308(h) requires states to either: (1) Submit a negative declaration
to EPA that no further substantive revision to the state's existing
regional haze SIP is needed; (2) provide notification to EPA (and other
state(s) that participated in the regional planning process) if the
state determines that its existing regional haze SIP is or may be
inadequate to ensure reasonable progress at one or more Class I areas
due to emissions from sources in other state(s) that participated in
the regional planning process, and collaborate with
[[Page 10453]]
these other state(s) to develop additional strategies to address
deficiencies; (3) provide notification with supporting information to
EPA if the state determines that its existing regional haze SIP is or
may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress at one or more Class I
areas due to emissions from sources in another country; or (4) revise
its regional haze SIP to address deficiencies within one year if the
state determines that its existing regional haze SIP is or may be
inadequate to ensure reasonable progress in one or more Class I areas
due to emissions from sources within the state.
III. EPA's Analysis of Virginia's Regional Haze Progress Report and
Adequacy Determination
On November 8, 2013, Virginia submitted a SIP revision to address
progress made towards RPGs of Class I areas in the Commonwealth and
Class I areas outside the Commonwealth that are affected by emissions
from Virginia's sources. This progress report SIP also includes a
determination of the adequacy of the Commonwealth's existing regional
haze SIP.
Virginia has two Class I areas within its borders: James River Face
Wilderness Area (James River) and Shenandoah National Park
(Shenandoah). Virginia mentions in the progress report SIP that
Virginia sources were also identified, through an area of influence
modeling analysis based on back trajectories, as potentially impacting
nine Class I areas in five neighboring states: Dolly Sods Wilderness
Area in West Virginia; Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Joyce
Kilmer--Slickrock Wilderness Area in North Carolina and Tennessee;
Linville Gorge, Shining Rock and Swanquarter Wilderness Areas in North
Carolina; Cohutta and Wolf Island Wilderness Areas in Georgia; and Cape
Romaine Wilderness Area in South Carolina.
A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs
This section summarizes each of the seven elements that must be
addressed by the progress report under the provisions of 40 CFR
51.308(g); how Virginia's progress report SIP addressed each element;
and EPA's analysis and proposed determination as to whether the
Commonwealth satisfied each element.
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) require a description of
the status of implementation of all measures included in the regional
haze SIP for achieving RPGs for Class I areas both within and outside
the state. The Commonwealth of Virginia evaluated the status of all
measures included in its 2010 regional haze SIP in accordance with the
requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). Specifically, in its progress
report SIP, Virginia summarizes the status of the emissions reduction
measures that were included in the final iteration of the Visibility
Improvement--State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS)
regional haze emissions inventory and RPG modeling. The Commonwealth
also discusses the status of those measures that were not included in
the final VISTAS emissions inventory and were not relied upon in the
initial regional haze SIP to meet RPGs. The Commonwealth notes that the
emissions reductions from these measures, which are relied upon by
Virginia for reasonable progress, will help ensure Class I areas
impacted by Virginia sources achieve their RPGs. The measures include
applicable Federal programs (e.g., mobile source rules, Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards, Federal and state
consent agreements, and Federal and state control strategies for
electric generating units (EGUs) such as CAIR, CSAPR, and state multi-
pollutant regulations for EGUs). Virginia's summary includes a
discussion of the benefits associated with each measure and quantifies
those benefits wherever possible. In instances where implementation of
a measure did not occur on schedule, information is provided on the
source category and the measure's relative impact on the overall future
year emissions inventories. The progress report SIP also discusses the
status and implementation of the best available retrofit technology
(BART) determinations for BART sources in Virginia, the implementation
status of BART for sources in neighboring states, and the
implementation of a reasonable progress determination for one Virginia
source. Finally, Virginia's progress report SIP discusses
implementation of regulations and requirements developed after
Virginia's regional haze SIP was prepared which Virginia asserts will
provide extra assurance that Virginia's Class I areas will meet their
RPGs including the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) for EGUs, the
2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS), several control measures for volatile organic
compound (VOC) reductions, Federal consent decrees which include
SO2 and nitrogen oxide (NOX) reductions at
sources, and plant shutdowns.
In aggregate, as noted later in section III.A of this rulemaking
action, the emissions reductions from the identified measures are
expected to exceed significantly the original projections in Virginia's
regional haze SIP and result in lower emissions by 2018 than originally
projected. Virginia states that it did not expect reasonable progress
to be adversely impacted in any of the Class I areas in Virginia or
neighboring states by any of the changes to the emissions reductions
projected.
EPA proposes to find that Virginia's analysis adequately addresses
the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). The Commonwealth documents
the implementation status of measures from its regional haze SIP such
as regulations, Federal and state consent decrees, and BART
determinations in addition to describing additional measures that came
into effect since the VISTAS analysis for the Virginia regional haze
SIP was completed, including new regulations for EGUs, Federal consent
decrees, and unanticipated plant shutdowns. Virginia's progress report
also describes significant measures resulting from EPA regulations
other than the regional haze program as they pertain to Virginia
sources. The progress report SIP highlights the effect of several
Federal control measures both nationally and in the VISTAS region, and
when possible, in Virginia.
The Commonwealth's progress report discusses the status of key
control measures that the Commonwealth relied upon in the first
implementation period to make reasonable progress. In its regional haze
SIP, Virginia identified SO2 emissions from coal-fired EGUs
as a key contributor to regional haze in the VISTAS region and
identified the EGU sector as a major contributor to visibility
impairment at all Class I areas in the VISTAS region. The
Commonwealth's progress report SIP provides additional information on
EGU control strategies and the status of existing and future expected
controls for Virginia's EGUs, with updated actual SO2
emissions data for the years 2002-2012 reflecting large reductions of
SO2 through 2012. In its regional haze SIP, Virginia had
determined that no additional controls of non-EGU sources were
reasonable for the first implementation period.
Regarding the status of BART and reasonable progress control
requirements for sources in the Commonwealth, EPA finds Virginia's
progress report SIP adequately reviews the status of the Commonwealth's
four BART sources and its reasonable progress determination source by
mentioning that controls are currently operational at these sources or
that units
[[Page 10454]]
have been shutdown.\2\ Because the Commonwealth found no additional
controls to be reasonable for the first implementation period for
sources evaluated for reasonable progress in Virginia, no further
discussion of the status of controls was necessary in the progress
report SIP. EPA proposes to conclude that Virginia has adequately
addressed the status of control measures in its regional haze SIP as
required by the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) by discussing the
status of key measures that the Commonwealth relied upon in the first
implementation period to make reasonable progress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Virginia also identified 66 BART-subject sources in other
states determined to be in the area of influence of either James
River or Shenandoah using the Commonwealth's methodology for
determining sources eligible for a reasonable progress control
determination. EPA finds the progress report SIP adequately
summarizes the BART control determinations and their implementation
for these facilities in the surrounding States of Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Delaware, West Virginia, Tennessee, and
North Carolina.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2) require a summary of the
emissions reductions achieved in the state through the measures subject
to the requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). In its regional haze SIP
and progress report SIP, Virginia focused its assessment on the largest
contributor to visibility impairment, SO2 emissions from
EGUs. Virginia made this decision for the first implementation period
due to VISTAS' findings that sulfate accounted for more than 70 percent
of visibility-impairing pollution in the Southeast and that
SO2 point source emissions in 2018 represent more than 95
percent of the total projected SO2 emissions inventory.
Overall, Virginia states SO2 emissions have decreased
significantly in the Commonwealth. Virginia states there has been a
large reduction in SO2 emissions from EGUs, an 87 percent
decrease from 2002 to 2012, which resulted from many process and
operational changes, including SO2 control installations,
switches to cleaner fuels by emission units, retirements of units, and
curtailments of certain coal-fired operations. Based on utility
emissions data from 2002 through 2012 as reported in EPA's Clean Air
Markets Division (CAMD) database, Virginia indicates that actual
emissions of SO2 from the coal-fired EGU sector have dropped
from 216,341 tons per year (tpy) in 2002 to 28,345 tpy in 2012,
reflecting the 87 percent decrease.\3\ Additionally, the 2012 actual
emissions of SO2 (30,732 tpy) are substantially less than
originally projected in the 2018 modeling inventory (82,121 tpy).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In comparing 2002 and 2012 emissions to report the 87
percent decrease in SO2 emissions from the EGU sector,
Virginia excluded SO2 emissions from EGU sources which
did not report to CAMD in 2002 from the 2012 SO2
emissions of 28,345 tpy. The complete SO2 emissions from
all Virginia EGUs reporting to CAMD in 2012 is 30,732 tpy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While heat input to Virginia's EGUs has decreased approximately 27
percent from 2002 values, Virginia states in its progress report SIP
that SO2 and NOX emission rates for the coal-
fired EGUs have decreased by 82 percent for SO2 and 67
percent for NOX due to installation of controls and fuel
switches. Given these substantial reductions in emission rates,
Virginia states it expects the significant reductions of SO2
should be maintained even if heat inputs increase in the future.
Virginia states that similar progress in emissions reductions across
all VISTAS states have been observed between 2002 and 2012 as well.
Based on EPA's CAMD data, 2012 heat input data decreased only 8 percent
from 2002 values, while SO2 and NOX emission
rates declined 76 percent and 73 percent respectively. Virginia also
states in its progress report SIP that it expects additional
retirements of EGU sources through 2018 and asserts the remaining coal-
fired EGUs in Virginia have operational SO2 controls which
should greatly reduce the visibility impact of such sources on Class I
areas.
EPA proposes to conclude that Virginia has adequately addressed the
requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2) with its summary of the large
emissions reductions, particularly in SO2 and NOX
from EGUs, achieved in the Commonwealth through the measures in
Virginia's regional haze SIP. The Commonwealth provides estimates, and
where available, actual emissions reductions of SO2 (and
NOX) from EGUs in Virginia that have occurred since the
Commonwealth submitted its regional haze SIP. The Commonwealth
appropriately focused on SO2 emissions from its EGUs in its
progress report SIP because Virginia had previously identified these
emissions as the most significant contributors to visibility impairment
at James River and Shenandoah and at additional Class I areas that
Virginia sources impact. In addition, Virginia provides estimates, and
where available, actual emissions reductions for certain non-EGU
control measures that were in its regional haze SIP when addressing the
requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) for implementation status.
Because no additional controls were found to be reasonable for the
first implementation period for evaluated sources in Virginia for
reasonable progress, EPA proposes to find that no further discussion of
emissions reductions from controls was necessary in the progress report
SIP.
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3) require that states with
Class I areas provide the following information for the most impaired
and least impaired days for each area, with values expressed in terms
of five-year averages of these annual values: \4\ (1) Current
visibility conditions; (2) the difference between current visibility
conditions and baseline visibility conditions; and (3) the change in
visibility impairment over the past five years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The ``most impaired days'' and ``least impaired days'' in
the regional haze rule refers to the average visibility impairment
(measured in deciviews) for the twenty percent of monitored days in
a calendar year with the highest and lowest amount of visibility
impairment, respectively, averaged over a five-year period. See 40
CFR 51.301.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commonwealth provides visibility data for 2001 through 2011
that addresses the three requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3) for James
River and Shenandoah. In the Virginia regional haze SIP, for the 20%
worst days, Virginia established a RPG for James River of 6.7 deciview
(dv) reduction in visibility impairment by 2018, which is significantly
greater than the 4.2 dv reduction required to meet the uniform rate of
progress necessary to achieve a natural background condition of 11.1 dv
by 2064. For Shenandoah, Virginia established a RPG for the 20% worst
days of 7.4 dv reduction in visibility impairment by 2018, which is
significantly greater than the 4.2 dv reduction required to meet the
uniform rate of progress necessary to achieve the natural background
condition of 11.4 dv by 2064. Likewise, Virginia also adopted a RPG for
the 20% best days that would result in a 2.2 dv reduction in visibility
impairment for James River and 1.8 dv reduction in visibility
impairment for Shenandoah. Based on Virginia's analysis of emissions
reductions and visibility data for 2001-2011, Virginia states it is on
track to achieve its RPGs by 2018, visibility is improving at James
River and Shenandoah, and no additional controls on non-EGUs are needed
as SO2 emission reductions from EGUs are expected to
continue over the next five years.
EPA finds the difference between current and baseline visibility
and the five-year rolling averages for the most impaired (20% worst)
and least impaired (20% best) days at both Virginia Class I areas
indicates that visibility has significantly improved since 2001 (as
illustrated in Table 1 of this rulemaking action) and finds Virginia's
assessment that it is on track
[[Page 10455]]
to meet its RPGs at James River and Shenandoah reasonable given the
downward trend in visibility impairment and in SO2 emissions
from EGUs.
Table 1--Visibility Data for Virginia Class I Areas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James River Face Wilderness Area Shenandoah National Park
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20% Worst days 20% Best days 20% Worst days 20% Best days
Year ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-Year 5-Year 5-Year 5-Year
Annual average Annual average Annual average Annual average
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001............................................................ 29.5 ......... 14.5 ......... 29.2 ......... 13.2 .........
2002............................................................ 30.4 ......... 15.7 ......... 30.5 ......... 11.5 .........
2003............................................................ 28.4 ......... 12.9 ......... 28.9 ......... 9.5 .........
2004............................................................ 28.2 ......... 13.8 ......... 29.3 ......... 9.4 .........
2005............................................................ 30.5 29.4 14.9 14.4 30.8 29.8 10.2 10.8
2006............................................................ 29.0 29.3 14.8 14.4 29.3 29.8 10.6 10.3
2007............................................................ 28.5 28.9 13.8 14.0 28.8 29.4 11.1 10.2
2008............................................................ 25.5 28.4 13.0 14.1 25.7 28.8 8.2 10.0
2009............................................................ 22.9 27.3 11.6 13.6 21.8 27.3 8.2 9.7
2010............................................................ 23.9 26.0 13.4 13.3 23.4 25.8 9.7 9.6
2011............................................................ 24.3 24.4 11.5 12.7 23.4 24.6 7.8 9.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA finds Virginia provided the required information regarding
visibility conditions and changes to meet the requirements under 40 CFR
51.308(g)(3), specifically providing current conditions based on the
latest available Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments (IMPROVE) monitoring data, the difference between current
visibility conditions and baseline visibility conditions (2001-2004),
and the change in visibility impairment over the most recent five-year
period (2007-2011) for which data were available at the time of the
progress report SIP development. For the 2007-2011 time period for
James River, visibility impairment for the 20-percent worst days
improved by 4.5 dv (comparing 5 year averages) and for the 20-percent
best days improved by 1.3 dv (comparing 5 year averages). For the 2007-
2011 time period for Shenandoah, visibility impairment for the 20-
percent worst days improved by 4.8 dv (comparing 5 year averages) and
for the 20-percent best days improved by 1.2 dv (comparing 5 year
averages). Given the visibility improvement in Virginia's Class I
areas, EPA finds that the Commonwealth's assessment that it is on track
to meet RPGs by 2018 is reasonable. EPA proposes to conclude that
Virginia has adequately addressed 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3).
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4) require an analysis
tracking emissions changes of visibility-impairing pollutants from the
state's sources by type or category over the past five years based on
the most recent updated emissions inventory. In its progress report
SIP, Virginia presents emissions inventories for 2002, 2007, 2009,
2011, and 2018 in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR
51.308(g)(4). The progress report SIP includes Virginia's baseline
emissions inventory from 2002 and estimated emissions inventories for
2009 and 2018 (as updated by VISTAS in 2008).\5\ Virginia's progress
report SIP includes the 2007 emissions inventory prepared by the
Southeastern Modeling, Analysis, and Planning (SEMAP) project, which
was funded by EPA and the ten states in VISTAS and which is the most
recent historical inventory that has been fully quality-assured
according to Virginia.\6\ Virginia then compares emissions from 2002
and 2007 to its 2011 emissions inventory which was prepared from 2011
National Emissions Inventory, version 1 (NEIv1) data and available
state-level information.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ VISTAS improved model performance for the 2002 base year
emissions inventory used by Virginia in its original regional haze
SIP, resulting in updates to the 2002 inventory and the 2009 and
2018 projection inventories. VISTAS provided the final iteration of
these inventories to the states in 2008.
\6\ Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(b), regional haze SIPs for the
first implementation period were due on December 17, 2007.
Therefore, EPA finds that the 2007 emissions inventory used by
Virginia in this progress report SIP reflects an appropriate
emissions inventory for Virginia to use for 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4) to
track emissions changes of visibility-impairing pollutants from the
state's sources.
\7\ The 2011 NEI inventory uses state-supplied data or model
inputs for area and non-road estimates. The 2011 on-road estimates
are based on Virginia's application of EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES) model using both county-specific inputs for all
Virginia jurisdictions and the model's inventory mode. The 2011
point source data is based on 2011 CAMD data for those sources
reporting to CAMD or on data from Virginia's Comprehensive
Environmental Data System (CEDS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pollutants inventoried include carbon monoxide (CO), VOCs,
NOX, fine particulate matter (PM2.5), coarse
particulate matter (PM10), ammonia (NH3), and
SO2. The emissions inventories include the following source
classifications: Stationary point and area sources, off-road and on-
road mobile sources, and biogenic sources. The comparison of emissions
inventory data shows that emissions of the key visibility-impairing
pollutant for the southeast, SO2, continued to drop from
428,070 tpy in 2002 to 268,877 tpy in 2007 to 115,436 tpy in 2011. The
emissions inventories also show similar substantial declines in other
pollutants, including CO, NOX, PM10, and VOCs
between 2007 and 2011.\8\ Finally, the 2011 emissions inventory shows
emissions levels of SO2, CO, NH3,
PM10, PM2.5, and VOCs well below levels projected
for 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ EPA notes that emissions of PM2.5 remained
relatively stable in Virginia between 2007 and 2011; however,
significant reductions in emissions of PM2.5 occurred
from 2002 (85,762 tpy) to 2011 (72,441 tpy), and the 2011 emissions
of PM2.5 are still well below the 2018 projections of
93,895 tpy of PM2.5 demonstrating Virginia's progress in
reductions of PM2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For meeting the requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2), Virginia
documented substantial emissions reductions in SO2 and
NOX from EGUs that already have occurred and discussed
further emissions expected by 2018 for this sector. As noted in section
III.A of this rulemaking action, Virginia expects overall EGU
SO2 emissions to continue to decline beyond the reductions
projected in the Commonwealth's regional haze SIP due the retirement of
many coal-fired power plants and additional fuel switches not
previously projected which should result in further visibility
improvement
[[Page 10456]]
at Class I areas affected by Virginia sources.
EPA proposes to conclude that Virginia has adequately addressed the
requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4). While ideally the five-year
period to be analyzed for emissions inventory changes is the time
period since the current regional haze SIP was submitted, availability
of quality-assured data may not always correspond with this period.
Therefore, EPA believes that there is some flexibility in the five-year
time period states can select for tracking emissions changes to meet
this requirement. EPA proposes to find Virginia appropriately compared
its 2011 emissions inventory with the 2007 emissions inventory.\9\
Virginia also included more recent SO2 and NOX
emissions data from 2012 for the EGU sector which shows continuing
declining trends in emissions of these pollutants. EPA also reviewed
preliminary SO2 and NOX emissions data from CAMD
for Virginia's EGUs for 2013 and notes similar significantly reduced
emissions from these EGU sources in 2013. EPA believes that Virginia
presented an adequate analysis tracking emissions trends for visibility
impairing pollutants such as SO2, NOX,
PM10 and PM2.5 since 2007 using the emissions
data available to Virginia. Virginia's 2011 emissions inventory shows
significant reductions of 153,441 tpy of SO2, 92,081 tpy of
NOX, and 16,373 tpy of PM10 from 2007 with even
larger reductions when compared to 2002 and well beyond what was
projected for 2018, demonstrating greater progress than Virginia had
projected in 2010. EPA believes this provides sufficient information to
support the representativeness of the period evaluated by Virginia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ As stated above, Virginia's 2007 emissions inventory
reflects emissions in the year the first regional haze SIP was due
per 40 CFR 51.308(b), and EPA finds the 2007 inventory to be an
appropriate emissions inventory for Virginia to use for 40 CFR
51.308(g)(4) to track emissions changes of visibility-impairing
pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5) require an assessment of
any significant changes in anthropogenic emissions within or outside
the state that have occurred over the past five years that have limited
or impeded progress in reducing pollutant emissions and improving
visibility in Class I areas impacted by the state's sources. In its
progress report SIP, Virginia states that sulfates continue to be the
biggest single contributor to regional haze at James River and
Shenandoah. Accordingly, Virginia focused its analysis on addressing
large SO2 emissions from point sources but has also
addressed in its analysis NOX and PM2.5. In its
progress report SIP, Virginia demonstrates that the Commonwealth's
reduced emissions in 2012 have already exceeded Virginia's 2018
emissions inventory projections for SO2, NOX, and
PM2.5 particularly for the EGU sector and discusses further
emissions reductions expected from additional state and Federal
measures not included in the regional haze SIP such as MATS, the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, Federal consent decrees with SO2 and
NOX reductions at sources, and plant shutdowns.
EPA proposes to find that Virginia has adequately addressed the
provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5). The Commonwealth adequately
demonstrated that there are no significant changes in emissions of
SO2, PM2.5, or NOX that have impeded
progress in reducing emissions and improving visibility in the Class I
areas within Virginia or impacted by Virginia sources. The Commonwealth
provided data demonstrating present emission reductions of
SO2 from EGUs were greater than originally projected for
2018 in the State's regional haze SIP and showing an overall
significant downward trend in emissions over the period 2002 to 2011.
Furthermore, the progress report SIP shows that the Commonwealth is on
track to meeting its 2018 RPGs for James River and Shenandoah.
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) require an assessment of
whether the current regional haze SIP is sufficient to enable the
state, or other states, to meet the RPGs for Class I areas affected by
emissions from the state. In its progress report SIP, Virginia states
that it believes that the elements and strategies outlined in its
original regional haze SIP are sufficient to enable Virginia and other
neighboring states to meet all the established RPGs. To support this
conclusion, the Commonwealth of Virginia notes that Virginia's actual
2012 EGU emissions of SO2 are already below the 2018
projected emissions of SO2, with further decreases expected.
Virginia expects that the reduction of SO2 emissions will in
fact be even greater than originally anticipated, particularly for the
EGU sector as previously discussed in this rulemaking notice. In
particular, the Commonwealth notes the emissions reductions already
achieved between 2007 and 2012 and the additional reductions projected
for 2018 which were not included in the original regional haze SIP (as
discussed previously for purposes of 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1)) further
support the Commonwealth's conclusion that the regional haze SIP's
elements and strategies are sufficient to meet the established RPGs.
Virginia also provides information on all the Class I areas where any
Virginia point source was found to have contributed to the calculated
sulfate visibility impairment in 2018 and shows each Class I area has
made significant progress toward improving visibility. Virginia's
progress report SIP contains visibility data supporting the conclusion
that each Class I area impacted by sources in Virginia is meeting or
below its ``glidepath,'' making reasonable progress towards achieving
natural visibility conditions.
EPA proposes to conclude that Virginia has adequately addressed
under the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6). EPA views this
requirement as a qualitative assessment that should evaluate emissions
and visibility trends and other readily available information,
including expected emissions reductions associated with measures with
compliance dates that have not yet become effective. The Commonwealth
referenced the improving visibility trends with appropriately supported
data and referenced the downward emissions trends in the Commonwealth,
with a focus on SO2 emissions from Virginia EGUs, that
support the Commonwealth's determination that the Commonwealth's
regional haze SIP is sufficient to meet RPGs for Class I areas within
and outside the Commonwealth impacted by Virginia sources.
The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7) require a review of a
state's visibility monitoring strategy and an assessment of whether any
modifications to the monitoring strategy are necessary. In its progress
report SIP, Virginia summarizes the existing monitoring network at
James River and Shenandoah and discusses its intended continued
reliance on the IMPROVE monitoring network for its visibility planning.
Virginia also expresses its continued commitment to operate monitors
supporting regional haze investigations where appropriate and when
support is available. Virginia also encourages VISTAS and other
regional planning organizations to maintain support of the existing
data management system or an equivalent to facilitate availability
analysis of IMPROVE and visibility-related data. Virginia concludes
that the existing network is adequate and that no modifications to the
Commonwealth's visibility monitoring strategy are necessary at this
time.
EPA proposes to conclude that Virginia has adequately addressed the
[[Page 10457]]
sufficiency of its monitoring strategy as required by the provisions
under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7). The Commonwealth reaffirmed its continued
reliance upon the IMPROVE monitoring network and discussed its
additional PM2.5 monitoring network used to further
understand visibility trends in the Commonwealth. Virginia also
explained the importance of the IMPROVE monitoring network for tracking
visibility trends at James River and Shenandoah and identified no
expected changes in this network.
B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan
Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are required to take one of four
possible actions based on the information gathered and conclusions made
in the progress report SIP. The following section summarizes: the
action taken by Virginia under 40 CFR 51.308(h); Virginia's rationale
for the selected action; and EPA's analysis and proposed determination
regarding the Commonwealth's action.
In its progress report SIP, Virginia submitted a negative
declaration that it had determined that the existing regional haze SIP
requires no further substantive revision to achieve the RPGs for Class
I areas affected by Virginia's sources. The basis for the
Commonwealth's negative declaration is the findings from the progress
report (as discussed in section III of this rulemaking action),
including the findings that: Visibility data has improved at James
River and Shenandoah; SO2 emissions from the Commonwealth's
sources have decreased beyond original projections; additional EGU
control measures not relied upon in the Commonwealth's regional haze
SIP have been implemented or will occur in the implementation period;
and the EGU SO2 emissions in Virginia are already below the
levels projected for 2018 in the regional haze SIP and are expected to
continue to trend downward for the next five years, as will the
SO2 emissions from EGUs in the other VISTAS states. EPA
proposes to conclude Virginia has adequately addressed under the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(h) because the visibility data trends at
the Class I areas impacted by the Commonwealth's sources and the
emissions trends of the Commonwealth's largest emitters of visibility-
impairing pollutants both indicate that the Commonwealth's RPGs for
2018 will be met or exceeded.
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
program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.
V. EPA's Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Virginia's regional haze five-year
progress report SIP revision, submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia
on November 8, 2013, as meeting the applicable regional haze
requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 51.308(h).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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
proposed 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 proposed 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);
[[Page 10458]]
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 proposed rule to approve Virginia's regional haze
progress report SIP revision 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 11, 2014.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III
[FR Doc. 2014-04087 Filed 2-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P