The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed approving a revision to Virginia's state implementation plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) on December 20, 2024, the revision, known as B23, seeks to remove two outdated regulations from the SIP: Article 11, which sets emission standards for petroleum refinery operations, and Article 26, which addresses emissions from large appliance coating application systems. This proposal, published in the Federal Register on November 28, 2025, comes after Virginia confirmed that no facilities subject to these rules remain in the state. The move reflects a periodic regulatory review aimed at streamlining the SIP without compromising air quality protections. By eliminating these provisions, Virginia ensures its plan remains relevant to current industrial conditions, while any future facilities would fall under more stringent federal and state rules. This development underscores ongoing efforts to maintain efficient environmental oversight amid changing economic landscapes.
Background on Virginia's Emission Standards and SIP Framework
Virginia's regulations for existing stationary sources, codified under 9VAC5-40, originated in 1972 to address emissions of criteria pollutants. Article 11 targeted petroleum refinery operations, controlling particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and hydrogen sulfide. Article 26 focused on VOC emissions from large appliance coating systems, such as those used in manufacturing household appliances. These rules were incorporated into Virginia's SIP by the EPA on April 21, 2000, as documented in the Federal Register (65 FR 21315). The SIP serves as the state's blueprint for achieving and maintaining national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) set by the EPA for pollutants like ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter.
Under the CAA, states must periodically review and update their SIPs to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Virginia's State Air Pollution Control Board conducted such a review, examining the Comprehensive Environmental Data System database and public input. This process revealed that no petroleum refineries or large appliance coating facilities operate in the state anymore. As a result, the board repealed these articles from the Virginia Administrative Code on September 13, 2023. The SIP revision now seeks to align the federal plan with this state-level change, preventing redundancy in regulatory frameworks.
Details of the Proposed SIP Revision
Revision B23 specifically proposes repealing 9VAC5-40-1340 through 9VAC5-40-1510 (Article 11) and 9VAC5-40-3560 through 9VAC5-40-3700 (Article 26) from the SIP. VADEQ's submission emphasizes that these regulations no longer apply, as confirmed by emissions inventories and database reviews. For instance, the EPA's analysis of the 2020 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) corroborated the absence of such sources in Virginia. Any new facilities of this type would be governed by modern standards, including New Source Review permitting, which imposes stricter controls than the 1972-era rules.
The revision complies with CAA procedural requirements, including public notice and hearings. Virginia's certification of public participation, included in the submission docket, details compliance with state administrative procedures, ensuring transparency and stakeholder input.
EPA's Analysis Under Clean Air Act Section 110(l)
A key aspect of the EPA's proposal is its evaluation under CAA section 110(l), which prohibits approval of SIP revisions that interfere with reasonable further progress toward NAAQS attainment or other CAA mandates. Virginia demonstrated noninterference by showing zero emissions impact from the repeal, given the lack of affected facilities. The EPA independently verified this through NEI data, noting no petroleum refineries or large appliance coating operations in the state.
This approach aligns with precedents where the EPA has approved similar removals of obsolete rules. For example, in cases involving discontinued industrial activities, the agency has consistently required evidence of noninterference, such as emissions data and forward-looking assurances. Here, the proposal maintains SIP integrity by focusing on active sources, avoiding unnecessary administrative burdens.
Perspectives on this action vary. Environmental advocates may view it as a pragmatic update that allows resources to focus on pressing pollution issues, while industry groups could see it as reducing regulatory clutter. State officials emphasize efficiency, arguing that retaining inapplicable rules complicates enforcement. However, critics might caution against overly broad repeals, though in this case, the targeted nature and data-backed justification mitigate such concerns.
Potential Implications for Air Quality Management
Removing these articles could set a model for other states reviewing legacy regulations. Short-term effects include streamlined SIP administration, potentially easing compliance for Virginia's environmental agencies. Long-term, it reinforces the adaptive nature of CAA implementation, ensuring plans evolve with industrial shifts.
Broader political forces include ongoing debates over regulatory reform. While not directly tied to federal administration changes, this action occurs amid discussions on balancing environmental protection with economic growth. No immediate emissions increases are anticipated, but it highlights the importance of robust monitoring to detect any reemergence of these industries.
In conclusion, the EPA's proposed approval of Virginia's SIP revision represents a measured step toward regulatory efficiency. Key takeaways include the confirmation of no applicable sources, compliance with CAA noninterference standards, and adherence to public processes. Potential next steps involve the public comment period, open until December 29, 2025, after which the EPA may finalize the rule. Ongoing challenges include maintaining vigilant emissions tracking and addressing any future industrial developments through updated permitting. Debates may continue on the pace of regulatory pruning versus precautionary retention, but this proposal underscores a fact-based approach to air quality governance.
