[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19296-19311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-8927]
[[Page 19295]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Parts 80 and 86
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles; Amendment to the Tier
2/Gasoline Sulfur Regulations; Final and Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2001 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 19296]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 80 and 86
[AMS-FRL-6768-1]
RIN 2060-AI69
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles; Amendment to
the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Today's action corrects, amends, and revises certain
provisions of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur regulations to assist
regulated entities with program implementation and compliance. First,
it makes minor corrections to clarify the regulations governing
compliance with the gasoline sulfur standards. Second, with respect to
the low sulfur gasoline program, it revises the boundaries of the
Geographic Phase-in Area (GPA) to include counties and tribal lands in
states adjacent to the eight original GPA states. The intention of this
amendment is to ensure a smooth transition to low sulfur gasoline
nationwide and to mitigate the potential for gasoline supply shortages.
Third, it amends certain provisions of the small refiner and Averaging,
Banking, and Trading (ABT) programs to assist domestic and foreign
refiners and importers in establishing gasoline sulfur baselines for
credit and allotment generation purposes. Fourth, it revises certain
sampling and testing provisions for low sulfur gasoline to enable
certain refiners to generate early credits and/or allotments under the
ABT program. Finally, today's action makes minor revisions to the
regulations governing compliance with the vehicle standards. We plan to
make other necessary corrections, amendments, and revisions to the Tier
2/Gasoline Sulfur regulations in a future rulemaking.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective July 12, 2001, without
further notice, unless we receive adverse comments or a request for a
public hearing by June 12, 2001. Should we receive any adverse comments
on this direct final rule we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments: All comments and materials relevant to today's
action should be submitted to Public Docket No. A-97-10 at the
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Air
Docket (6102), Room M-1500, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
Materials related to this rulemaking are available at EPA's Air Docket
for review at the above address (on the ground floor in Waterside Mall)
from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on
government holidays. You can reach the Air Docket by telephone at (202)
260-7548 and by facsimile at (202) 260-4400. You may be charged a
reasonable fee for photocopying docket materials, as provided in 40 CFR
Part 2.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Manners, U.S. EPA, National
Vehicle and Fuels Emission Laboratory, Assessment and Standards
Division, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor MI 48105; telephone (734) 214-
4873, fax (734) 214-4051, e-mail [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is publishing this rule without prior
proposal because we view this action as noncontroversial and anticipate
no adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of
today's Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to adopt the provisions in
this Direct Final rule if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be
effective on July 12, 2001 without further notice unless we receive
adverse comment or a request for a public hearing by June 12, 2001. If
EPA receives adverse comment on one or more distinct amendments,
paragraphs, or sections of this rulemaking, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register indicating which provisions are
being withdrawn due to adverse comment. We will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will
not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Any distinct
amendment, paragraph, or section of today's rulemaking for which we do
not receive adverse comment will become effective on the date set out
above, notwithstanding any adverse comment on any other distinct
amendment, paragraph, or section of today's rule.
Regulated Entities
This action will affect you if you manufacture new motor vehicles,
alter individual imported motor vehicles to address U.S. regulation, or
convert motor vehicles to use alternative fuels. It will also affect
you if you produce, distribute, or sell gasoline.
The table below gives some examples of entities that may have to
comply with the regulations. However, since these are only examples,
you should carefully examine these and other existing regulations in 40
CFR parts 80 and 86. If you have any questions, please call the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Category NAICS SIC potentially
codes a codes b regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................... 336111 3711 Motor Vehicle
Manufacturers.
336112
336120
Industry.................... 336311 3592 Alternative Fuel
Vehicle Converters.
336312 3714
422720 5172
454312 5984
811198 7549
541514 8742
541690 8931
Industry.................... 811112 7533 Commercial Importers
of Vehicles and
Vehicle Components.
811198 7549
541514 8742
Industry.................... 324110 2911 Petroleum Refiners.
Industry.................... 422710 5171 Gasoline Marketers
and Distributors.
422720 5172
Industry.................... 484220 4212 Gasoline Carriers.
484230 4213
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
b Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
[[Page 19297]]
Access to Rulemaking Documents Through the Internet
Today's action is available electronically on the day of
publication from the Office of the Federal Register Internet Web site
listed below. Electronic copies of this preamble, regulatory language,
and other documents associated with today's final rule are available
from the EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality Web site listed
below shortly after the rule is signed by the Administrator. This
service is free of charge, except any cost that you already incur for
connecting to the Internet.
EPA Federal Register Web Site:
http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/epa-air/ (Either select a desired date
or use the Search feature.)
Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur home page: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/tr2home.htm
Please note that due to differences between the software used to
develop the document and the software into which the document may be
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc., may occur.
Outline of This Preamble
I. Clarifications and Other Minor Corrections
II. Geographic Phase-in Area
A. Application Deadline for GPA Standards
B. How Did EPA Establish the Geographic Phase-in Area?
C. How Was the GPA Established in the Adjoining States?
D. What Are the Results of the GPA Counties Process?
III. Small Refiners
A. Documentation of Crude Oil Capacity by Foreign Refiners
B. Oxygenates Included in Baseline
IV. Credits and Allotments
A. Baseline Calculations
B. Refineries That Were Non-operational in 1997-98
C. Foreign Refiners With Approved 1990 Baselines Who Did Not
Submit Anti-dumping Compliance Reports to EPA in 1997-1998
V. Sampling and Testing
A. Obtaining Test Results Before Gasoline Leaves the Refinery
1. Before January 1, 2004
2. January 1, 2004 and Beyond
B. Sample Retention
1. Limitation on Length of Time to Retain Samples
2. Composited Samples
3. Sample Retention for Reformulated Blendstocks for Oxygenate
Blending
VI. Changes to Vehicle Compliance Regulations
VII. Administrative Requirements
A. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Intergovernmental Relations
1. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
2. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
3. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
E. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
F. Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection
G. Congressional Review Act
VIII.Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
I. Clarifications and Other Minor Corrections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of clarification or
Section correction
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 80.216(a)(1)(i) and Revised to clarify that the refinery
(a)(2). annual average standard for GPA gasoline
is 150.00 ppm instead of 150 ppm, in
accordance with the annual average
refinery standards under Sec.
80.195(a)(1) and Sec. 80.240(a) which
are expressed to two decimals.
Sec. 80.230(a)(1)........... Revised to change ``of'' to ``with'' for
clarity.
Sec. 80.225(d).............. Revised to clarify that the employee/
crude oil criteria applies to parties
seeking small refiner status under Sec.
80.225(d).
Sec. 80.235(f).............. Revised to clarify that to obtain
approval as a small refiner, the
information submitted under Sec. 80.235
must show that the refiner employed an
average of no more than 1500 people and
had an average crude oil capacity less
than or equal to 155,000 bpcd.
Sec. 80.235(g)(1)........... Revised to change the phrase ``baseline
standard and volume, and per-gallon
cap'' to ``annual average sulfur
standard, baseline volume and per-gallon
cap standard,'' and to add the words
``for the 2004-2007 averaging periods''
for clarity.
Sec. 80.245(a)(3)........... Revised to conform language to other
provisions relating to requirements for
establishing a sulfur baseline. This
revision does not change the substance
of the baseline provisions under Sec.
80.245.
Sec. 80.250(a)(1) and (a)(2) Revised to clarify that foreign refiners
must include only gasoline imported into
the U.S. in calculating a small
refinery's baseline and baseline volume.
Also revised to reference requirements
under Sec. 80.245(a)(3).
Sec. 80.285(a)(1)(i)........ Revised to add the words ``for a
refinery'' for clarity.
Sec. 80.285(a)(1)(ii)....... Revised to add the words ``for
refineries' and ``refineries'' for
clarity.
Sec. 80.285(a)(1)(iii)...... Revised to add the words ``for that
refinery'' for clarity.
Sec. 80.285(b)(1)(i)........ Revised to add the words ``for any
refinery'' for clarity.
Sec. 80.285(b)(1)(ii)....... Revised to clarify that, for refiners of
GPA gasoline, credits generated
beginning in 2004 are based on the
refinery's annual average sulfur
standard for GPA gasoline established
under Sec. 80.216(a).
Sec. 80.285(b)(2)........... Revised to add ``under Sec. 80.310'' for
clarity.
Sec. 80.295(a).............. Revised to clarify that foreign refiners
must include only gasoline imported into
the U.S. in calculating a sulfur
baseline under Sec. 80.295.
Sec. 80.295(b).............. Revised to change an incorrect reference
to Sec. 80.65. The correct reference is
Sec. 80.69. Also revised to add the
words ``for a refinery'' and ``for that
refinery'' for clarity.
Sec. 80.305(a).............. Revised to clarify in the definition of
the term Va that foreign refiners must
include only gasoline imported into the
U.S. in calculating early credits under
Sec. 80.305, and to clarify in the
definition of the term Sa that the
annual average sulfur level used in the
equation in this section is calculated
in accordance with Sec. 80.205.
Sec. 80.305(d).............. Revised to add ``for a refinery'' and
``at that refinery'' and to change
``refiner's'' to ``refinery's'' for
clarity.
Sec. 80.310(b).............. Revised to clarify in the definition of
the term Sstd that the standard for GPA
gasoline is the standard established for
GPA gasoline for the refinery under Sec.
80.216(a), and to clarify in the
definition of the term Sa that the
annual average sulfur level used in the
equation in this section is calculated
in accordance with Sec. 80.205.
Sec. 80.410(d)(1)........... Revised to change an incorrect reference
to paragraph (c)(3)(i). The correct
reference is paragraph (c)(3)(ii).
[[Page 19298]]
Sec. 80.410(s).............. Revised to change an incorrect reference
to paragraph (r). The correct reference
is paragraph (p).
Sec. 86.1810-01(l)(1)....... Corrected an inadvertent limitation of
applicability by removing the model year
designations in the referenced section
numbers.
Sec. 86.1810-01(m)(1)....... Corrected an inadvertent limitation of
applicability by removing the model year
designations in the referenced section
numbers.
Sec. 86.1811-04(c)(3)(i) and Revised to clarify the applicability of
(ii). the NMOG standard to flex, bi- or dual-
fueled vehicles on the gasoline or
diesel portion of certification only.
Sec. 86.1811-04(e).......... Revised to delete an erroneous statement
about the applicability of the spitback
standard to newly assembled vehicles.
Sec. 86.1811-04(f)(2)(i).... Revised to clarify an incorrect rounding
procedure.
Sec. 86.1829-01(2)(i)....... Revised to add a waiver provision for
evaporative/refueling testing of CNG or
LPG vehicles, inadvertently omitted.
Sec. 86.1835-01(d).......... Corrected an incorrect reference to
paragraph (b) to paragraph (a).
Sec. 86,1841-01(e).......... Revised to clarify that RAFS may be
applied only to NLEV vehicles.
Sec. 86.1845-04(f)(1)....... Revised to change an incorrect reference
to NMOG to NMHC.
Sec. 86.1846-01(a)(3)....... Revised to add the word ``passenger'' to
``medium-duty passenger vehicles'' for
clarity.
Sec. 86.1860-04(g)(2)(ii)... Revised to correct a rounding procedure.
Sec. 86.1860-04(h).......... Revised to clarify that the multipliers
for fleet average NOX specified in
(h)(1) apply to the denominator in the
equation in paragraph (f)(2) of that
section. Provide optional formula
necessary to address mathematical
problems caused by the value of zero
associated with Bin 1.
Sec. 86.1861-04(a)(5)....... Revised to correct an inconsistency with
small volume hardship provisions by
changing the requirement for 100%
compliance in a specific model year to
one model year before a deficit can be
carried forward.
Sec. 86.1861-04(b)(1)....... Revised formula to replace erroneous +
symbol with X.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Geographic Phase-in Area
A. Application Deadline for GPA Standards
Due to the timing of today's action, we are extending the
application deadline for GPA standards from December 31, 2000 to May 1,
2001. To apply for the GPA standards under Sec. 80.216 (What standards
apply to gasoline produced or imported for use in the GPA?), a refiner
or importer must submit an application in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 80.290 (How does a refiner apply for a sulfur
baseline?).
B. How Did We Establish the Geographic Phase-in Area?
In the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur final rule (65 FR 6698, February 10,
2000), we established a geographic area in which the low sulfur
gasoline program will be phased-in differently than the national
program. This program, referred to as the Geographic Phase-In Area
(GPA) program, covers seven states in the Rocky Mountains and Upper
Great Plains, as well as Alaska. The gasoline sulfur standards and
phase-in schedule for the GPA program can be found at Secs. 80.216,
80.219, and 80.220. Gasoline produced by any refiner and/or importer
can be sold in the GPA provided that the refiner and/or importer
registers with us (see Sec. 80.217) and sells gasoline within the GPA
consistent with the requirements summarized in the regulations.
As discussed in the Tier 2 final rulemaking (FRM), the GPA program
was established to help enable a smooth transition to low sulfur
gasoline nationwide. The need for such a program was based on the
competition for engineering and construction resources and the time
needed for installation of desulfurization equipment. (See 65 FR 6755-
6756)
As described in the preamble to the Tier 2 FRM, states in the GPA
were determined based on two criteria: Environmental need and gasoline
supply. First, we evaluated states based on the environmental need
criterion. In defining the GPA, we identified those states that have a
somewhat less urgent environmental need in the near term (relative to
the 1-hour ozone standard) for ozone precursor reductions\1\ and whose
emissions are less important with respect to ozone transport. (Tier 2
vehicles operating on higher sulfur gasoline have increased emission
rates compared with those operated on 30 ppm, but this effect is
partially reversible.) Second, we considered the issue of sufficient
gasoline supply, specifically, the relative difficulty of producing or
obtaining through product transport (via pipeline, truck, rail or
barge) adequate supplies of gasoline which would meet the requirements
of the national low sulfur gasoline program. Upon evaluation of these
criteria, we identified eight states for the GPA program: Alaska,
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Primarily oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this same assessment we also acknowledged that there may be
counties in other states adjoining these eight states which are solely
or predominantly dependent on gasoline produced by the refineries that
supply these eight states and which meet the same basic environmental
and gasoline supply criteria. As part of the Tier 2 final rule, we
committed to conducting additional assessments to identify which
counties in these adjoining states should be considered for inclusion
in the GPA program.
C. How Was the GPA Established in the Adjoining States?
As part of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur final rule, we included
criteria that should be considered in establishing which counties in
adjoining states should be included in the GPA program. We designed
these criteria to include those counties in adjacent states which
receive a majority of their gasoline from the refineries located in the
eight states covered by the GPA program. Not including these counties
within the GPA program could potentially undermine the basic intent of
the GPA program by pressuring refineries in the eight states to supply
their markets in the adjoining states with national gasoline, in spite
of the existence of the GPA program. It could also have the affect of
creating spot gasoline supply shortages and put upward pressure on
prices in these counties.
[[Page 19299]]
EPA's current gasoline sulfur regulations provide that additional
counties or tribal lands in states adjacent to the eight states listed
above will be included in the GPA, and gasoline sold there will thus be
subject to the GPA standards, if one of the following conditions is met
for the area in 1999: (1) Approximately 50 percent or more of the total
volume of gasoline, as measured at the terminals and bulk stations, was
received from refineries located in the eight GPA states, (2)
approximately 50 percent or more of the total volume of gasoline
dispensed was received from refineries in the GPA states, or (3)
approximately 50 percent or more of the total commercial and private
dispensing outlets were supplied by gasoline produced by refineries
located in the eight GPA states. See 40 CFR 80.215(a)(2).
To identify additional areas for inclusion in the GPA under these
regulations, we worked with interested parties such as petroleum
marketers and state governments to obtain information regarding
gasoline distribution practices. We identified pipeline and terminal
locations and, in several cases, information on GPA and total gasoline
dispensed in given states and counties. Using the various types of
information provided as a foundation, we then developed a basic
methodology to identify counties which rely on GPA refineries for a
majority of their gasoline. This methodology involved the following
steps:
Prepare a list of the states adjoining the eight GPA
states (10 in total)
Identify and locate the GPA refineries (those in the eight
core GPA states that are not expected to qualify as small businesses
under the low sulfur gasoline program)
Identify the pipelines used by these GPA refineries to
transport product to the terminals which suppy gasoline to the
adjoining states, and
Identify all other refineries/terminals which service the
adjoining states
Using this methodology, we developed an initial list of counties in
the adjacent states which receive gasoline from the refineries in the
eight GPA states. We then identified counties which receive the
majority of their gasoline from a given source. To accomplish this
task, we mapped counties that fell within a distance range of 100-150
miles from refinery racks and pipeline terminals used by GPA refineries
since essentially all gasoline is delivered to private and retail
outlets by tanker truck. We used this distance range because our
analysis of the information provided to us by the states and petroleum
marketers suggested this was a good indicator of a county's primary
source of gasoline. We then adjusted this initial list of counties
based on two inputs. First, in some cases, county-specific data on the
percent of gasoline dispensed that was produced at refineries in the
eight GPA states was available. We used these data to include or
exclude specific counties from the program. Second, we excluded a
county if our analysis indicated that low sulfur gasoline would be
available from nearby refineries and terminals which are not linked to
the refineries in the eight core GPA states. In places where refineries
and terminals are located nearby, we expect that, for economic reasons,
retail outlets will obtain the majority of their gasoline at those
locations rather than obtaining gasoline that has been transported a
much greater distance from a terminal supplied by a refinery in a GPA
state.
In summary, under Sec. 80.215(a)(2) of the low sulfur gasoline
program regulations, we expanded the boundaries of the GPA to include
additional counties and tribal lands in states adjacent to the eight
GPA states established under Sec. 80.215(a)(1) of the Tier 2 final
rule. To accomplish this, we identified the counties in which we
reasonably concluded that approximately 50 percent or more of the
gasoline volume dispensed is produced by refineries in the eight GPA
states. Specifically, we 1) determined the location of terminals that
receive such gasoline, and 2) identified retail outlets in the adjacent
states that receive most of their gasoline from these terminals. Next,
we excluded certain counties based on specific data which showed that
more than half of the gasoline dispensed came from refineries outside
the eight GPA states. We then included some additional counties based
on specific data which showed that more than half of the gasoline
dispensed came from refineries within the eight GPA states. Finally, we
excluded some counties identified in our initial analysis based on the
identification of nearby terminals that provided an economical source
of gasoline from refineries outside the eight GPA states. We have
included materials in the docket for today's action that describe in
more detail the relevant information regarding the location of
terminals and retail outlets for each county.
D. What Are the Results of the GPA Counties Process?
Using the approach described above, we have identified 74 counties
in six states that adjoin the GPA which should be included in the GPA.
These counties are shown in Figure 1 below and are listed in the
regulatory text in a new Sec. 80.215.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
[[Page 19300]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR13AP01.023
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
GPA gasoline sold in these counties is subject to the requirements
in Secs. 80.215-80.220, in addition to other applicable requirements in
part 80. In our analysis, we concluded that no counties in Minnesota,
Texas, Oklahoma, or Kansas need to be included in the GPA. No county in
these states meets the criteria in the regulation and with the
exception of Minnesota, these four states receive little or no gasoline
from the refineries in the eight states now in the GPA program.
The eight core GPA states contain a number of American Indian
reservations. These reservations are fully included in the GPA under
today's action. The adjacent counties discussed above also contain 25
American Indian reservations. If a reservation is only partly within a
GPA state or adjacent county, it is considered fully in the area for
purposes of the GPA program. This is consistent with the inclusion of
entire states or counties in the program.
Overall, the gasoline sold in these adjacent counties and American
Indian reservations represents about one percent of U.S. gasoline
consumption, bringing the total gasoline consumption covered by the GPA
program to 5.7 percent. Even though we have revised the GPA program to
include these additional counties, the overall emission benefits of the
early years of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program are not reduced over
those described in the final rule. The air quality analysis of the
final Tier 2 program was based on the premise that all gasoline
produced or used in the eight GPA states would be covered by the GPA
program. Thus, GPA gasoline produced at refineries located in the eight
GPA states was included in the air quality analysis. We believe that
including the states, counties, and tribal lands described above will
allow the objectives of the GPA program to be achieved.
III. Small Refiners
A. Documentation of Crude Oil Capacity by Foreign Refiners
Section 80.235(c)(2) provides that a refiner's application for
small refiner status must contain the total corporate crude oil
capacity of each refinery as reported to the Energy Information
Administration (EIA) of the U.S. Department of Energy. Because foreign
refiners do not report their crude oil capacity to the EIA, today's
rule modifies Sec. 80.235(c)(2) to provide that, in the case of a
foreign refiner, the small refiner status application must contain the
total crude oil capacity of each refinery as documented by a comparable
[[Page 19301]]
reputable source, such as a professional publication or trade journal.
Today's rule does not change the definition of ``small refiner''
under Sec. 80.225(a), and we are not seeking comment on any of the
provisions of Sec. 80.225(a).
B. Oxygenates Included in Baseline
Section 80.250 provides the equations to be used in determining
small refiner sulfur baselines and baseline volumes. This section,
however, does not address whether oxygenates added downstream from the
small refinery are to be included in the calculations. The current low
sulfur gasoline regulations at Sec. 80.295(b) provide that any refiner
who, under the RFG and anti-dumping regulations, included oxygenates
blended downstream in compliance calculations for 1997-1998, must
include this oxygenate in the calculations for sulfur content under
Sec. 80.295 for purposes of establishing a baseline for early credit
generation. We intended the provisions of Sec. 80.250 under the small
refiner program to be consistent with the provisions of Sec. 80.295,
since both baselines are intended to reflect current sulfur levels at a
refinery and are based on the same calculation. As a result, today's
rule modifies Sec. 80.250 to require any small refiner who included
oxygenates blended downstream in RFG/anti-dumping compliance
calculations for 1997-1998, to include this oxygenate for purposes of
establishing a sulfur baseline under Sec. 80.250.
IV. Credits and Allotments
A. Baseline Calculations
The current low sulfur gasoline regulations at Sec. 80.205 require
the annual refinery or importer average or corporate pool average
calculations to be conducted to two decimal places. However, the
provisions at Secs. 80.250 and 80.295 for calculating a sulfur baseline
for purposes of determining small refinery standards and generating
early credits and allotments currently do not contain a similar
requirement. We intended the provisions for calculating a sulfur
baseline to be consistent with the provisions for calculating the
refinery or importer annual average sulfur level, including the
requirement to conduct the calculations to two decimal places. As a
result, today's rule modifies Secs. 80.250 and 80.295 to require the
baseline calculations under these sections to be conducted to two
decimal places.
Note, however, that sulfur credits generated under the sulfur
program are in units of ``ppm-gallons.'' See Sec. 80.305(c). We
interpret Sec. 80.305(c) to require sulfur credits to be rounded to the
nearest ppm-gallon. Therefore, in calculating sulfur credits using the
equation in Sec. 80.305(a), the refiner should use the refinery's
sulfur baseline value established under Sec. 80.250 or Sec. 80.295,
conducted to two decimal places, and the refinery's actual annual
average sulfur level calculated under Sec. 80.205, conducted to two
decimal places. Once the sulfur credits are calculated, the refiner
should round the credits to the nearest ppm-gallon.
B. Refineries That Were Non-Operational in 1997-98
Section 80.290 requires a refiner to submit in its sulfur baseline
application the annual average gasoline sulfur baseline for gasoline
produced in 1997-1998 for each refinery for which the refiner is
applying for a sulfur baseline. The regulations, however, do not
address refineries that were shutdown or non-operational during 1997-
1998. Today's rule provides that, for such refineries, sulfur data for
at least one annual averaging period is required to establish a sulfur
baseline. The refiner's baseline application must include the
information required under Sec. 80.290(c) for the gasoline produced
during each annual averaging period that the refinery was in operation
after being reactivated. We will evaluate all of the data submitted by
the refiner in determining the appropriate sulfur baseline for the
refinery. Where we conclude that the data submitted reasonably reflects
current sulfur levels, the refinery's baseline will be determined based
on the annual average sulfur content for the most recent annual
averaging period that the refinery was in operation. Today's rule
modifies Secs. 80.290 and 80.295 to clarify these requirements.
C. Foreign Refiners With Approved 1990 Baselines Who Did Not Submit
Anti-Dumping Compliance Reports to EPA in 1997-1998
To establish a sulfur baseline for purposes of the small refinery
standards or generating early sulfur credits, the regulations require
refiners to submit to us sulfur baseline data for 1997-1998, including
information on each batch of gasoline produced and the batch number
assigned to the batch for purposes of compliance with the RFG/anti-
dumping regulations. See Secs. 80.245(a) and 80.290(c). We may then
verify the data in the refiner's baseline submission by comparing it
with the data submitted to us on the refiner's 1997-1998 annual
averaging reports. Foreign refiners who do not have an approved
individual baseline under the RFG/anti-dumping regulations, and,
therefore, did not submit batch reports to us in 1997-1998, are
required to follow the procedures under Secs. 80.91 through 80.93
(provisions for establishing an individual anti-dumping baseline) to
establish the volume and sulfur content of gasoline that was produced
at the foreign refinery and imported into the United States during
1997-1998, for purposes of calculating a sulfur baseline under
Sec. 80.250 or Sec. 80.295. See Secs. 80.250(b), 80.290(d) and
80.410(b)(1). This is in addition to the other baseline establishment
requirements under Sec. 80.245 or Sec. 80.290.
The regulations, however, do not address the situation where a
foreign refiner has received an approved individual anti-dumping
baseline, but the baseline did not apply for purposes of compliance
with the anti-dumping regulations until after the 1998 annual averaging
period. Such a refiner would not have submitted any reports to us in
1997-1998. In this situation, we believe it is appropriate for the
foreign refinery's baseline to be based on the gasoline produced by the
foreign refinery and imported to the United States during the period of
time that the refinery was subject to its individual anti-dumping
baseline. The sulfur baseline is intended to be a reasonable
representation of a refinery's current sulfur level. See 65 FR 6761
(February 10, 2000). We believe that a baseline based on the refinery's
post-1998 sulfur data will provide a reasonable a representation of the
refinery's current sulfur level, and perhaps an even more accurate
representation of the refinery's current sulfur level than 1997-1998
data. As a result, today's rule requires a foreign refiner who has an
approved individual anti-dumping baseline that was not in effect in
1997-1998 to submit in its sulfur baseline application under
Sec. 80.245 or Sec. 80.290 information and data for the gasoline
produced by the refinery during each annual averaging period that the
refinery was subject to its individual anti-dumping baseline. EPA will
evaluate all of the data submitted by the foreign refiner in
determining the appropriate sulfur baseline for the refinery. Where we
conclude that the data they give us reasonably reflects current sulfur
levels, the refinery's baseline will be determined based on the average
sulfur content of gasoline produced by the refinery and imported to the
United States during the most recent annual averaging period in which
the refinery was subject to its individual anti-dumping baseline.
[[Page 19302]]
V. Sampling and Testing
A. Obtaining Test Results Before Gasoline Leaves the Refinery
1. Before January 1, 2004
The current low sulfur gasoline regulations at Sec. 80.330(a)(1)
require a refiner to collect a representative sample from each batch of
gasoline produced and then to test each sample to determine its sulfur
content prior to the gasoline leaving the refinery. The requirements in
Sec. 80.330(a)(1) apply beginning on January 1, 2004, or January 1 of
the first year of credit or allotment generation, whichever is earlier.
Sections 80.330(a)(3) and (a)(4) provide the following exceptions: (1)
Parties who collect and test composited samples of conventional
gasoline are allowed to continue that practice until January 1, 2004;
and (2) parties who are unable to obtain test results prior to the
gasoline leaving the refinery are exempt from that requirement if they
have an approved in-line blending exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4). The
current low sulfur gasoline rule, therefore, requires parties who
currently test each batch of gasoline by testing a representative
sample taken from the certification tank (i.e., who do not test
composite samples) to obtain test results prior to the gasoline leaving
the facility for purposes of generating early credits or allotments
prior to January 1, 2004. The current low sulfur gasoline rule also
requires a refiner who produces gasoline using in-line blending
equipment to have an in-line blending exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4)
in order to generate early credits or early allotments.
Under the RFG regulations, refiners who produce RFG by in-line
blending are required to obtain an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4).
However, refiners who produce conventional gasoline by in-line blending
are not required to obtain an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4) for
purposes of anti-dumping compliance. The current low sulfur gasoline
regulations require these conventional gasoline refiners to apply for
and receive an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4) to generate early
credits or allotments.
We did not intend for refiners who test every batch of conventional
gasoline by testing samples from the certification tank to have more
severe testing requirements for purposes of generating early credits or
allotments prior to January 1, 2004, than refiners who test composite
samples. In addition, we now believe that the requirement under
Sec. 80.330(a)(4) to obtain an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4) for in-
line blending operations, regarding both RFG and conventional gasoline,
is unnecessary for purposes of generating early credits or allotments.
The requirement to obtain test results prior to the gasoline leaving
the refinery, and the exemption requirement for in-line blenders, were
intended to ensure that the sulfur level of each batch produced was
known at the time of shipment. However, since early credit or allotment
generation is based on the refinery's annual average sulfur level,
credits and allotments are not calculated until the end of the annual
averaging period, after the test results for all batches produced
during the averaging period are obtained. Therefore, it is unnecessary
for refiners to obtain test data prior to the gasoline leaving the
refinery for purposes of early credit or allotment generation.
Moreover, there are no per-gallon sulfur standards prior to January 1,
2004, which would necessitate knowing the sulfur content of the
gasoline prior to its leaving the refinery. As a result, today's rule
modifies Sec. 80.330 to provide that refiners, including those who
produce gasoline using computer-controlled in-line blending equipment,
and those who test every batch of conventional gasoline, are not
required to obtain test results prior to the gasoline leaving the
refinery to generate early credits in 2000-2003 or early allotments in
2003. However, refiners generating early credits or allotments must
meet the requirements under Sec. 80.330 to obtain a representative
sample of each batch of gasoline produced, and conform their sampling
methods to the ASTM methodologies set forth in Secs. 80.330(b)(1) and
(b)(2). Today's rule also modifies the provisions of Sec. 80.410 to
allow foreign refiners who generate early sulfur credits in 2000-2003
to ship gasoline from the foreign refinery without having the sulfur
content included in the product transfer documents.
2. January 1, 2004 and Beyond
Beginning on January 1, 2004, refiners must obtain test results
before the gasoline leaves the refinery or import facility. There is an
exception to this requirement for refiners who use computerized in-line
blending methods. In-line blenders typically route finished gasoline
out of the refinery before an entire batch is completed so they are
unable to comply with the requirement to test prior to shipment. An
automatic sampler takes a large number of small volumes from a batch
throughout production and does not have a representative sample until
the blending is completed. The current low sulfur gasoline regulations
address in-line blending by providing that refiners who use such in-
line blending equipment may meet the requirement to test prior to
shipment under the terms of an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4) of the
RFG regulations. The basis for this provision is that these exemption
holders measure sulfur on-line and therefore know the sulfur
concentration of each batch throughout the blending process and can
thereby prevent non-complying batches from leaving the refinery.
Currently, all exemption holders are producers of RFG and must meet
a wide range of requirements, including the on-line measurement of
several properties in addition to sulfur. See Sec. 80.65(f)(4). It is
not practical for in-line blenders of conventional gasoline, with fewer
requirements, to meet the requirements designed for RFG blenders, and
there is no process under the current low sulfur gasoline regulations
for granting a more specialized exemption. As a result, today's rule
revises Sec. 80.330(a)(4), which requires all in-line blenders to have
an exemption granted under Sec. 80.65(f)(4), to distinguish between
conventional gasoline and RFG in-line blenders.
Today's rule removes the requirement that in-line blenders of
conventional gasoline obtain an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4) to
ship gasoline prior to testing. Instead, today's rule provides that any
refiner who uses in-line blending equipment may be exempt from the
requirement to obtain test results prior to releasing the gasoline from
the refinery, provided that the refiner submits to us the information
required for an in-line blending exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4)(i)(A)
(requiring a detailed description of the in-line blending operation),
or the refiner has an in-line blending exemption granted under
Sec. 80.65(f)(4). Today's rule also requires the refiner to submit any
additional information requested by us and to comply with any other
requirements that we include in the exemption. For refiners who do not
hold an exemption under Sec. 80.65(f)(4), in the absence of
notification by us that the exemption has not been approved, or that
additional information is required or other requirements have been
included in the exemption, the in-line blending exemption will be
effective 60 days from our receipt of the refiner's submission of
information.
We believe it is important to ensure that the on-line analyzer
technology and the refiner's methodology and procedures are sufficient
for the gasoline sulfur levels that the refinery will have when the low
sulfur gasoline rule is implemented, for both RFG and conventional
gasoline. Generally, we
[[Page 19303]]
will require the accuracy of the on-line sulfur measurement to be
sufficient to identify product segments that violate the applicable
per-gallon sulfur standards. The control of an in-line blending system
must be sufficient to prevent non-complying gasoline from leaving the
refinery. Recordkeeping must be sufficient to allow us to verify the
sulfur compliance of each batch and the accuracy and control capability
of the in-line blending system.
Currently, on-line sulfur measurement technology is evolving and
refiners are evaluating analyzers. In the preamble to the final rule,
we indicated that we will be asking in-line blending refiners with
exemptions under Sec. 80.65(f)(4) to submit additional information
under the sulfur rule, including information on how sulfur is monitored
and how streams of gasoline are distributed in the in-blending process.
See 65 FR 6807. As indicated above, today's action includes provisions
which require in-line blender-refiners, both refiners of conventional
gasoline and refiners of RFG under a Sec. 80.65(f)(4) exemption, to
submit any additional information requested by us and to comply with
other requirements that we include in the exemption. Today's action
also provides that we may modify the requirements of an exemption under
Sec. 80.330(a)(4) if we determine that the in-line blending operation
does not effectively or adequately control, monitor or document the
sulfur content of the gasoline, or if we determine that other
circumstances exist which merit the modification of the requirements
for an exemption, such as advancements in the state-of-the-art for in-
line blending measurement which allow for additional control or more
accurate monitoring or documentation of sulfur content. Consistent with
other provisions of the sulfur rule, today's action provides that a
refiner's exemption will be void ab initio if we determine that the
refiner provided false or inaccurate information in any submission
required for an exemption under Sec. 80.330(a)(4).
B. Sample Retention
1. Limitation on Length of Time To Retain Samples
Section 80.335(a)(2) requires refiners to retain sample portions
for the most recent 20 samples collected, or for each sample collected
during the most recent 21 day period, whichever is greater. This
section specifies the minimum number of batch samples from a refinery,
which once created, must be retained. The regulation does not
specifically address the maximum amount of time that any particular
sample must be retained. At the time the low sulfur gasoline rule was
promulgated, it was assumed that refineries and importers produce or
import a substantial number of batches each year, and, therefore, would
accrue the 20 batch minimum in a relatively short time period and be
able to dispose of any additional, older samples quickly. We now
understand, however, that at least one refiner or importer handles less
than a handful of batches each year. Under the current low sulfur
gasoline rule, such refiner or importer may be required to retain batch
samples for as long as 10 to 20 years. We did not intend for refiners
to be required to retain sulfur samples for that length of time. As a
result, today's rule modifies Sec. 80.335(a)(2) to place a limit of 90
days on the length of time that any one sample must be retained.
We believe that placing a 90 day maximum on sample retention
provides a reasonable balance between our need to have samples
available for enforcement purposes and burden on the industry. Ideally,
we would require all samples to be available for at least 90 days.
However, we understand that retaining a large number of samples can
create an undue burden on parties. Under today's rule only parties who
produce relatively few batches of gasoline would be required to keep
any samples for as long as 90 days. We do not believe this would unduly
burden such parties, since they would only need to retain a few
samples. Parties who produce a substantial number of batches, for whom
sample retention is potentially a greater burden, will be able to
discard samples in less than 90 days.
2. Composited Samples
Section 80.335(a) provides that beginning on January 1, 2004, or
January 1 of the first year of allotment or credit generation,
whichever is earlier, a refiner or importer must retain representative
samples of the gasoline batch samples analyzed under the requirements
of Sec. 80.330. Under 80.330(a)(3), composited samples are treated as
single batches of gasoline and are allowed for sulfur testing purposes
prior to January 1, 2004. Today's rule modifies Sec. 80.335 to clarify
that, prior to January 1, 2004, refiners who analyze composited samples
are required to retain portions of the composited samples, and not
portions of samples of each batch comprising the composited samples.
3. Sample Retention for Reformulated Blendstocks for Oxygenate Blending
Section 80.335 describes the sample retention requirements for
refiners or importers. However, this section does not address how
reformulated blendstocks for oxygenate blending (RBOB) samples should
be considered. Section 80.69(a)(2) of the RFG regulations requires
refiners to conduct testing on RBOB by adding the specified type and
amount of oxygenate to a representative sample of the RBOB, and
determining the properties and characteristics of the resulting
gasoline (i.e., a ``handblend''). Section 80.335(a) requires refiners
to collect a representative portion of each sample analyzed and retain
such sample portions as specified in Sec. 80.335(a)(2). We interpret
Sec. 80.335(a) to require refiners to retain samples of the RBOB
batches and samples of the ethanol used to conduct the handblend
testing, rather than samples of the actual handblend. Refiners,
therefore, are not required to create additional volumes of the
handblend samples for purposes of fulfilling the sample retention
requirements of Sec. 80.335. Having the RBOB and accompanying ethanol
samples available to us will allow us to combine samples of the actual
RBOB and ethanol used in the handblend. This will enable us to
determine whether the refiner blended the handblend with proper amounts
of the components and properly conducted the testing. Today's rule
clarifies Sec. 80.335 with regard to the sample retention requirement
for RBOB.
VI. Changes to Vehicle Compliance Regulations
The table in Section I, above, lists minor changes which we are
making to Subpart S of 40 CFR Part 86 which contains the certification
compliance regulations for new motor vehicles. The changes correct some
errors and inconsistencies and add some clarification. We believe these
changes are minor and technical in nature, and can be made as a direct
final rule.
VII. Administrative Requirements
A. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency
is required to determine whether this regulatory action would be
``significant'' and therefore subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as any
regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:
[[Page 19304]]
Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with
an action taken or planned by another agency;
Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or,
Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, we have determined
that this final rule is not a ``significant regulatory action.''
B. Regulatory Flexibility
We have determined that this rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities, and that it is
therefore not necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in
conjunction with this direct final rule. Because today's rule corrects,
amends, and revises certain provisions of the December 1999 regulations
for the control of air pollution from new motor vehicles and for low
sulfur gasoline, regulated entities will find it easier to comply with
the requirements of the Tier 2/Gasoline sulfur program. Today's rule
also identifies counties for inclusion in the GPA, resulting in
additional flexibility for refiners providing gasoline to those areas.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 USC 3501 et seq., and
implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, do not apply to this action
as it does not involve the collection of information as defined
therein.
D. Intergovernmental Relations
1. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal
governments, and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, We
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more for
any single year. Before promulgating a rule for which a written
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative that is
not the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if we provide an explanation in the final rule of why such
an alternative was adopted.
Before we establish any regulatory requirement that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, we must develop a small government plan pursuant to
section 203 of the UMRA. Such a plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, and enabling officials of
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of our regulatory proposals with significant federal
intergovernmental mandates. The plan must also provide for informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
This rule contains no federal mandates for state, local, or tribal
governments as defined by the provisions of Title II of the UMRA. The
rule imposes no enforceable duties on any of these governmental
entities. Nothing in the rule will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments.
We have determined that this rule does not contain a federal
mandate that may result in estimated expenditures of more than $100
million to the private sector in any single year. This action has the
net effect of correcting, amending, and revising certain provisions of
the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program, and identifying counties for
inclusion in the GPA. Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded
Mandates Act do not apply to this action.
2. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
On January 1, 2001, Executive Order 13084 was superseded by
Executive Order 13175. However, this rule was developed during the
period when Executive Order 13084 was still in force, and so tribal
considerations were addressed under Executive Order 13084.
Under Executive Order 13084, we may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian Tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or we consult with those
governments. If we comply by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires
us to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a separately
identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the
extent of our prior consultation with representatives of affected
tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a
statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition,
Executive Order 13084 requires us to develop an effective process
permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect
their communities.''
Today's rule does not uniquely affect the communities of American
Indian tribal governments since the motor vehicle emissions, motor
vehicle fuel, and other related requirements for private businesses in
today's rule will have national applicability. Furthermore, today's
rule does not impose any direct compliance costs on these communities
and no circumstances specific to such communities exist that will cause
an impact on these communities beyond those discussed in the other
sections of today's document. The effect of today's rule is no more
significant than the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program for tribes within
the original GPA; under today's action, gasoline sold in certain tribal
lands will be subject to the GPA standards rather than the otherwise
applicable gasoline sulfur standards until 2007. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to
this rule. Our conclusions regarding the impacts from the
implementation of today's rule discussed in the other sections of this
preamble are equally applicable to the communities of American Indian
tribal governments.
As described elsewhere in this rule, the overall emission benefits
of the early years of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program are not
reduced over those described in the final rule. The air quality
analysis of the final Tier 2 program was based on the premise that all
gasoline produced or used in the eight GPA states would be covered by
the GPA program. Thus, GPA gasoline produced at refineries located in
the
[[Page 19305]]
eight GPA states was included in the air quality analysis.
3. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires us to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.
Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, we may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or we consult
with State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation. We also may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts State law, unless the Agency
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
Section 4 of the Executive Order contains additional requirements
for rules that preempt State or local law, even if those rules do not
have federalism implications (i.e., the rules will not 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). Those
requirements include providing all affected State and local officials
notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the
development of the regulation. If the preemption is not based on
express or implied statutory authority, we also must consult, to the
extent practicable, with appropriate State and local officials
regarding the conflict between State law and Federally protected
interests within the agency's area of regulatory responsibility.
This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
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. This rule clarifies and corrects
certain provisions of an earlier rule that adopted national emissions
standards for certain categories of motor vehicles and national
standards to control gasoline sulfur, and identifies additional areas
to be subject to the GPA program for low sulfur gasoline. The
requirements of the rule will be enforced by the federal government at
the national level. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order do not apply to this rule. Although section 6 of
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule, we did consult with
State and local officials in developing this rule.
E. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Section 12(d) of Public Law 104-113, directs us to
use voluntary consensus standards in our regulatory activities unless
it would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the we decide not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This rule references technical standards adopted by us through
previous rulemakings. No new technical standards are established in
today's rule. The standards referenced in today's rule involve the
measurement of gasoline fuel parameters and motor vehicle emissions.
The measurement standards for gasoline fuel parameters referenced in
today's proposal are all voluntary consensus standards. The motor
vehicle emissions measurement standards referenced in today's rule are
government-unique standards that were developed by us through previous
rulemakings. These standards have served our emissions control goals
well since their implementation and have been well accepted by
industry. We are not aware of any voluntary consensus standards for the
measurement of motor vehicle emissions. Therefore, we are using the
existing EPA-developed standards found in 40 CFR part 86 for the
measurement of motor vehicle emissions.
F. Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, section 5-501 of the Order directs us to evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by us.
This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not
an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866. Furthermore, this rule does not concern an environmental
health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children.
G. Congressional Review Act
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. We 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. 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). This rule will be effective July 12, 2001.
VIII. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
Statutory authority for the vehicle controls set in today's final
rule can be found in sections 202, 206, 207, 208, and 301 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. sections 7521, 7525, 7541, 7542
and 7601.
Statutory authority for the fuel controls set in today's final rule
comes from section 211(c) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7545(c)), which allows
us to regulate fuels that either contribute to air pollution which
endangers public health or welfare or which impair
[[Page 19306]]
emission control equipment. Additional support for the procedural and
enforcement-related aspects of the fuel's controls in today's final
rule, including the record keeping requirements, comes from sections
114(a) and 301(a) of the CAA.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Imports,
Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 86
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 19, 2001.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 80 and 86 of the
Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 80--REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521(l), 7545 and 7601(a).
2. Section 80.215 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and
(a)(3) and by adding paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.215 What is the scope of the geographic phase-in program?
(a) * * *
(2) In addition, the following counties within the states
identified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section and the following
Federal Indian reservations in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section are
included in the GPA:
(i) The list of counties follows:
Arizona
Apache
Coconino
Gila
Greenlee
Navajo
Nebraska
Banner
Box Butte
Cheyenne
Dawes
Deuel
Garden
Keith
Kimball
Morrill
Scotts Bluff
Sheridan
Sioux
Nevada
Elko
Eureka
Humboldt
Lander
Lincoln
White Pine
Oregon
Baker
Crook
Gilliam
Grant
Harney
Malheur
Morrow
Sherman
Umatilla
Union
Wallowa
Wheeler
South Dakota
Bennett
Butte
Corson
Custer
Dewey
Fall River
Haakon
Harding
Jackson
Jones
Lawrence
Meade
Mellette
Pennington
Perkins
Shannon
Stanley
Todd
Ziebach
Washington
Adams
Asotin
Benton
Chelan
Columbia
Douglas
Ferry
Franklin
Garfield
Grant
Kittitas
Lincoln
Okanogan
Pend Oreille
Spokane
Stevens
Walla Walla
Whitman
Yakima
(ii) The list of Federal Indian reservations follows: Burns Paiute,
Cheyenne River, Colville, Duck Valley, Ely Colony, Fort Apache, Fort
McDermitt, Goshute, Haulapai, Havasupai, Hopi, Kalispel, Navajo, Pine
Ridge, Rosebud, Yakama, San Carlos, Spokane, Standing Rock, Summit
Lake, Te-Moak, Umatilla, Winnemucca.
(3) Contiguous tribal reservations of a particular tribe are
included in the GPA if a portion of the tribal reservation is within
the GPA state or county.
(4) Any dispensing facility located partially within a GPA county
or tribal reservation land shall be considered fully within the GPA for
purposes of this program.
* * * * *
3. Section 80.216 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.216 What standards apply to gasoline produced or imported for
use in the GPA?
(a)(1) * * *
(i) 150.00 ppm; or
* * * * *
(2) In the case of any refinery whose actual annual sulfur average
decreases to a level lower than the refinery's annual average sulfur
standard established under paragraph (a)(1) of this section during the
period 2000 through 2003, the standard applicable to that refinery from
2004 through 2006 shall be the lowest average sulfur content for any
year in which the refinery generated allotments or credits under
Sec. 80.275(a) or Sec. 80.305 plus 30 ppm, not to exceed 150.00 ppm.
* * * * *
4. Section 80.217 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.217 How does a refiner or importer apply for the GPA
standards?
* * * * *
(b) Applications under paragraph (a) of this section must be
submitted by May 1, 2001.
* * * * *
5. Section 80.225 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.225 What is the definition of a small refiner?
* * * * *
(d) Notwithstanding the definition in paragraph (a) of this
section, refiners who acquire and/or reactivate a refinery that was
shutdown or was non-operational between January 1, 1998, and January 1,
1999, may apply for small refiner status in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 80.235. The
[[Page 19307]]
employee (1500 annual average) and crude oil capacity criteria (155,000
bpcd) for small refiner status for such refineries will be determined
in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.235(f).
6. Section 80.230 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read
as follows:
Sec. 80.230 Who is not eligible for the hardship provisions for small
refiners?
(a) * * *
(1) Refiners with refineries built after January 1, 1999;
* * * * *
7. Section 80.235 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(2), (f) and
(g)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.235 How does a refiner obtain approval as a small refiner?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) The total corporate crude oil capacity of each refinery as
reported to the Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE), or, in the case of a foreign refiner, a
comparable reputable source, such as a professional publication or
trade journal. The information submitted to EIA or the comparable
reputable source is presumed to be correct. In cases where a company,
domestic or foreign, disagrees with this information, the company may
petition EPA with appropriate data to correct the record within 60 days
after the company submits its application for small refiner status.
* * * * *
(f) Approval of small refiner status for refiners who apply under
Sec. 80.225(d) will be based on all information submitted under
paragraph (c) of this section. The information submitted must show that
the refiner employed an average of no more than 1500 people and had an
average crude oil capacity less than or equal to 155,000 bpcd. Where
appropriate, the employee and crude oil capacity criteria for such
refiners will be based on the most recent 12 months of operation.
(g) * * *
(1) If approved, EPA will notify the refiner of each refinery's
applicable annual average sulfur standard, baseline volume, and per-
gallon cap standard under Sec. 80.240 for the 2004-2007 averaging
periods.
* * * * *
8. Section 80.245 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) and
adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.245 How does a small refiner apply for a sulfur baseline?
(a) * * *
(3) For any refiner that acquires and/or reactivates a refinery
that was shut down or non-operational between January 1, 1997, and
December 31, 1998, the average sulfur level and average volume of
gasoline produced during each annual averaging period that the refinery
was in operation after the refinery was acquired and/or reactivated.
EPA will evaluate all of the information and data submitted by the
refiner in determining the appropriate sulfur baseline for the
refinery. Where EPA concludes that the data submitted reasonably
reflects current sulfur levels, the refinery's baseline will be
determined based on the average sulfur content of gasoline produced by
the refinery during the most recent annual averaging period in which
the refinery was in operation.
* * * * *
(c)(1) Foreign refiners who do not have an approved individual
refinery baseline under Sec. 80.94 must follow the procedures specified
in Sec. 80.410(b).
(2) Foreign refiners who have an approved individual refinery
baseline under Sec. 80.94, but one that was not in effect for purposes
of anti-dumping compliance during the 1997-1998 annual averaging
periods, must comply with the requirements of this section for the
gasoline produced at the refinery and imported into the United States
during each of the annual averaging periods in which the refinery was
subject to its individual anti-dumping baseline. EPA will evaluate all
of the information and data submitted under this section in determining
the foreign refinery's sulfur baseline pursuant to this paragraph.
Where EPA concludes that the data submitted reasonably reflects current
sulfur levels, the refinery's baseline will be determined based on the
annual average sulfur level and volume of gasoline produced by the
foreign refinery and imported into the U.S. during the most recent
annual averaging period in which the refinery was subject to its
individual anti-dumping baseline.
9. Section 80.250 is amended by revising the definitions of ``n''
and ``i'' following the equations in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2),
adding paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4), and removing and reserving
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.250 How is the small refiner sulfur baseline and volume
determined?
(a) (1) * * *
n = Total number of batches of gasoline produced from January 1,
1997, through December 31, 1998 (or the total number of batches of
gasoline pursuant to Sec. 80.245(a)(3); or, for a foreign refinery,
the total number of batches of gasoline produced and imported into
the U.S. from January 1, 1997, through December 31, 1998, or the
total number of batches of gasoline produced and imported into the
U.S. pursuant to Sec. 80.245(c)(2)).
i = Individual batch of gasoline produced from January 1, 1997,
through December 31, 1998 (or individual batch of gasoline pursuant
to Sec. 80.245(a)(3); or, for a foreign refinery, individual batch
of gasoline produced and imported into the U.S. from January 1,
1997, through December 31, 1998, or individual batch of gasoline
produced and imported into the U.S. pursuant to Sec. 80.245(c)(2)).
(2) * * *
n = Total number of batches of gasoline produced from January 1,
1997, through December 31, 1998 (or the total number of batches of
gasoline pursuant to Sec. 80.245(a)(3); or, for a foreign refinery,
the total number of batches of gasoline produced and imported into
the U.S. from January 1, 1997, through December 31, 1998, or the
total number of batches of gasoline produced and imported into the
U.S. pursuant to Sec. 80.245(c)(2)).
i = Individual batch of gasoline produced from January 1, 1997,
through December 31, 1998 (or individual batch of gasoline produced
pursuant to Sec. 80.245(a)(3); or, for a foreign refinery,
individual batch of gasoline produced and imported into the U.S.
from January 1, 1997, through December 31, 1998, or individual batch
of gasoline produced and imported into the U.S. pursuant to
Sec. 80.245(c)(2)).
(3) Any refiner who, under Sec. 80.69 or Sec. 80.101(d)(4),
included oxygenate blended downstream in compliance calculations for
1997-1998 must include this oxygenate in the baseline calculations for
sulfur content under this section.
(4) Sulfur baseline calculations under this section shall be
conducted to two decimal places.
(b) [Reserved]
* * * * *
10. Section 80.285 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i),
(a)(1)(ii), (a)(1)(iii), (b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.285 Who may generate credits under the ABT program?
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Refiners who establish a sulfur baseline under Sec. 80.295 for
a refinery;
(ii) Foreign refiners for refineries with an approved baseline
under Sec. 80.94, or refineries with baselines established in
accordance with Sec. 80.290(d); or
(iii) Small refiners for any refinery subject to the standards
under Sec. 80.240, using their small refiner baseline
[[Page 19308]]
established under Sec. 80.250 for that refinery.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Refiners for any refinery, and importers subject to the
standards under Sec. 80.195;
(ii) Refiners and importers of gasoline designated as GPA gasoline
under Sec. 80.219, using the refinery's annual average sulfur standard
for GPA gasoline established under Sec. 80.216(a)(for any party
generating credits under both paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section and
this paragraph (b)(1)(ii), such credits must be calculated separately);
or
* * * * *
(2) Generation of credits under Sec. 80.310 for all imported
gasoline shall be through the importer.
* * * * *
11. Section 80.290 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(6) and
revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.290 How does a refiner apply for a sulfur baseline?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(6) For any refiner that acquires and/or reactivates a refinery
that was shut down or non-operational between January 1, 1997, and
December 31, 1998, the average sulfur level of gasoline produced during
each annual averaging period that the refinery was in operation after
the refinery was acquired and/or reactivated. EPA will evaluate all of
the data submitted by the refiner in determining the appropriate sulfur
baseline for the refinery. Where EPA concludes that the data submitted
reasonably reflects current sulfur levels, the refinery's baseline will
be determined based on the average sulfur content of the refinery's
gasoline production during the most recent annual averaging period the
refinery was in operation.
(d)(1) Foreign refiners who do not have an approved refinery
baseline under Sec. 80.94 must follow the procedures specified in
Sec. 80.410(b).
(2) Foreign refiners who have an approved individual refinery
baseline under Sec. 80.94, but one that was not in effect for purposes
of anti-dumping compliance during the 1997-1998 annual averaging
periods, must comply with the requirements of this section for the
gasoline produced at the refinery and imported to the U.S. during each
annual averaging period in which the refinery was subject to its
individual anti-dumping baseline. EPA will evaluate all of the
information and data submitted under this section in determining a
foreign refinery's sulfur baseline pursuant to this paragraph (d).
Where EPA concludes that the data submitted reasonably reflects current
sulfur levels, a foreign refinery's baseline sulfur level under this
paragraph will be determined based on the average sulfur level of
gasoline produced by the foreign refinery and imported to the U.S.
during the most recent annual averaging period in which the refinery
was subject to its individual anti-dumping baseline.
* * * * *
12. Section 80.295 is amended by revising the definitions of ``n''
and ``i'' following the equation in paragraph (a), revising paragraph
(b) and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.295 How is a refinery sulfur baseline determined?
(a) * * *
n = Total number of batches of gasoline produced during January 1,
1997 through December 31, 1998 (or the total number of batches of
gasoline pursuant to Sec. 80.290(c)(6); or, for a foreign refinery,
the total number of batches of gasoline produced and imported into
the U.S. during January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1998, or, the
total number of batches of gasoline produced and imported into the
U.S. pursuant to Sec. 80.290(d)(2)).
i = Individual batch of gasoline produced during January 1, 1997
through December 31, 1998 (or individual batch of gasoline produced
pursuant to Sec. 80.290(c)(6); or, for a foreign refinery,
individual batch of gasoline produced and imported into the U.S.
during January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1998, or, individual
batch of gasoline produced and imported into the U.S. pursuant to
Sec. 80.290(d)(2)).
(b) Any refiner who, under Sec. 80.69 or Sec. 80.101(d)(4),
included oxygenate blended downstream in compliance calculations for
1997-1998 for a refinery must include this oxygenate in the baseline
calculations for sulfur content for that refinery under paragraph (a)
of this section.
(c) Sulfur baseline calculations under this section shall be
conducted to two decimal places.
13. Section 80.305 is amended by revising the definitions of
``Va'' and ``Sa'' following the equation in
paragraph (a), and revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.305 How are credits generated during the time period 2000
through 2003?
(a) * * *
Va = Total volume of gasoline produced during the
averaging period at the refinery (or for a foreign refinery, the
total volume of gasoline produced during the averaging period at the
refinery that was imported into the U.S. in accordance with the
requirements of Sec. 80.410)
* * * * *
Sa = Actual annual average sulfur level, calculated in
accordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.205, for gasoline produced
during the averaging period by the refinery, exclusive of any
credits, (or for a foreign refinery, the actual average sulfur
level, calculated in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.205,
for gasoline produced during the averaging period at the refinery
that was imported into the U.S., in accordance with the requirements
of Sec. 80.410, exclusive of any credits.)
* * * * *
(d) Refiners may generate credits for gasoline produced during an
averaging period for a refinery only if the annual average sulfur level
for the gasoline produced at that refinery during the averaging period
is less than 0.90 of the refinery's baseline under Sec. 80.250 or
Sec. 80.295.
* * * * *
14. Section 80.310 is amended by revising the definitions of
Sstd and Sa following the equation in paragraph
(b) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.310 How are credits generated beginning in 2004?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Sstd = 30 ppm; or the sulfur standard for a small
refinery established under Sec. 80.240; or, for gasoline designated
as GPA gasoline under Sec. 80.219, the standard for GPA gasoline
established for a refinery under Sec. 80.216(a).
Sa = Actual annual average sulfur level, calculated in
accordance with the provisions of Sec. 80.205, for gasoline produced
at a refinery or imported during the averaging period, exclusive of
any credits.
* * * * *
15. Section 80.330 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and
(a)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.330 What are the sampling and testing requirements for
refiners and importers?
(a) * * *
(3) Prior to January 1, 2004:
(i) Any refiner may release gasoline from the refinery prior to
obtaining the test results required under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section.
(ii) Any refiner of conventional gasoline may combine samples of
gasoline from more than one batch of gasoline or blendstock prior to
analysis and treat such composite sample as one batch of gasoline or
blendstock pursuant to the requirements of Sec. 80.101(i)(2).
(4)(i) Beginning January 1, 2004, any refiner who produces gasoline
using
[[Page 19309]]
computer-controlled in-line blending equipment is exempt from the
requirement of paragraph (a)(1) of this section to obtain the test
results required under paragraph (a)(1) of this section prior to the
gasoline leaving the refinery, provided that the refiner obtains an
exemption from this requirement from EPA. To obtain such exemption, the
refiner must:
(A) Have been granted an in-line blending exemption under
Sec. 80.65(f)(4); or
(B) If the refiner has not been granted an exemption under
Sec. 80.65(f)(4), submit to EPA all of the information required under
Sec. 80.65(f)(4)(i)(A). A letter signed by the president, chief
operating or chief executive officer of the company, or his/her
designee, stating that the information contained in the submission is
true to the best of his/her belief must accompany any submission under
this paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B).
(ii) Refiners who seek an exemption under paragraph (a)(4)(i) of
this section must comply with any request by EPA for additional
information or any other requirements that EPA includes as part of the
exemption.
(iii) Within 60 days of EPA's receipt of a submission under
paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) of this section, EPA will notify the refiner if
the exemption is not approved or of any deficiencies in the refiner's
submission, or if any additional information is required or other
requirements are included in the exemption pursuant to paragraph
(a)(4)(ii) of this section. In the absence of such notification from
EPA, the effective date of an exemption under paragraph (a)(4)(i) of
this section for refiners who do not hold an exemption under
Sec. 80.65(f)(4) is 60 days from EPA's receipt of the refiner's
submission under paragraph (a)(4)(i)(B) of this section.
(iv) EPA reserves the right to modify the requirements of an
exemption under paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this section, in whole or in
part, at any time, if EPA determines that the refiner's operation does
not effectively or adequately control, monitor or document the sulfur
content of the refinery's gasoline production, or if EPA determines
that any other circumstances exist which merit modification of the
requirements of an exemption, such as advancements in the state of the
art for in-line blending measurement which allow for additional control
or more accurate monitoring or documentation of sulfur content. If EPA
finds that a refiner provided false or inaccurate information in any
submission required for an exemption under this section, upon
notification from EPA, the refiner's exemption will be void ab initio.
* * * * *
16. Section 80.335 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) and
adding paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 80.335 What gasoline sample retention requirements apply to
refiners and importers?
(a) * * *
(2) Retain sample portions for the most recent 20 samples
collected, or for each sample collected during the most recent 21 day
period, whichever is greater, not to exceed 90 days for any given
sample;
* * * * *
(d) Prior to January 1, 2004, for purposes of complying with the
requirements of this section, refiners who analyze composited samples
under Sec. 80.330(a)(3) must retain portions of the composited samples.
Portions of samples of each batch comprising the composited samples are
not required to be retained.
(e) For purposes of complying with the requirements of this section
for RBOB, a sample of each RBOB batch produced plus a sample of the
ethanol used to conduct the handblend testing pursuant to Sec. 80.69
must be retained.
17. Section 80.410 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(1),
(d)(3)(ii), (f)(2)(ii) introductory text, and (s) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 80.410 What are the additional requirements for gasoline produced
at foreign refineries having individual small refiner sulfur baselines,
foreign refineries granted temporary relief under Sec. 80.270, or
baselines for generating credits during 2000 through 2003?
* * * * *
(d) * * * (1) Any foreign refiner of a foreign refinery that has
been assigned an individual sulfur baseline must designate each batch
of Sulfur-FRGAS as such at the time the gasoline is produced, unless
the refinery has elected to classify no gasoline exported to the United
States as Sulfur-FRGAS under paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) The certification shall be made part of the product transfer
documents for the Sulfur-FRGAS. Prior to 2004, the information required
under paragraph (d)(3)(i)(D)(1) of this section may be omitted from the
product transfer documents that accompany the gasoline, provided that
such information is provided to the United States importer prior to
collection of the representative sample required under paragraph
(o)(3)(ii)(A) of this section.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) Prepare a volume-weighted vessel composite sample from the
compartment samples, and determine the value for sulfur in accordance
with the methodology and requirements specified in Sec. 80.330, by:
* * * * *
(s) Additional requirements for petitions, reports and
certificates. Any petition for a refinery baseline under Sec. 80.250 or
Sec. 80.295, any alternative procedures under paragraph (p) of this
section, and any certification under paragraph (d)(3) of this section
shall be:
* * * * *
PART 86---CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES
AND ENGINES
18. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7521(l) and 7521(m)-7671(q).
19. Section 86.1810-01 is amended by revising paragraphs (l)(1)
introductory text and (m)(1) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1810-01 General standards; increase in emissions; unsafe
conditions; waivers.
* * * * *
(l) Fuel dispensing spitback testing waiver. (1) Vehicles certified
to the refueling emission standards set forth in Secs. 86.1811(e),
86.1812(e) and 86.1813(e) are not required to demonstrate compliance
with the fuel dispensing spitback standard contained in that section
provided that:
* * * * *
(m) Inherently low refueling emission testing waiver. (1) Vehicles
using fuels/fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are not
required to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the
refueling emission standards set forth in Secs. 86.1811(e), 86.1812(e)
and 86.1813(e) provided that:
* * * * *
20. Section 86.1811-04 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(3)(i),
(c)(3)(ii), and (e) introductory text, and in paragraph (f)(2)(i) by
revising the introductory text, the equation and the definition for
SFTP Standard following the equation to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1811-04 Emission standards for light-duty vehicles, light-duty
trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
[[Page 19310]]
(3)(i) For a given test group of flexible-fueled, bi-fuel or dual
fuel vehicles certified to bin 10 in Table S04-1, when operated on the
alcohol or gaseous fuel they are designed to use, manufacturers may
choose to comply with an NMOG standard of 0.230 for LDV/LLDTs or 0.280
g/mi for HLDT/MDPVs at full useful life and corresponding intermediate
life standards of 0.160 g/mi and 0.195 g/mi, respectively, when these
flexible-fueled, bi-fuel or dual fuel vehicles are certified to operate
on gasoline or diesel fuel.
(ii) For a given test group of flexible-fueled, bi-fuel or dual
fuel vehicles certified to bin 8 in Table S04-1, when operated on the
alcohol or gaseous fuel they are designed to use, manufacturers may
choose to comply with a NMOG standard of 0.156 g/mi for LDV/LLDTs and
0.180 for HLDT/MDPVs at full useful life and corresponding intermediate
life standards of 0.125 g/mi and 0.140 g/mi, respectively, when these
flexible-fueled, bi-fuel or dual fuel vehicles are certified to operate
on gasoline or diesel fuel.
* * * * *
(e) Evaporative emission standards. Consistent with the phase-in
requirements in paragraph (k) of this section, evaporative emissions
from gasoline-fueled, natural gas-fueled, liquefied petroleum gas-
fueled, ethanol-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles must not exceed the
standards in this paragraph (e). The standards apply equally to
certification and in-use vehicles.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2)(i) Manufacturers must calculate their applicable full useful
life SFTP standards for NMHC+ NOX, PM and for CO, if using
the weighted CO standard. If not using the weighted CO standard,
manufacturers may use the full useful life standalone Tier 1 standards
for US06 and SC03. To calculate the applicable full useful life
weighted NMHC+ NOX, PM and CO standards, manufacturers must
use the following formula:
SFTP Standard = SFTP Standard1-[0.35 x (FTP
Standard1-Current FTP Standard)]
Where:
SFTP Standard = Applicable full life weighted SFTP standard for
NMHC+ NOX, PM or CO. The NMHC+ NOX and PM
standards must be rounded to two decimal places and the CO standard
must be rounded to one decimal place.
* * * * *
21. Section 86.1829-01 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2)(i)
to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1829-01 Durability and emission testing requirements; waivers.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Testing at low altitude. One EDV in each evaporative/refueling
family and evaporative/refueling emission control system combination
must be tested in accordance with the evaporative/refueling test
procedure requirement of subpart B of this part. The configuration of
the EDV will be determined under the provisions of Sec. 86.1828-01. The
EDV must also be tested for exhaust emission compliance using the FTP
and SFTP procedures of subpart B of this part. In lieu of testing
natural gas-fueled or liquefied petroleum gas-fueled vehicles, the
manufacturer may provide a statement in its application for
certification that, based on the manufacturer's engineering evaluation
of such emission testing as the manufacturer deems appropriate, these
vehicles will comply with the emission standards.
* * * * *
22. Section 86.1835-01 is amended by revising paragraph (d)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1835-01 Confirmatory certification testing.
* * * * *
(d) Upon request of the manufacturer, the Administrator may issue a
conditional certificate of conformity for a test group which has not
completed the Administrator testing required under paragraph (a) of
this section. Such a certificate will be issued based upon the
condition that the confirmatory testing be completed in an expedited
manner and that the results of the testing be in compliance with all
standards and procedures.
* * * * *
23. Section 86.1841-01 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read
as follows:
Sec. 86.1814-01 Compliance with emission standards for the purpose of
certification.
* * * * *
(e) Unless otherwise approved by the Administrator, manufacturers
must not use Reactivity Adjustment Factors (RAFs) in their calculation
of the certification level of any pollutant for any vehicle except for
LDVs and LLDTs participating in the National Low Emission Vehicle
(NLEV) program described in subpart R of this part, regardless of the
fuel used in the test vehicle.
24. Section 86.1845-04 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(1) to
read as follows:
Sec. 86.1845-04 Manufacturer in-use verification testing requirements.
* * * * *
(f)(1) A manufacturer may conduct in-use testing on a test group by
measuring NMHC exhaust emissions rather than NMOG exhaust emissions.
The measured NMHC exhaust emissions must be multiplied by the
adjustment factor used for certification of the test group, or another
adjustment factor acceptable to the Administrator, to determine the
equivalent NMOG exhaust emission values for the test vehicle. The
equivalent NMOG exhaust emission value must be used in place of the
measured NMHC exhaust emission value in determining the exhaust NMOG
results. The equivalent NMOG exhaust emission values must be compared
to the NMOG exhaust emission standard from the emission bin to which
the test group was certified.
* * * * *
25. Section 86.1846-01 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 86.1846-01 Manufacturer in-use confirmatory testing requirements.
(a) * * *
(3) For purposes of this section, the term vehicle includes light-
duty vehicles, light-duty trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles.
* * * * *
26. Section 86.1860-04 is amended by revising paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)
and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1860-04 How to comply with the Tier 2 and interim non-Tier 2
fleet average NOX standards.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The manufacturer must calculate these extra NOX
credits, where permitted, by substituting an adjusted NOX
standard for the applicable NOX standard from the full
useful life certification bin when it calculates the applicable fleet
average NOX emissions by the procedure in paragraph (f) of
this section. The adjusted standard must be equal to the applicable
full useful life NOX standard multiplied by 0.85 and rounded
to one more decimal place than the number of decimal places as the
applicable full useful life NOX standard.
* * * * *
(h) Additional credits for vehicles certified to low bins. A
manufacturer may obtain additional NOX credits by certifying
vehicles to bins 1 and/or 2 in model years from 2001 through 2005
subject to the following requirements:
(1) When computing the fleet average Tier 2 NOX
emissions using the formula
[[Page 19311]]
in paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the manufacturer may multiply the
number of vehicles certified to bins 1 and 2 by the applicable
multiplier shown in Table S04-11 when computing the denominator in the
formula. These multipliers may not be used after model year 2005. The
table follows:
Table S04-11.--Multipliers for Additional Tier 2 NOX Credits for Bin 1
and 2 LDV/Ts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiplier
Bin Model year 73
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2........................ 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005.... 1.5
1........................ 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005.... 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Optionally, instead of the process described in paragraph
(h)(1) of this section, when computing Tier 2 NOX credits
using the formula in Sec. 86.1861-04(b)(1), the manufacturer may
multiply the number of vehicles certified to bin 1 and bin 2 by the
applicable multiplier shown in Table S04-11 in paragraph (h)(1) of this
section when computing the ``Total number of Tier 2 Vehicles Sold,
Including ZEVs and HEVs''. These multipliers may not be used after
model year 2005.
27. Section 86.1861-04 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5) and
the equation in paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1861-04 How do the tier 2 and interim non-tier 2
NOX averaging, banking and trading programs work?
(a) * * *
(5) A small volume manufacturer that has opted not to meet all
phase-in requirements as permitted under Sec. 86.1811-04(k)(5), must:
(i) demonstrate compliance or obtain appropriate credits to comply
with the 0.30 g/mi. fleet average NOX standard for interim
LDV/LLDTs for 100% of its LDV/LLDTs for one model year , in order to
carry forward a credit deficit for later model year interim LDV/LLDTs;
and
(ii) Demonstrate compliance or obtain appropriate credits to comply
with the 0.07 g/mi. fleet average NOX standard for 100% of
its LDV/LLDTs for one model year , in order to carry forward a credit
deficit for later model year Tier 2 LDV/LLDTs; and
(iii) Demonstrate compliance or obtain appropriate credits to
comply with the 0.20 g/mi. fleet average interim NOX
standard for 100% of its HLDT/MDPVs for one model year, in order to
carry forward a credit deficit for later model year interim HLDT/MDPVs.
* * * * *
(b) * * * (1) * * *
[(Fleet Average NOX Standard)-(Manufacturer's Fleet Average
NOX Value)] x (Total Number of Tier 2 Vehicles Sold,
Including ZEVs and HEVs).
Where: * * *
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-8927 Filed 4-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U