[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 13, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8202-8209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2702]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0002; FRL-8529-2]
Approval of Louisiana's Petition To Relax the Summer Gasoline
Volatility Standard for the Grant Parish Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action approving the State of
Louisiana's request to relax the federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)
standard applicable to gasoline introduced into commerce in Grant
Parish, Louisiana, (Grant Parish) during the summer ozone control
season--June 1 to September 15 of each year. Grant Parish is a
designated attainment area under the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (``NAAQS'') and is a redesignated attainment area
under the
[[Page 8203]]
1-hour ozone NAAQS. This action amends our regulations to change the
summertime RVP standard for Grant Parish from 7.8 pounds per square
inch (psi) to 9.0 psi. EPA has determined that this change to our
federal RVP regulations is consistent with the applicable provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Louisiana's request is supported by evidence that
Grant Parish can implement the 9.0 psi RVP standard and maintain the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and that relaxation of the applicable RVP standard to
9.0 psi will provide economic benefits. This action is being taken
without prior proposal because EPA believes that this final rulemaking
is noncontroversial, for the reasons set forth in this preamble, and
due to the limited scope of this action.
DATES: This rule is effective on April 14, 2008 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 14, 2008. If EPA receives
adverse comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0002, by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected]
Fax: Air and Radiation Docket--(202) 566-9744
Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0002.
Hand Delivery: Public Reading Room, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket Office's normal hours of
operations, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0002. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Public Reading Room, EPA/
DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Hillson, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Transportation and Regional Programs Division,
Mailcode AASMCG, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood
Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4789; fax
number: (734) 214-4052; e-mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
EPA is publishing this rule without a 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,
we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal
to relax the applicable volatility standard in Grant Parish if adverse
comments are received on this direct final rule. We do not intend to
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of
this document.
If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.
Regulated Entities: Entities potentially affected by this rule are
fuel producers and distributors who do business in Grant Parish.
Regulated entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS
Examples of potentially regulated entities codes
\a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum Refineries.......................................... 324110
Gasoline Marketers and Distributors........................... 424710
424720
Gasoline Retail Stations...................................... 447110
Gasoline Transporters......................................... 484220
484230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
This table provides only a guide for readers regarding entities
likely to be regulated by this action. You should carefully examine the
amended regulations in 40 CFR 80.27 to determine whether your facility
is impacted. If you have further questions, call the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.
Outline
I. Introduction
II. What Is the History of Gasoline Volatility Regulation?
III. What Are the EPA Rulemaking Actions Addressing the Transition
From the 1-Hour to 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS?
IV. What Is the EPA Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility
Standards in Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as
Attainment Areas?
A. What Is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy?
B. How Is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy Applied to
Grant Parish?
V. What Information Supports the Relaxation of Federal RVP
Requirements in Grant Parish?
A. History
B. Louisiana's RVP Relaxation Request and Initial EPA Response
C. EPA Approval of the Grant Parish 8-Hour Maintenance Plan
D. What Are the Section 110(l) Requirements?
VI. Final Action and Rationale
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 8204]]
I. Introduction
This rulemaking describes our final action to approve Louisiana's
request to relax the federal RVP standard from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi in
Grant Parish during the summer ozone control season--June 1 to
September 15. In 1995, EPA redesignated Grant Parish to a 1-hour ozone
NAAQS attainment area. Currently, Grant Parish is a designated
attainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone
NAAQS will also be called the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standards).
This preamble is hereafter organized into five parts. Section II
provides the history of federal gasoline volatility regulation. Section
III describes EPA's rulemaking actions to transition from the 1-hour to
the 8-hour ozone standard. Section IV provides the Agency's policy
regarding relaxation of volatility standards in former ozone
nonattainment areas that have been redesignated to attainment, and how
this policy is applied to Grant Parish while taking into account the
requirements under the 8-hour ozone standard. Section V reviews the
available information to determine if relaxation of the RVP standard in
Grant Parish is warranted: Louisiana's history of federal RVP
requirements; EPA's redesignation and designation of Grant Parish as
attainment of the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS, respectively;
Louisiana's relaxation request prompting this action; and the 8-hour
maintenance plan approval to support the request. Finally, Section VI
presents EPA's final action in response to the request and our
rationale.
II. What is the History of Gasoline Volatility Regulation?
In 1987, EPA determined that gasoline nationwide had become
increasingly volatile, causing an increase in evaporative emissions
from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.\1\ Evaporative emissions
from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), are
precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone and contribute to the
nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to ground-level ozone can
reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma or other respiratory
conditions), increase susceptibility to respiratory infection, and may
contribute to premature death in people with heart and lung disease.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 52 FR 31274 (Aug. 19, 1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is the Reid Vapor Pressure
(RVP). Under section 211(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act''),
we promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989, that set maximum limits
for the RVP of gasoline sold during the summer ozone control season--
June 1 to September 15. These regulations were referred to as Phase I
of a two-phase nationwide \2\ program, which was designed to reduce the
volatility of commercial gasoline during the summer ozone control
season.\3\ On June 11, 1990, EPA promulgated more stringent volatility
controls under Phase II of the volatility control program.\4\ These
requirements established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi
(depending on the State, the month, and the area's initial ozone
attainment designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard or ``NAAQS'') during the ozone control
season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Hawaii, Alaska and U.S. territories were excepted.
\3\ 54 FR 11868 (Mar. 22, 1989).
\4\ 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the ozone
control season. It further requires EPA to establish more stringent RVP
standards in nonattainment areas if we find such standards ``necessary
to generally achieve comparable evaporative emissions (on a per vehicle
basis) in nonattainment areas, taking into consideration the
enforceability of such standards, the need of an area for emission
control, and economic factors.'' Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from
establishing a volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an
attainment area, except that we may impose a lower (more stringent)
standard in any former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to
attainment.
On December 12, 1991, EPA modified the Phase II volatility
regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA.\5\ The
modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP above
9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning in
1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations retained
the original Phase II standards published in 1990.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
\6\ See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility controls,\7\
and reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility standards
published in 1991,\8\ we will rely on States to initiate changes to our
volatility program that they believe will enhance local air quality
and/or increase the economic efficiency of the program within the
statutory limits.\9\ In those rulemakings, we explained that the
Governor of a State may petition the Agency to set a volatility
standard less stringent than 7.8 psi for some month or months in a
nonattainment area. The petition must demonstrate such a change is
appropriate because of a particular local economic impact and that
sufficient alternative programs are available to achieve attainment and
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 55 FR 23660 (June 11, 1990) for a discussion on
procedures by which States could petition EPA for more or less
stringent volatility standards.
\8\ See 56 FR 24242 (May 29, 1991) and 56 FR 64706 (Dec. 12,
1991).
\9\ See CAA section 211(h)(1) (allowing EPA to set a volatility
standard more stringent than 9.0 psi as necessary to achieve
comparable emissions in nonattainment areas considering
enforceability, the need of an area for emissions control and
economic factors).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What are the EPA Rulemaking Actions Addressing the Transition from
the 1-Hour to 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS?
In July 1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone standard which would
be measured over an 8-hour period, i.e., the 8-hour ozone NAAQS or
standard.\10\ The 8-hour Ozone NAAQS rule was challenged by numerous
litigants and in May 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit issued a decision remanding, but not vacating, the 8-hour ozone
standard. In February 2001, the Supreme Court upheld our authority to
set the ozone NAAQS and remanded the case to the D.C. Circuit Court for
disposition of issues the Court did not address in its initial
decision.\11\ The Court of Appeals addressed these remaining issues and
upheld the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\12\ In April 2004, EPA designated and
classified areas for the 8-hour ozone standard.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).
\11\ Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass'ns, 531 U.S. 457 (2001).
\12\ American Trucking Assoc. v. EPA, 195 F.3d 4 (D.C. Cir.,
1999).
\13\ 69 FR 23857 (Apr. 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also in April 2004, we promulgated the Phase 1 Ozone Implementation
rule that addressed the revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and
identified the 1-hour requirements that would remain applicable after
revocation (i.e., the ``anti-backsliding provisions'').\14\ These
requirements varied based on areas'
[[Page 8205]]
designation for the 1-hour standard and such areas' designation for the
8-hour NAAQS. As part of these anti-backsliding provisions, EPA
required areas that had been redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1-hour standard (i.e., 1-hour ozone ``maintenance''
areas) and that were designated attainment for the 8-hour standard to
submit a new maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) that would
provide for maintenance of the 8-hour standard.\15\ After such a plan
was approved, anti-backsliding provisions provided relief for such
areas from certain 1-hour maintenance plan requirements. Although the
Phase 1 Ozone implementation rule was challenged in court and portions
of the rule were vacated, the vacated portions of the rule are not
relevant to today's Grant Parish volatility relaxation rulemaking.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 69 FR 23951 (Apr. 30, 2004).
\15\ See 69 FR 23955 (Apr. 30, 2004), section IV.C.2.c.v and
IV.C.2.d; see also 40 CFR 51.905(a)(4).
\16\ S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.
Cir. 2006 reh'g denied S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 2007
U.S. App. Lexis 13751 (D.C. Cir. June 8, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In November 2005, EPA promulgated the Phase 2 Ozone Implementation
rule that addressed various control and planning obligations that are
applicable to areas designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\17\ This rule has been challenged and EPA is currently awaiting
argument and a decision.\18\ No part of the Phase 2 Ozone
implementation rule is relevant for today's Grant Parish volatility
relaxation rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 70 FR 71612 (Nov. 29, 2005).
\18\ NRDC v. EPA, No. 06-1045 (D.C. Cir.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. What is the EPA Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards
in Nonattainment Areas that are Redesignated as Attainment Areas?
A. What is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy?
Under the amended Phase II volatility regulations, any change in
the volatility standard for a nonattainment area that was subsequently
redesignated as an attainment area must be accomplished through a
separate rulemaking that revises the applicable standard for that
area.\19\ Thus, for former 1-hour nonattainment areas where EPA
mandated a Phase II volatility standard of 7.8 psi RVP in the December
12, 1991 rulemaking, the 7.8 psi RVP standard will remain in effect,
even after such an area is redesignated as being in attainment, until a
separate rulemaking is completed that revises the RVP standard in that
area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 56 FR 64706 (Dec. 12, 1991).
\20\ As stated in the preamble for the Agency's initial Phase II
volatility standards (55 FR 23609), and in the preamble in the
proposal to revise those standards (56 FR 24244), EPA may also
promulgate a rule to revise the volatility standard in a particular
nonattainment area in order to enhance local air quality and/or
increase the economic efficiency of the program. The Governor of a
state, or his designee, may petition EPA for a less stringent
standard if such a standard is consistent with the requirements of
the Act and if the state can document (1) particular local economic
impact that makes the less stringent standard appropriate and (2)
sufficient alternative programs to achieve attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS for ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the Agency
believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard is best
accomplished in conjunction with the redesignation process. In order
for an ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment
area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act requires the State to make a
showing, pursuant to section 175A of the Act, that the area is capable
of maintaining attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years. Depending
on the area's circumstances, this maintenance plan will either
demonstrate that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten
years without the more stringent volatility standard or that the more
stringent volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain
its attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a
request for redesignation, the Agency will not relax the volatility
standard unless the State requests a relaxation and the maintenance
plan demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Agency, that the area
will maintain attainment for ten years without the need for the more
stringent volatility standard.
B. How Is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy Applied to Grant
Parish?
Under the Phase 1 Ozone implementation rule, 1-hour ozone
maintenance areas that are designated 8-hour ozone attainment areas,
such as Grant Parish, are required to develop and submit to EPA a
maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) of the Act.\21\ In today's
rulemaking, we are determining that 1-hour ozone maintenance areas that
are designated 8-hour ozone attainment areas may rely on the section
110(a)(1) maintenance plan, rather than a section 175A maintenance plan
as explained above, for purposes of requesting relaxation of the more
stringent volatility standard. We come to the conclusion that a section
110(a)(1) maintenance plan can be used to make a relaxation
demonstration for the following reasons: (1) Section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans contain analogous information and meet similar
criteria as section 175A maintenance plans, namely a demonstration of
continued maintenance of the ozone standard for at least 10 years using
the less stringent volatility standard and that the plan contains
contingency measures; (2) Although the EPA general volatility
relaxation policy calls for an approved 175A maintenance plan, the
requirement to submit a section 175A maintenance plan for the 8-hour
standard does not apply to areas initially designated attainment for
that standard; and (3) Development of a section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan is consistent with the Phase 1 Ozone Implementation rule
requirements, specifically 40 CFR 51.905(a)(4), which is applicable to
Grant Parish, and thus use of an approved section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan for the purpose of relaxing the applicable RVP standard follows
logically. Therefore, in today's rulemaking, EPA is allowing Grant
Parish to rely on its section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan and the
accompanying analysis set forth below in demonstrating the
approvability of the State's relaxation request of the applicable RVP
standard in Grant Parish.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 69 FR 23955 (Apr. 30, 2004), section IV.C.2.c.v and
IV.C.2.d; see also 40 CFR 51.905(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. What Information Supports the Relaxation of Federal RVP Requirements
in Grant Parish?
A. History
In the summer of 1989, the Phase I gasoline volatility control
program was implemented throughout the country. At that time, based on
designations issued on September 11, 1978, Grant Parish was a
designated ozone nonattainment area.\22\ Under the Phase I volatility
rule, gasoline volatility requirements throughout the entire State of
Louisiana were uniform, although there was some variation by month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 43 FR 40412 (Sept. 11, 1978).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 6, 1991, EPA issued ozone nonattainment designations
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Pursuant to section 107(d)(1)(C)(i) of the
CAA, the nonattainment designation for Grant Parish issued in 1978
continued because Louisiana had not acquired the three years of ambient
air quality data necessary to petition for redesignation to
attainment.\23\ In 1992, under Phase II of the volatility control
program, the Grant Parish ozone nonattainment area
[[Page 8206]]
(at the time) was required to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi. In
1995, EPA approved a request from the State of Louisiana to redesignate
Grant Parish to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard and approved a
maintenance plan.\24\ At that time, the State of Louisiana did not make
a request for relaxation of the gasoline volatility standard at that
time; therefore, Grant Parish continued to use gasoline with an RVP of
7.8 psi during the ozone control season through the summer of 2005. In
2004, we designated Grant Parish as an 8-hour ozone attainment
area.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991).
\24\ 60 FR 43020 (Aug. 18, 1995).
\25\ 69 FR 23857 (Apr. 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Louisiana's RVP Relaxation Request and Initial EPA Response
In May of 2005, the State of Louisiana requested that the gasoline
volatility standard for Grant Parish be relaxed and that enforcement
discretion be granted in the interim between the request and the final
rulemaking.\26\ This petition from the State cited the fact that Grant
Parish is a designated 8-hour ozone attainment area and a redesignated
1-hour ozone attainment area that has not measured a 1-hour exceedance
in the 10 years since the 1995 maintenance plan became effective.
Louisiana also stated the following justifications for the relaxation:
First, Grant Parish is classified as rural, is not adjacent to any
urban area, and has only seen about 7% population growth from 1990 to
2000 (17,526 to 18,698). Second, a review of vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) statistics for Grant Parish show a downward trend from 1990 to
1999. There was a slight increase (2% per year) from 1999 through 2003,
although Louisiana qualifies this by stating the increase could be a
reflection of increases in population, but is more likely due to
changes in VMT reporting in 2001. Third, air quality data shows a
general decrease in emissions of ozone-forming pollutants, such as
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX).
Finally, Louisiana provides evidence that relaxation of the RVP
requirement will result in economic benefit to Grant Parish. Outside of
the ozone control season, bulk plant operators are able to acquire
conventional gasoline from nearby terminals. During the ozone control
season, however, bulk plant operators must purchase gasoline meeting
the 7.8 psi RVP standard from facilities in Baton Rouge or Lake
Charles, Louisiana. Each of these cities is approximately 145 miles
from Grant Parish, resulting in a 290-mile roundtrip to deliver
compliant fuel. This distance increases the transportation costs and
can increase the price of gasoline by an estimated 2 cents per gallon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Letter from Michael McDaniel, Secretary of the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality, to Mayor Richard Greene,
Administrator of U.S. EPA Region 6, titled ``Relaxation of the
Summer Gasoline Volatility Standard for Grant Parish'' (May 24,
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In May of 2006, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
granted enforcement discretion to allow the use of gasoline having a
volatility that is no higher than 9.0 psi during the ozone control
seasons for Grant Parish from May 16, 2006, to September 16, 2007, or
the effective date of the action set forth in this rulemaking,
whichever is earlier.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Letter from Granta Nakayama, Assistant Administrator of the
U.S. EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, to Michael
McDaniel, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, titled ``Enforcement Discretion Regarding the Gasoline
Volatility Standard for Grant Parish, Louisiana'' (May 16, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. EPA Approval of the Grant Parish 8-Hour Maintenance Plan
On August 23, 2006, the State of Louisiana submitted a maintenance
plan for Grant Parish to EPA Region 6 that ensures continued attainment
of the 8-hour ozone standard through 2014, which is 10 years following
designation under the 8-hour standard as required by 40 CFR
51.905(a)(4)(ii). EPA has determined that the maintenance plan also
meets the other statutory and regulatory requirements and is consistent
with EPA guidance; therefore, in November 2007, EPA published a direct
final rule in the Federal Register that approved the 8-hour maintenance
plan for Grant Parish.\28\ No adverse comments were received, and the
rule became effective on January 7, 2008. The State's maintenance plan
submission, EPA's Technical Support Document, and approval rulemaking
action are incorporated by reference in today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 72 FR 62579 (November 6, 2007); Docket ID: EPA-R06-OAR-
2006-0271.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA determined that the Grant Parish maintenance plan adequately
addresses the components of a maintenance plan: a 2002 base year
attainment inventory; projected emission inventories for the future
years of 2008, 2011, and 2014 with a maintenance demonstration;
verification of continued attainment with the use of either 7.8 or 9.0
psi gasoline; and contingency measures. Some of these components are
presented in greater detail below.
The following table \29\ provides VOC and NOX emissions
data for the 2002 base attainment year inventory, as well as projected
VOC and NOX emission inventory data for the major
anthropogenic source categories developed using EPA-approved
technologies and methodologies and keeping 7.8 psi RVP gasoline in
place for the years 2008, 2011, and 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The ``Total VOCs'' values for 2008, 2011, and 2014 in this
table differ from the values in the November 6, 2007, maintenance
plan approval rulemaking. These differences were due to a
typographical error by EPA in the ``Onroad VOCs'' row; those errors
have been corrected here resulting in new ``Total VOCs'' values. The
changes accurately reflect the data submitted by the state of
Louisiana and yield lower ``Total VOCs'' values in all future years.
Therefore the conclusion that Grant Parish has demonstrated
maintenance of the 8-hour standard is still valid.
Grant Parish.--VOC and NOX Emission Inventory Baseline
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions source 2002 (tpd) 2008 (tpd) 2011 (tpd) 2014 (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source VOCs............................... 0.66 0.83 0.91 0.98
Point Source NOX................................ 1.85 1.96 2.01 2.06
Non-Point (Area) Source VOCs.................... 1.57 1.62 1.63 1.66
Non-point (Area) Source NOX..................... 0.61 0.64 0.65 0.67
Nonroad VOCs.................................... 5.49 4.66 4.20 3.83
Nonroad NOX..................................... 1.56 1.41 1.33 1.23
Onroad VOCs..................................... 1.27 0.80 0.63 0.52
Onroad NOX...................................... 1.71 1.12 0.83 0.62
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total VOCs.................................. 8.99 7.91 7.37 6.99
Total NOX................................... 5.73 5.13 4.82 4.58
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8207]]
As shown in the table above, Louisiana has demonstrated that the future
year 8-hour ozone emissions will be less than the 2002 base attainment
year's emissions. Measures that will provide for additional 8-hour
ozone emission reductions include: (1) Implementation of Federal VOC
Emission Standards for Automobile Refinish Coatings, Consumer Products,
and Architectural Coatings; (2) Federal Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission
Standards, Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards, and gasoline and
highway diesel fuel sulfur control requirements; (3) Federal control of
emissions from non-road diesel engines and fuels; and (4)
implementation of the Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Grant Parish maintenance plan's attainment inventory,
Louisiana provided an analysis of VOC emissions from on-road mobile
sources comparing 7.8 and 9.0 psi RVP gasoline for three projection
years: 2008, 2011, and 2014.
Grant Parish.--RVP Comparison Effect on VOC Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.8 psi RVP 9.0 psi RVP
Year VOCs (tpd) VOCs (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002.................................... 1.27 N/A
2008.................................... 0.80 0.90
2011.................................... 0.63 0.70
2014.................................... 0.52 0.57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling results for this comparison show that the overall effect on
VOC emissions from between 7.8 and 9.0 psi RVP gasoline was 0.1 tpd or
less for each of the three projection years, and that each of the
projected VOC emission inventories from 9.0 psi RVP gasoline is less
than the VOC emission inventory from the 2002 attainment year
inventory. Therefore, the Grant Parish 8-hour maintenance plan
demonstrates that use of the less stringent 9.0 psi RVP gasoline will
not interfere with 8-hour ozone maintenance. In its approval of the
maintenance plan for Grant Parish, EPA concluded that ``the Grant
Parish 8-hour maintenance plan demonstrates that the use of either 7.8
or 9.0 psi RVP gasoline in the parish will allow the area to continue
to meet the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.''
D. What are the Section 110(l) Requirements?
Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (``RFP'') (as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. The modeling in the maintenance plan
showed a very small increase in VOC emissions with the relaxed RVP
standard when comparing emissions from 7.8 and 9.0 psi RVP gasoline in
future years, but the emissions projections for the future years using
9.0 psi RVP gasoline in Grant Parish still reflect a decrease in
emissions from the 2002 baseline year and a downward trend in VOC and
NOX emissions through 2014. Therefore, and as discussed in
more detail above, Louisiana has demonstrated that EPA's approval of
the relaxed RVP standard in Grant Parish will not interfere with
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in that Parish.
VI. Final Action and Rationale
EPA is taking direct final action to approve Louisiana's request to
relax the federal RVP standard applicable to summertime gasoline
supplied to Grant Parish. This action changes the applicable RVP
standard in Grant Parish from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi in 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2).
This action will become effective on April 14, 2008, unless adverse
comment is received by March 14, 2008.
Relaxation of the applicable RVP standard for Grant Parish is based
on the fact that Grant Parish is a redesignated 1-hour ozone attainment
area and a designated 8-hour ozone attainment area that has an approved
section 110(a)(1) 8-hr maintenance plan. This maintenance plan
demonstrates that Grant Parish can maintain the 8-hour ozone standard
for the duration of the plan while using 9.0 psi RVP gasoline. As also
discussed earlier, this SIP revision meets the requirements of section
110(l) of the Act. Finally, relaxation of the applicable standard will
result in economic benefits as increased transportation costs
associated with the delivery of 7.8 psi RVP gasoline will be
eliminated.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., and therefore is not subject to these requirements.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
This action will relax the federal RVP standard for gasoline sold
in Grant Parish, Louisiana, during the ozone control season (June 1 to
September 15), from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi, and is therefore expected not
to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The rule does not impose any requirements or create impacts
on small entities beyond those, if any, already required by or
resulting from the CAA Section 211(h) Volatility Control program.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
[[Page 8208]]
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, EPA
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 in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA 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 EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying affected small governments, enabling officials of
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Today's rule merely relaxes the Federal RVP
standard for gasoline in the Grant Parish area, and thus avoids
imposing the costs that the existing Federal regulations would
otherwise impose. Today's rule, therefore, is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. As discussed above, the rule relaxes an existing standard
and affects only the gasoline industry.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255 August
10, 1999), requires EPA 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.''
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. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule
would relax the applicable RVP standard in Grant Parish, LA, during the
ozone control season (June 1st to September 15th) from 7.8 psi to 9.0
psi. It applies only to Grant Parish, LA. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, Apr. 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 EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must 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 the Agency.
This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. As previously discussed, the Grant
Parish area has continued to meet the 1-hour ozone standard since 1995
and has met the 8-hour ozone standard since initial designations were
issued in 2004. The maintenance plan approved on November 6, 2007 shows
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the entire maintenance time
period of 2002 through 2014 with the 9.0 psi RVP standard.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in
its regulatory activities unless to do so 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) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent
[[Page 8209]]
practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of
their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the applicable 8-hour ozone NAAQS which establish the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment. This rule will
relax the applicable volatility standard of gasoline during the summer
possibly resulting in slightly higher mobile source emissions. However,
the State of Louisiana has demonstrated in a maintenance plan that this
action will not interfere with attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and
therefore disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations are not an
anticipated result.
K. 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. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. 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(a).
This rule will be effective April 14, 2008.
VIII. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions
Authority for this action is in sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7545(h) and 7601(a).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Incorporation by
reference, Motor vehicle and motor vehicle engines, Motor vehicle
pollution, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 7, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
Title 40, chapter I, part 80 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 80--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545 and 7601(a).
0
2. In Sec. 80.27(a)(2)(ii), the table is amended by revising the entry
for Louisiana and adding a new footnote 4 to read as follows:
Sec. 80.27 Controls and prohibitions on gasoline volatility.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
Applicable Standards\1\ 1992 and Subsequent Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State May June July August September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Louisiana:
Grant Parish \4\........................... 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
All other volatility nonattainment areas... 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Standards are expressed in pounds per square inch (psi).
* * * * * * *
\4\ The standard for Grant Parish from June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through 2007 was 7.8 psi.
* * * * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-2702 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P