Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles and Nonroad Diesel Engines: Alternative Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuel Transition Program for Alaska, 59690-59704 [05-20519]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
59690
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA
has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of
the rule in accordance with the
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive
order. This proposed rule to approve
addition of ozone and fine particulate
standards does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 5, 2005.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 05–20514 Filed 10–12–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[R01–OAR–2005–CT–0003;
A–1–FRL–7979–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; Redesignation of City of
New Haven PM10 Nonattainment Area
To Attainment and Approval of the
Limited Maintenance Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of
Connecticut. This revision establishes a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) for the
New Haven PM10 nonattainment area
(New Haven NAA) in the State of
Connecticut and grants a request by the
State to redesignate the New Haven
NAA to attainment for the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal
to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10).
EPA is approving this redesignation and
LMP because Connecticut has met the
applicable requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before November 14,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01–OAR–
2005–CT–0003 by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
2. Agency Web site: https://
docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional
Material in EDocket (RME), EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA’s preferred method for
receiving comments. Once in the
system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then key
in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
3. E-mail: conroy.dave@epa.gov
4. Fax: (617) 918–0661
5. Mail: ‘‘RME ID Number R01–OAR–
2005–CT–0003,’’ David Conroy, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023.
6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to: David Conroy, Air
Programs Branch Chief, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal
holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules Section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA New England Regional
Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023,
telephone number (617) 918–1684, fax
number (617) 918–0684, e-mail
simcox.alison@epa.gov.
In the
Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving
Connecticut’s SIP submittal as a direct
final rule without prior proposal
because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and
anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the direct final rule. If no
adverse comments are received in
response to this rule, no further activity
is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn and all public comments
received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time. Please note
that if EPA receives adverse comment
on an amendment, paragraph, or section
of this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
For additional information, see the
direct final rule which is located in the
Rules Section of this Federal Register.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: September 26, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 05–20417 Filed 10–12–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 69
[OAR–2004–0229; FRL–7982–6]
RIN 2060–AJ72
Control of Air Pollution From Motor
Vehicles and Nonroad Diesel Engines:
Alternative Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuel
Transition Program for Alaska
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing an
implementation date of June 1, 2010 for
the sulfur, cetane and aromatics
requirements for highway, nonroad,
locomotive and marine diesel fuel
produced or imported for, distributed
to, or used in the rural areas of Alaska.
As of the implementation date, diesel
fuel used in these applications would
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59691
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
have to meet a 15 ppm (maximum)
sulfur content standard. This action
would allow full implementation of the
programs for highway and nonroad
diesel fuels in Alaska while providing
some limited additional leadtime for
development of any necessary changes
to the fuel distribution system in rural
Alaska. This additional leadtime is
appropriate given the circumstances of
the rural areas, including the expected
delay in time before use of new diesel
engines requiring sulfur controlled
diesel fuel. In 2010 highway and
nonroad fuel in rural Alaska would be
regulated according to the
implementation schedule of fuel
property standards applicable in the rest
of the U.S., providing the full
environmental benefits of these
programs to rural Alaska as well.
Locomotive and marine diesel fuel used
in rural areas of Alaska would meet the
15ppm standard two years earlier than
the rest of the U.S., so that all NRLM
diesel fuel in rural areas of Alaska
would meet the 15ppm standard in
2010. EPA is not proposing changes to
or reopening the diesel fuel rules as they
apply to the other areas of Alaska. We
have not received any information that
would warrant such action, and the
State has not requested such action.
This proposal is consistent with the
State’s request and comments on the
NRLM rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 11, 2006. However,
since we do not plan to hold a public
hearing on this proposed rule, any
requests for a public hearing must be
received on or before November 14,
2005. Requests for a public hearing must
be made to the person identified in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. OAR–2004–
0229, by one of the following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Agency Website: https://
www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA’s preferred method for
receiving comments. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
C. E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov,
Attention Docket ID No. OAR–2004–
0229, Fax: 202–566–0805.
D. Mail: Attention Docket ID No.
OAR–2004–0229, Air Docket,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
E. Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
(EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC., Attention Docket ID No. OAR–
2004–0229. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. OAR–2004–0229. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made
available online at https://www.epa.gov/
edocket, 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 EDOCKET,
regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA
EDOCKET and the federal
regulations.gov websites are
‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, 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
EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit
EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal
Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102).
For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Unit I of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the EDOCKET index at
https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy at the HQ EPA Docket Center, Air
Docket, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington,
DC. This Docket Facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
Docket telephone number is (202) 566–
1742. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Korotney, Assessment and
Standards Division, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality,
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
48105; telephone number: (734) 214–
4507; fax number: (734) 214–4051; email address: korotney.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Does This Action Apply to Me?
You will be regulated by this action
if you produce, import, distribute, or
sell diesel fuel for use in the rural areas
of Alaska. The following table gives
some examples of entities that may have
to follow the regulations. But because
these are only examples, you should
carefully examine the regulations in 40
CFR part 80. If you have questions, call
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble:
Examples of potentially
regulated entities
NAICS
codes a
SIC
codes b
Petroleum Refiners ...........
Petroleum Bulk Stations,
Terminals, .....................
Petroleum and Products
Wholesalers ..................
Diesel Fuel Trucking .........
32411
2911
42271
5171
42272
48422
48423
44711
44719
5172
4212
4213
5541
Diesel Service Stations ....
a North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS).
b Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC)
system code.
What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through EDOCKET,
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59692
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. If you submit the copy
that does not contain CBI on disk or CD
ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD
ROM clearly that it does not contain
CBI. Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
If you have any questions about CBI or
the procedures for claiming CBI, please
consult the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
How Can I Get Copies of This
Document and Other Related
Information?
Docket. EPA has established an
official public docket for this action
under Docket ID No. OAR–2004–0229.
The official public docket consists of the
documents specifically referenced in
this action, any public comments
received, and other information related
to this action. Although a part of the
official docket, the public docket does
not include Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
The official public docket is the
collection of materials that is available
for public viewing at the Air Docket in
the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA
Docket Center 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
Reading Room is (202) 566–1742, and
the telephone number for the Air Docket
is (202) 566–1742.
Electronic Access. You may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An
electronic version of the public docket
is available through EPA’s electronic
public docket and comment system,
EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to
submit or view public comments, access
the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and to access
those documents in the public docket
that are available electronically. Once in
the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in
the appropriate docket identification
number.
Certain types of information will not
be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not
included in the official public docket,
will not be available for public viewing
in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA’s
policy is that copyrighted material will
not be placed in EPA’s electronic public
docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public
docket. To the extent feasible, publicly
available docket materials will be made
available in EPA’s electronic public
docket. When a document is selected
from the index list in EPA Dockets, the
system will identify whether the
document is available for viewing in
EPA’s electronic public docket.
Although not all docket materials may
be available electronically, you may still
access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket
facility identified above.
For public commenters, it is
important to note that EPA’s policy is
that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public
viewing in EPA’s electronic public
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
docket as EPA receives them and
without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. When EPA
identifies a comment containing
copyrighted material, EPA will provide
a reference to that material in the
version of the comment that is placed in
EPA’s electronic public docket. The
entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available
in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on
computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be
transferred to EPA’s electronic public
docket. Public comments that are
mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA’s
electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be
photographed, and the photograph will
be placed in EPA’s electronic public
docket along with a brief description
written by the docket staff.
For additional information about
EPA’s electronic public docket visit EPA
Dockets online or see 67 FR 38102, May
31, 2002.
Outline of This Preamble
I. Background
A. How Was Alaska Treated in the
Highway Diesel Rule?
B. How Was Alaska Treated in the NRLM
Diesel Rule?
C. Alaska’s Highway Submission and
Comments to NRLM Proposal
II. What Is EPA Proposing?
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
B. Nonroad, Locomotive, and Marine
Diesel Fuel
C. Summary of Proposed Sulfur Standards
for Alaska
III. Why Are We Proposing a June 1, 2010
Effective Date for Rural Areas of Alaska?
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
1. Ensure an Adequate Supply (Either
Through Production or Imports) of 15
ppm Sulfur Diesel Fuel To Meet the
Demand of Any 2007 or Later Model
Year Vehicles
2. Ensure Sufficient Retail Availability of
Low Sulfur Fuel for New Vehicles in
Alaska
3. Address the Growth of Supply and
Availability Over Time as More New
Vehicles Enter the Fleet
4. Include Measures To Ensure Segregation
of the 15 ppm Fuel and Avoid
Contamination and Misfueling
5. Ensure Enforceability
B. NRLM Diesel Fuel
IV. What is the Emissions Impact of Today’s
Proposal?
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
V. Public Participation
A. How and to Whom Do I Submit
Comments?
B. Will There Be a Public Hearing?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Federalism
F. Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
H. Actions that Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
VII. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
59693
I. Background
A. How Was Alaska Treated in the
Highway Diesel Rule?
The nationwide implementation dates
(including all of Alaska) for highway
diesel fuel at 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. (66
FR 5002, January 18, 2001) are shown in
Table I.A–1.
TABLE IA–1.—FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR HIGHWAY DIESEL FUEL 15 PPM STANDARD
Date
Applicable parties
June 1, 2006 .............
July 15, 2006 .............
September 1, 2006 ....
Refiners and importers.
Downstream facilities except retailers and wholesale- purchaser consumers.
Retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
These implementation dates begin the
transition of the nation to ultra-low
sulfur (15 ppm sulfur, maximum)
highway diesel fuel from the current
low sulfur (500 ppm sulfur, maximum)
diesel fuel.1 Until 2010, at least 80
percent of each refiner’s production (or
imports) must meet the 15 ppm sulfur
standard, with the remaining 20 percent
or less meeting the 500 ppm sulfur
standard-that is, the 80/20 Temporary
Compliance Option. Exceptions are
made for EPA-approved small refiners,
which may produce all their highway
fuel to the 500 ppm sulfur standard
until later years, and refiners and
importers that obtain early use credits,
which would allow them to produce or
import more than 20 percent of their
diesel fuel to the 500 ppm sulfur
standard until 2010. However, because
of the sensitivity of the 2007 and later
model year highway engines and
emission control systems to fuel with
high sulfur content, those engines may
not be fueled with diesel fuel having a
sulfur content of greater than 15 ppm.
This requires that all 500 ppm sulfur
highway diesel fuel (i.e., from the 80/20
Temporary Compliance Option, credittrading, or by EPA-approved small
refiners) be segregated from the 15 ppm
sulfur highway diesel fuel and labeled
for use, and dispensed, only in 2006 and
earlier highway vehicles and engines.
Since the beginning of the 500 ppm
highway diesel fuel program in 1993,
we have granted Alaska exemptions
from both the 500 ppm highway diesel
fuel sulfur standard and the
nonhighway dye provisions of 40 CFR
80.29 because of its unique
geographical, meteorological, air
quality, and economic factors.2 We
granted temporary exemptions for areas
of the State served by the Federal Aid
Highway System (the urban areas), and
a permanent exemption for the
remaining areas (the rural areas).
On December 12, 1995, Alaska
submitted a petition for a permanent
exemption for all areas of the State
served by the Federal Aid Highway
System, that is, those areas previously
covered only by a temporary exemption.
While considering that petition, we
started work on a nationwide rule to
consider more stringent highway diesel
fuel requirements for sulfur content. In
our subsequent highway diesel final
rule (66 FR 5002, January 18, 2001) the
highway engine emission standards
were applied fully in Alaska, and the
permanent exemption for rural Alaska
from the 500 ppm sulfur standard of 40
CFR 80.29 terminates upon the
implementation date of the new 15 ppm
sulfur standard in 2006. However, based
on factors unique to Alaska, we
provided the State with: (1) an
extension of the temporary exemption
from the 500 ppm sulfur standard in the
urban areas until the implementation
date of the new 15 ppm sulfur standard
for highway diesel fuel in 2006, (2) an
opportunity to request an alternative
implementation plan for the 15 ppm
sulfur diesel fuel program, and (3) a
permanent exemption from the diesel
fuel dye provisions. In that rule, our
goal was to establish a mechanism
whereby modifications could be made,
as appropriate, for transitioning Alaska
to the ultra-low sulfur (15 ppm sulfur
maximum) highway diesel fuel program
in a manner that minimizes costs while
still ensuring that model year 2007 and
later highway vehicles and engines
receive the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel
they need.
B. How Was Alaska Treated in the
NRLM Diesel Rule?
The nationwide implementation date
for nonroad, locomotive, and marine
(NRLM) diesel fuel at 40 CFR 80.500 et
seq. (69 FR 38958, June 29, 2004) is June
1, 2007 for refiners and importers. This
implementation date begins the first
step of a two-step program of
transitioning the nation to 15 ppm
sulfur NRLM diesel fuel from
uncontrolled non-highway diesel fuel.
In this first step beginning in 2007, all
NRLM diesel fuel produced or imported
must meet the 500 ppm sulfur standard
and applicable cetane or aromatic
standard. Facilities downstream of the
refiners and importers must meet the
500ppm standard on other dates
depending on their location and type of
facility, as shown below:
TABLE I.B–1.—FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR NRLM DIESEL FUEL 500 PPM STANDARD
Implementation date
for urban Alaska and
Northeast/Mid-Atlantic
June 1, 2007 ..............
Implementation date
for all other areas
June 1, 2007
Refiners and importers.
1 Alaska was granted an exemption from the 500
ppm standard until June 1, 2006.
2 Under Section 211(i)(4) of the Clean Air Act, the
States of Alaska and Hawaii may be exempted from
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
Applicable parties
the 500 ppm sulfur content standard (and cetane,
automatics and dye requirements) of Section 211(i).
Copies of information regarding Alaska’s petition
for exemption under Section 211(i)(4), subsequent
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requests by Alaska, public comments received, and
actions by EPA are available in public docket A–
96–26.
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59694
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
TABLE I.B–1.—FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR NRLM DIESEL FUEL 500 PPM STANDARD—Continued
Implementation date
for urban Alaska and
Northeast/Mid-Atlantic
August 1, 2007 ...........
October 1, 2007 .........
December 1, 2007 .....
Implementation date
for all other areas
August 1, 2010
October 1, 2010
December 1, 2010
For most of the U.S. until June 1,
2010, NRLM diesel fuel with
uncontrolled sulfur content (and
uncontrolled aromatics content and
cetane index) can be produced by EPAapproved small refiners/importers and
refiners/importers using early use
credits. Until 2010 there is no restriction
in the use of this NRLM diesel fuel
having uncontrolled sulfur levels in
NRLM engines. However, under the
regulations applying to the nation as a
whole, other diesel fuel with
uncontrolled sulfur levels (i.e., all fuel
meeting the definition of heating oil)
must be segregated from the NRLM
diesel fuel, dyed with a yellow marker
Applicable parties
Downstream facilities except retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
Retailers and wholesale- purchaser consumers.
All facilities including farm tanks and construction facility tanks.
and red dye, and is prohibited from
being used in NRLM engines and
equipment.
The NRLM rule requires that heating
oil be segregated and marked with a
yellow marker and red dye to
distinguish it from small refiner or
credit-using high sulfur NRLM diesel
fuel (40 CFR 80.510). However, the
NRLM rule determined that a dye
requirement would impose a significant
challenge to Alaska’s unique
distribution system. That State’s
distribution system cannot easily handle
another fuel type that must be
segregated, and the same transfer and
storage facilities must accommodate jet
fuel that must not be contaminated by
dye. Therefore the rule exempted Alaska
from the dye and marker requirements,
but in exchange precluded the use of
credits and constrained the flexibility
granted to small refiners.3
Step two of the nationwide NRLM
diesel fuel program implements the 15
ppm sulfur standard for nonroad diesel
fuel beginning on June 1, 2010 for
refiners and importers. Locomotive and
marine diesel fuel produced or imported
continues to be subject to the 500 ppm
sulfur standard until June 1, 2012. The
downstream implementation dates for
this second step are shown in Tables
I.B–2 and I.B–3.
TABLE I.B–2.—FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR NR DIESEL FUEL 15 PPM STANDARD
Implementation date
for urban Alaska and
Northeast/Mid-Atlantic
Implementation date
for all other areas
June 1, 2010 ..............
August 1, 2010 ...........
October 1, 2010 .........
December 1, 2010 .....
June 1, 2010 .............
August 1, 2014 ..........
October 1, 2014 ........
December 1, 2014 .....
Applicable parties
Refiners and importers.
Downstream facilities except retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
Retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
All facilities including farm tanks and construction facility tanks.
TABLE I.B–3.—FEDERAL IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR LM DIESEL FUEL 15 PPM STANDARD
Implementation date
for urban Alaska and
Northeast/Mid-Atlantic
Implementation date
for all other areas
June 1, 2012 ..............
August 1, 2012 ...........
October 1, 2012 .........
December 1, 2012 .....
June 1, 2012 .............
n/a .............................
n/a .............................
n/a .............................
Applicable parties
Refiners and importers.
Downstream facilities except retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
Retailers and wholesale- purchaser consumers.
All facilities including farm tanks and construction facility tanks.
EPA-approved small refiners/
importers and refiners/importers using
early use credits may produce or import
nonroad diesel fuel that meets the 500
ppm sulfur standard until June 1, 2014.
However, the early-use credit provisions
do not apply to Alaska. In addition,
because of the sensitivity to fuel sulfur
content of the 2011 and later model year
nonroad engines and emission control
systems that will be certified to the Tier
4 emission standards, those engines are
prohibited from being fueled with diesel
fuel having a sulfur content greater than
15 ppm.
Alaska submitted its suggested
modification to the Agency for highway
diesel fuel in rural Alaska on June 12,
2003, after publication of our NRLM
proposal but before we had completed
development of the final NRLM rule.
This Alaska submission covered only
highway diesel used in rural areas.
Urban areas of Alaska were addressed in
a previous submission 4 for highway
fuel and in Alaska’s comments on the
NRLM proposed rule, and in both cases
the State of Alaska requested that urban
areas adhere to the federal fuel sulfur
standards and implementation
schedule. The provisions for NRLM
diesel fuel in urban Alaska were
finalized in the NRLM final rule, and
they require that NRLM in urban areas
meet the same requirements as the
contiguous 48 states.
The NRLM final rule stated that our
original proposal to permanently
exempt all NRLM diesel fuel in rural
Alaska from the sulfur content
standards was inconsistent with the
3 For the small refiner flexibilities to be used in
Alaska a refiner must first obtain approval from the
Administrator for a compliance plan (40 CFR
80.554(a)(4)).
4 Letter from Michele Brown, Commissioner,
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,
to Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant Administrator of
the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, April 1,
2002.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
action requested by the state. Under
normal circumstances this would have
meant that the NRLM final rule would
have included imposition of the sulfur
content standards on all NRLM diesel
fuel in rural Alaska, along with all the
associated labeling, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements. However, we
deferred this action until now to
coordinate the NRLM and highway
sulfur standards. Thus, the NRLM final
rule indicated that we would issue a
supplemental proposal (i.e., today’s
proposal) to address the comments
submitted by the State for NRLM diesel
fuel in the rural areas, as well as the
State’s suggestion of an alternative
implementation plan for highway diesel
fuel in the rural areas. However, the
NRLM final rule did require that 2011
model year and later nonroad engines in
rural areas, which will be manufactured
to operate on 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel,
must be fueled with 15 ppm diesel fuel
(40 CFR 69.51(f)).
C. Alaska’s Highway Submission and
Comments to NRLM Proposal
On June 12, 2003, Alaska submitted
its suggested modifications to
implementation of the highway diesel
fuel sulfur standards in Alaska. In its
plan, the State indicated that the rural
areas do not need the 15 ppm sulfur
diesel fuel in the early stage of the
highway diesel program. (The rural
areas are those areas not served by the
Federal Aid Highway System—which
includes the marine highway system—
as defined by the State of Alaska.) The
rural areas could use more time to plan
the switch to 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel,
and would be less impacted if we
implemented a one-step transition to 15
ppm sulfur rather than a two-step
transition which would have required a
minimum of 80% of each refinery’s
highway diesel to meet the 15 ppm
standard in 2006, with the remainder
meeting the 500 ppm standard. The
State requested that the rural areas be
exempt from the nationwide program
from 2006 to 2010, and join the
nationwide program in 2010 when all
highway diesel fuel must meet the 15
ppm standard. Thus, the rural areas
would switch from uncontrolled to 15
ppm sulfur for all highway diesel fuel
in 2010 along with the rest of the nation.
However, since all 2007 and later model
year highway diesel vehicles will need
15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel, fuel meeting
this standard would have to be made
available in rural communities that
obtain one or more 2007 or later model
year highway vehicle prior to 2010. This
approach would provide rural Alaska
more time to transition to the low sulfur
fuel program in a manner that
minimizes costs while still ensuring that
the 2007 and later model year highway
vehicles receive the low sulfur diesel
fuel they need.
On September 15, 2003, Alaska
submitted its comments to the May 23,
2003 NRLM proposal. In those
comments, Alaska asked us to bring the
NRLM diesel fuel requirements for
Alaska in line with the State’s
recommendations for highway diesel
fuel, as described above. The State
indicated the importance of avoiding
segregation of rural Alaska’s fuel stream.
Since the State previously requested
June 2010 to be the deadline for
conversion of highway diesel fuel in the
59695
rural areas, it requested June 2010 to
also be the deadline for conversion of all
NRLM diesel fuel in the rural areas.
This request included an acceleration of
the 15 ppm standard applicable to
locomotive and marine diesel fuel
produced in or imported to rural Alaska
from the June 2012 date in the final
NRLM rule to June 2010.
Although it is outside the scope of
today’s proposal, Alaska also
commented that in the NRLM final rule
we should capture marine engines,
locomotive engines, and more engine
sizes under the 15 ppm sulfur standard,
and that we should allow the State to
continue to use dye-free diesel fuel.
Alaska also requested our financial and
technical assistance to perform a health
study of diesel exhaust exposure in
rural Alaska because of concern about
exposure to diesel exhaust from village
electric power generators.5
II. What Is EPA Proposing?
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
We are proposing today to delay the
implementation dates for the
requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq.
for highway diesel fuel produced or
imported for, distributed to, or used in
the rural areas of Alaska. We are
proposing that the rural areas of Alaska
would join the rest of Alaska and the
nation in implementing the 15 ppm
sulfur content standard for highway
diesel fuel upon the implementation
dates of the nationwide program in
2010.6 The proposed implementation
dates for our highway diesel fuel
requirements in the rural areas of Alaska
are shown in table II.A–1.
TABLE II.A–1.—PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR HIGHWAY DIESEL FUEL 15 PPM STANDARD IN RURAL ALASKA
Date
Applicable parties
June 1, 2010 .............
August 1, 2010 ..........
October 1, 2010 ........
December 1, 2010 .....
Refiners and importers.
Downstream facilities except retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
Retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
All facilities including farm tanks and construction facility tanks.
The dates shown in Table II.A–1 are
slightly different than the downstream
dates that mark the end of the
Temporary Compliance Option
applicable to the nation as a whole. We
are proposing the above dates for
highway diesel fuel because they would
be more consistent with the downstream
implementation dates associated with
NRLM, as described in Section II.B
below.
Prior to the dates shown in Table
II.A–1, rural areas of Alaska would
continue to be exempt from the sulfur
standards. However, because of the
sensitivity of the 2007 and later model
year highway engines and emission
control systems to fuel sulfur content,
we would still require that diesel fuel
used in those vehicles and engines meet
the 15 ppm sulfur content standard.
This is the same refueling requirement
that applies in the 2006–2010 timeframe
5 In the June 29, 2004 NRLM final rule, we
applied the 15 ppm sulfur content standard to
locomotive and marine diesel fuel, but not until
June 1, 2012, and we exempted Alaska from the dye
and marker requirements.
6 Canada also requires 15 ppm sulfur highway
diesel fuel beginning June 1, 2006, and in October
2004 proposed that its NRLM diesel fuel meet a 500
ppm limit beginning June 1, 2007, its nonroad
diesel fuel meet the 15 ppm sulfur limit beginning
June 1, 2010, and that its locomotive and marine
diesel fuel meet the 15 ppm sulfur limit beginning
June 1, 2012. If finalized as proposed, the sulfur
requirements for highway and NRLM diesel fuel in
Canada would be harmonized with those of the
U.S., and today’s proposal would have rural Alaska
catch up to the requirements in both the U.S. and
Canada on June 1, 2010.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59696
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
for urban areas of Alaska and in all areas
of the rest of the nation.
To fully implement this transition
program for rural Alaska, we are
proposing to extend the current
exemption from the 500 ppm sulfur
standard of 40 CFR 80.29 until the
proposed implementation dates in 2010.
In the absence of this proposed
extension, highway diesel fuel in the
rural areas of Alaska would be required
to meet the 500 ppm sulfur standard of
40 CFR 80.29 beginning in 2006, when
the current exemption expires,
regardless of the proposed exclusion
under 40 CFR 80.500 et al. Under
today’s proposal, highway diesel fuel in
rural Alaska could remain at
uncontrolled sulfur levels until the
proposed implementation dates in 2010.
We are not proposing changes to the
implementation schedule of the
highway diesel fuel requirements as
they apply to the urban areas of Alaska,
and are not reopening the provisions of
the highway requirements previously
adopted for urban areas. We have not
received any information that would
warrant such reopening, and the State
did not request such a change and
indicated the urban areas should be
subject to the national implementation
schedule for highway diesel fuel. We
agree with the State’s reasoning that
urban areas of Alaska may not only have
a large number of 2007+ model year
highway vehicles in the 2006–2010
timeframe, but also that urban areas
have the means for distributing, storing,
and segregating highway diesel fuel
meeting with 15 ppm sulfur standard.
B. Nonroad, Locomotive and Marine
Diesel Fuel
In the nonroad, locomotive and
marine (NRLM) diesel final rule, we
covered urban Alaska along with the
rest of the nation, but held off on
finalizing any provisions for rural
Alaska so they could be aligned with the
provisions for the highway diesel
program in rural Alaska. We are
proposing today that NRLM diesel fuel
produced or imported for, distributed
to, or used in the rural areas of Alaska
be subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
80.500 et seq., but not until 2010. Thus,
during the first step of the nationwide
program from June 1, 2007 until June 1,
2010, NRLM diesel fuel in rural Alaska
could remain at uncontrolled sulfur
levels. Beginning June 1, 2010, nonroad
diesel fuel in rural Alaska would join
the rest of Alaska and the nation in
implementing the nonroad diesel fuel
requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq.
However, due to the unique
circumstances in rural Alaska which
limit the number of grades of diesel fuel
that can be stored and distributed, we
propose that the 15 ppm standard
applicable to locomotive and marine
fuel (LM) be moved forward to 2010 to
be consistent with the implementation
schedule for nonroad (NR) diesel fuel.
In this way, there will only be a single
grade of NRLM diesel fuel in rural areas
in 2010 and 2011 instead of the two
separate grades (i.e. 15 ppm and 500
ppm) that will exist elsewhere in the
U.S. The proposed initial
implementation dates for NRLM diesel
fuel sulfur standards are shown in Table
II.B–1. We request comment on the
delay of the NR requirements until
2010, and also the acceleration of the
LM 15 ppm sulfur standard to 2010
instead of 2012.
TABLE II.B–1.—PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION DATES FOR NRLM DIESEL FUEL 15 PPM STANDARD IN RURAL ALASKA
Date
Applicable parties
June 1, 2010 .............
August 1, 2010 ..........
October 1, 2010 ........
December 1, 2010 .....
Refiners and importers.
Downstream facilities except retailers and wholesale- purchaser consumers.
Retailers and wholesale-purchaser consumers.
All facilities including farm tanks and construction facility tanks.
Since the urban areas of Alaska would
follow the nationwide schedule for
sulfur standards, some LM fuel meeting
only the 500 ppm standard would be
available in these areas in the 2010–
2012 timeframe when nonroad engines
requiring 15 ppm fuel will be available.
Due to the potential for misfueling,
2011+ nonroad engines are prohibited
from using LM fuel meeting only the
500 ppm sulfur standard. Also, heating
oil will remain uncontrolled for sulfur
content in all areas of Alaska, and
would not be permitted to be used in
any 2007 or later model year highway
vehicles or engines, or in any 2011
model year nonroad engines or
equipment. Finally, in order to
coordinate with engine and fuel
requirements being proposed for
stationary internal combustion engines,
2011+ stationary engines will also be
prohibited from using fuel above the 15
ppm sulfur standard. All diesel fuel
used in engines covered by the
stationary internal combustion engine
standards will also be subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq.
following the implementation schedule
applicable to NRLM fuel.
We are not proposing changes to the
implementation schedule of the NRLM
diesel fuel requirements as they apply to
the urban areas of Alaska, and are not
reopening the provisions of the NRLM
requirements previously adopted for
urban areas. We have not received any
information that would warrant such
reopening, and the State did not request
such a change and indicated the urban
areas should be subject to the national
diesel fuel implementation schedule.
We agree with the State that urban areas
have the means for distributing, storing,
and segregating NRLM diesel fuel
meeting the 500 ppm standard in 2006
and the 15 ppm standard in 2010.
C. Summary of Proposed Sulfur
Standards for Alaska
Table II.C–1 shows all of the existing
federal and proposed Alaskan sulfur
standards for highway and NRLM diesel
fuel. Note that Alaska must still ensure
that 2007 and later highway engines and
2011 and later nonroad engines are only
fueled with fuel meeting the 15 ppm
standard.
TABLE II.C–1.—SUMMARY OF EXISTING FEDERAL AND PROPOSED ALASKAN SULFUR STANDARDS FOR DIESEL
PRODUCTION AND IMPORTS (PARTS PER MILLION)
Area
Fuel
Before 2006
Federal ........................................................................................
Urban Alaska ..............................................................................
HW ..
HW ..
500
none
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2006
2007–2009
2010–2011
15‡
15‡
15
15
15‡
15‡
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
2012+
15
15
59697
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
TABLE II.C–1.—SUMMARY OF EXISTING FEDERAL AND PROPOSED ALASKAN SULFUR STANDARDS FOR DIESEL
PRODUCTION AND IMPORTS (PARTS PER MILLION)—Continued
Area
Fuel
Before 2006
Rural Alaska ................................................................................
HW ..
none
Federal ........................................................................................
Urban Alaska ..............................................................................
Rural Alaska ................................................................................
NR ..
NR ..
NR ..
Federal ........................................................................................
Urban Alaska ..............................................................................
Rural Alaska ................................................................................
LM ...
LM ...
LM ...
2006
2007–2009
2010–2011
2012+
none
none
15†
15
none
none
none
none
none
none
500†
500†
none
15†
15†
15†
15
15
15
none
none
none
none
none
none
500†
500†
none
500
500
15†
15†
15†
15
† Refinery gate standard begins on June 1 of the first applicable year
‡ Temporary Compliance Option in effect: Up to 20% of a refinery’s production may exceed the 15 ppm standard so long as it meets the
500ppm standard, is segregated from 15ppm, and is not used in MY2007+ engines.
consisting primarily of subsistence
economies.
Our goal is to allow Alaska to
transition to the low sulfur fuel
programs in a manner that minimizes
costs while still ensuring that the small
number of model year 2007 and later
highway vehicles and engines, and the
small number of model year 2011 and
later nonroad engines and equipment
certified to the Tier 4 nonroad standards
beginning with the 2011 model year,
receive the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel
they need. By coordinating the
transition of both highway and NRLM
fuels to 15 ppm in 2010, rural
communities can make individual
decisions about retaining only one grade
of diesel fuel (e.g., ultra low) or build
additional storage tanks to handle two
grades of fuel that retains space heating
and power generation production with
high sulfur diesel fuel. In addition,
requiring rural areas to provide 15 ppm
diesel fuel for all NRLM applications
beginning in 2010, rather than
exempting them permanently, 8 helps
those rural areas to avoid the temptation
for misfueling that may arise as the
number of 2011+ engines increases and
rural communities are faced with the
choice of either building additional
tankage or storing only 15 ppm fuel.
III. Why Are We Proposing a June 1,
2010 Effective Date for Rural Areas of
Alaska?
Rural Alaska represents a rather
unique situation. The majority of
distillate fuel used in rural Alaska is for
stationary sources such as power
generation and home heating. The State
estimates that highway vehicles
consume only about one percent of the
distillate fuel in the rural areas.
‘‘Heating oil’’ consumes approximately
95 percent (about 50 percent for heating
and 45 percent for electricity
generation) and marine engines
consume the remaining four percent.
There is no significant consumption of
other nonroad or locomotive diesel fuel
in rural Alaska. Thus, in rural Alaska,
only a very small proportion of the
distillate fuel used is currently regulated
for sulfur content (and aromatics
content and/or cetane index).7 A single
grade of fuel is generally distributed to
rural Alaska. In order to ensure the fuel
can be used in the arctic conditions, the
fuel is usually Jet A (which has a pour
point of ¥50 degrees) that has been
downgraded. If the nationwide
requirements were followed, either
multiple grades of arctic grade fuel
would need to be transported and
stored, or a single grade of fuel meeting
the 15 ppm standard would need to be
used. For multiple fuel grades, the
limited transportation and storage
capabilities in rural Alaska would force
communities to build additional
infrastructure to handle the additional
grades. For a single grade meeting the 15
ppm standard, these small communities
would be forced to pay a premium for
fuel that is only required for a very
small number of engines in the 2006–
2010 timeframe. Both approaches
represent significant economic hardship
for the many rural communities
Under the highway diesel rule, at
least 80 percent of a refinery’s highway
diesel fuel production (except for that
produced by small refiners approved by
EPA under 40 CFR 80.550–553), must
meet the ultra-low sulfur content
standard (15 ppm sulfur, maximum) by
2006 (see Table I.A–1). The remaining
highway diesel fuel must meet the low
sulfur content standard (500 ppm sulfur,
maximum) and may not be used in 2007
and later model year highway diesel
7 Personal communication from Ron King, Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation. July 2,
2002.
8 The permanent exemption under the existing
regulations would still require all 2011+ nonroad
engines to be fueled with 15 ppm fuel.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
vehicles. These nationwide standards
and deadlines apply to Alaska,
including the rural areas. Since the
current fuel supply in rural Alaska is
primarily high sulfur, these nationwide
requirements for highway fuel would
cause the highway fuel supply in rural
Alaska to switch to the 15 ppm sulfur
diesel fuel, and possibly some to the 500
ppm sulfur diesel fuel, in 2006.
As previously discussed, Alaska has
been exempt from the sulfur and dye
provisions of 40 CFR 80.29 since the
beginning of the 500 ppm highway
diesel fuel program in 1993 because of
its unique geographical, meteorological,
air quality, and economic factors. The
rural areas have been permanently
exempt, and the urban areas have been
temporarily exempt. When we finalized
the 15 ppm sulfur content standard for
highway diesel fuel, we recognized the
factors unique to Alaska and provided
the State with: (1) An extension of the
temporary exemption for the urban
areas from the 500 ppm sulfur standard
until the implementation date of the
new 15 ppm sulfur standard for
highway diesel fuel in 2006, (2) an
opportunity to request an alternative
implementation plan for the 15 ppm
sulfur diesel fuel program, and (3) a
permanent exemption from the diesel
fuel dye provisions. As stated in that
rule and in today’s proposal, our goal is
to allow Alaska to transition to the 15
ppm sulfur standard for highway diesel
fuel in a manner that minimizes costs
while still ensuring that model year
2007 and later highway vehicles and
engines receive the 15 ppm sulfur diesel
fuel they need. In its subsequent request
for an alternative implementation plan
for the rural areas, the State indicated
that the rural areas will have few if any
model year 2007 and later highway
vehicles in the early stage of the
highway diesel program, and thus will
need little if any 15 ppm sulfur diesel
fuel in this timeframe. The State also
indicated that rural areas could use
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59698
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
more time to plan the switch to 15 ppm
sulfur diesel fuel, and would be less
impacted if we implemented a one-step
transition to 15 ppm sulfur rather than
a two-step transition.
There are about 600 highway diesel
vehicles in the rural areas of Alaska, and
their average age is about 18 years.
Many replacement vehicles are typically
pre-owned, and only about five to 15
new diesel vehicles are brought into the
rural areas each year.9 Thus, most of the
approximately 250 rural area villages
may not obtain their first 2007 or later
model year diesel highway vehicle for
some time.
According to the State, the fuel
storage and barge infrastructure in rural
Alaska is currently designed for one
grade of diesel fuel. Jet fuel is
distributed, downgraded (and
sometimes mixed with #1 diesel), sold,
and used as #1 diesel because it meets
arctic specifications. This fuel is
primarily high sulfur. The efficiency
and cost effectiveness of this system
discourages the introduction of a small
volume of a specialty fuel, such as low
or ultra-low sulfur highway diesel fuel.
However, the rural hub communities
with jet service still have to import jet
fuel untainted by dye for aviation
purposes. The fuel storage tanks in the
rural communities are owned and
maintained by the communities, thus,
any requirement for new tankage or
additional tank maintenance will fall
directly on the rural communities,
which have a subsistence economy.
We agree with the State that a 2010
implementation date in rural Alaska is
justified. We expect only a very small
demand for the 15 ppm sulfur fuel in
rural Alaska between 2006 and 2010
because of the very small number of
2007 and later highway diesel vehicles
expected to enter the rural Alaska
market during those years. Requiring the
rural areas to comply with the
nationwide requirements for 15 ppm
fuel 10 during the first step of the
highway program (2006–2010) would
cause significant burden on rural
Alaska’s distribution system and
communities without corresponding
environmental benefits. We also agree
that 2010 is an appropriate time to
implement a sulfur content requirement
for highway diesel fuel in the rural
areas. The number of 2007 and later
highway vehicles, and thus the benefits
of the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel will be
9 Diesel vehicle registration data (12,000 pound
and greater, unladed weight) as of October 1998
provided by the State of Alaska.
10 The first step of the nationwide highway
program would require only 80% of each refinery’s
production to meet the 15 ppm standard; the rest
must meet a 500 ppm standard.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
increasing. Extending the lead time for
sulfur-controlled diesel fuel by an
additional four years (from 2006 to
2010) should be adequate for the
distributors and rural communities to
make decisions on the most economical
way to transition to sulfur-controlled
highway diesel fuel, and to make any
necessary capital improvements.
Finally, 2010 marks the points at which
both the Temporary Compliance
Provision for highway diesel fuel ends
and the requirement for 15ppm nonroad
diesel fuel begins. Distribution of diesel
fuel to meet demand will thus be made
more efficient if the same sulfur
standards apply everywhere. As a result
2010 represents an ideal year in which
to transition rural Alaska to 15 ppm fuel
in a single step.
We are not proposing to require 500
ppm sulfur highway diesel fuel between
June 1, 2006 and June 1, 2010 as a
transition to 15 ppm sulfur highway
diesel fuel. Such an interim step would
create the same burden to Alaska’s
distribution system and rural
communities as requiring 15 ppm sulfur
highway diesel fuel on June 1, 2006. As
discussed in more detail below, the
primary burden of requiring low sulfur
highway diesel fuel in rural Alaska is
not the source of the low-sulfur diesel
fuel, or whether it meets the 500 or 15
ppm sulfur standard, but the
distribution and storage tank constraints
associated with an additional fuel type
and the associated economic burden of
increased fuel costs imposed on
communities having subsistence
economies. If we imposed a 500 ppm
sulfur content standard on June 1, 2006
as a transition to 15 ppm sulfur highway
diesel fuel, rural Alaska would not get
the relief intended by today’s proposal.
As discussed in the January 18, 2001
Federal Register notice, any revisions to
the final rule for highway diesel fuel in
Alaska would, at a minimum, have to:
(1) Ensure an adequate supply (either
through production or imports) of 15
ppm fuel to meet the demand of any
2007 or later model year vehicles, (2)
ensure sufficient retail availability of
low sulfur fuel for new vehicles in
Alaska, (3) address the growth of supply
and availability over time as more new
vehicles enter the fleet, (4) include
measures to ensure segregation of the 15
ppm fuel and avoid contamination and
misfueling, and (5) ensure
enforceability. We believe that the
provisions proposed in this notice meet
these criteria, as discussed below.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. Ensure an Adequate Supply (Either
Through Production or Imports) of 15
ppm Sulfur Diesel Fuel To Meet the
Demand of Any 2007 or Later Model
Year Vehicles
Alaska has nearly 9,000 highway
diesel vehicles. The fuel provided to
those vehicles in the areas served by the
Federal Aid Highway System—
approximately 8,400 vehicles—must
meet the requirements of the highway
rule, regardless of today’s proposal. At
least 80 percent of that fuel produced or
imported, except that which is
produced or imported by a small refiner
having EPA approval under 40 CFR
80.550–553, must meet the 15 ppm
sulfur standard beginning June 1, 2006.
The remainder of that fuel must meet
the 500 ppm sulfur standard.
Consumption of highway diesel fuel
in the rural areas is about seven percent
of highway diesel fuel consumption in
Alaska (assuming the same average
vehicle consumption throughout the
state). Consumption of highway diesel
fuel by the five to 15 new vehicles per
year from 2007 through 2010 (for a total
of 20 to 60 model year 2007 and later
vehicles by the end of 2010) will be
much smaller—less than one percent of
the highway diesel fuel consumption in
Alaska. Thus, production or imports of
15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for the model
year 2007 and later highway vehicles in
the rural areas until June 1, 2010 under
today’s proposal should not be a
challenge, and is less than what would
be required under the current
regulations.
The significant challenge in the rural
areas is the distribution and storage
infrastructure, which is currently
designed to handle only one type of
distillate fuel. The highway diesel rule
would require changes to the
distribution and storage infrastructure to
handle the additional fuel type, or a
shift to 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for all
purposes, to occur by July 15, 2006.
However, under today’s proposal,
changes to the distribution and storage
infrastructure, or a shift to 15 ppm
sulfur diesel fuel for all purposes,
would not be required to occur in the
rural areas until October 1, 2010. Thus,
this proposal would grant the rural area
fuel distributors and villages four
additional years to make the necessary
changes, but they would still have to
supply the required 15 ppm sulfur fuel
to all 2007 and later model year
highway vehicles and engines.
Supplying 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel
for 2007 and later model year diesel
vehicles until October 1, 2010 can be
accomplished several ways. A village
not having any 2007 or later model year
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
diesel vehicles or engines would not
have a need for the new fuel and/or
infrastructure changes until October 1,
2010. When a village obtains one or
more 2007 or later model year highway
vehicles or engines, 15 ppm sulfur fuel
could be shipped in 55 gallon drums, or
the fuel infrastructure can be changed to
handle a second diesel fuel type, or the
village could shift to 15 ppm sulfur fuel
for all purposes.
The first option—using 55 gallon
drums—would likely have additional
transportation costs for shipping the
new fuel for the 2007 and later model
year diesel vehicles, but the volume
would be very low (only 20 to 60 of
those vehicles by the end of 2010
distributed among the approximate 250
villages in rural Alaska). Thus, the
overall incremental cost of diesel fuel in
rural Alaska would be negligible on
average.
The second option (changing the fuel
infrastructure to handle the additional
fuel type) probably has the most cost
impact because the distributors would
need to split their barge deliveries into
multiple fuel types, and the villages
would need to have multiple storage,
handling, and delivery systems. All of
these distribution modifications will
cost money. The need to have multiple
fuel types will likely impact the
consumer by increasing the cost for all
fuel, not just the 15 ppm diesel.
The third option (switching all diesel
uses to 15 ppm sulfur) would avoid any
incremental transportation, storage and
delivery systems costs, but may incur
the higher cost of the 15 ppm sulfur fuel
for all purposes in the villages. This
probable higher fuel cost would be
imposed on heating and electricity
generation, which accounts for all but
about five percent of the distillate
consumption in the villages.
Under today’s proposal, it is possible
that all of the above options, or a
combination of these options, might be
found prior to December 1, 2010 among
the villages that need the fuel. In any
case, we believe an adequate supply of
15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for all 2007
and later model year vehicles and
engines in the rural areas should present
no significant challenge in this time
period.
2. Ensure Sufficient Retail Availability
of Low Sulfur Fuel for New Vehicles in
Alaska
Sufficient retail availability 11 is not
an issue if adequate supply is provided
to rural Alaska. Fuel deliveries to rural
11 For the purpose of this discussion concerning
rural Alaska, we assume that retail availability
means availability to the end user (e.g. diesel
vehicle or engine owner/operator).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
Alaska are made to village tank farms
(typically one tank farm per village).
Some villages have no separate
consumer tanks and pumps. In such
cases the villagers withdraw the fuel
directly from the tank farm. In villages
having one or more optional refueling
locations, those pumps are filled
directly from the village tank farm.
Presumably, any fuel deliveries in 55
gallon drums would be delivered either
to the village tank farm or directly to the
vehicle owners.
3. Address the Growth of Supply and
Availability Over Time as More New
Vehicles Enter the Fleet
Under today’s proposal, all diesel fuel
for 2007 and later model year highway
diesel vehicles and engines in the rural
areas must meet the 15 ppm sulfur
standard, as it is required nationwide.
As previously discussed, the demand
from 2007 and later model year diesel
vehicles in the rural areas is expected to
be very low—between 20 and 60
vehicles from late 2006 to December 1,
2010, the proposed implementation date
by which all highway diesel fuel in the
rural area retail facilities would have to
meet the 15 ppm sulfur content
standard. Whether the small volume of
fuel that would be needed for these
vehicles prior to December 1, 2010 is
distributed and stored in 55 gallon
drums, in segregated tanks, or in village
tanks from which diesel fuel for all
purposes is withdrawn, incremental
increases to that small volume for a few
additional new vehicles should present
no significant challenge.
4. Include Measures To Ensure
Segregation of the 15 ppm Fuel and
Avoid Contamination and Misfueling
All segregation and contamination
avoidance measures that apply
nationwide to highway diesel fuel,
except for the dye requirements, would
be applicable under today’s proposal to
any diesel fuel used in the rural areas
between 2006 and December 1, 2010 in
2007 and later model year highway
vehicles and engines. We believe that
Alaska can meet these requirements and
no additional measures beyond these
will be needed. Beyond 2010, all diesel
fuel meeting the 15 ppm standard must
be segregated from all other diesel fuel.
5. Ensure Enforceability
All quality assurance measures
(including testing and sampling) and
enforcement provisions that apply
nationwide to highway diesel fuel,
except for the dye requirements, would
be applicable under today’s proposal to
any diesel fuel used in the rural areas
between 2006 and December 1, 2010 in
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
59699
2007 and later model year highway
vehicles and engines. We do not believe
that any additional measures beyond
these will be needed.
B. NRLM Diesel Fuel
As discussed above, today’s proposal
would require 15 ppm sulfur highway
diesel fuel in retail facilities in the rural
areas by December 1, 2010. In its
comments on the NRLM proposal, the
State also asked that we apply the
nationwide NRLM fuel requirements to
the rural areas beginning in 2010
(except for the dye and marker
requirements). This approach allows for
the coordination of the highway and
NRLM diesel fuel requirements in the
rural areas. Given the significant
distribution limitations in rural areas,
this is a critical need.
With one exception, today’s proposal
would apply the nationwide NRLM
standards and implementation
deadlines to diesel fuel produced or
imported for, distributed to, or used in
rural Alaska beginning June 1, 2010.
The one exception is that locomotive
and marine diesel fuel would be
required to meet the 15 ppm sulfur
standard in 2010 instead of 2012.
We believe that imposing the 15 ppm
standard on all NRLM diesel fuel in
rural Alaska, rather than allowing the
current exemption to continue
indefinitely, is both warranted and
feasible. First, all NRLM fuel in urban
areas, and all highway diesel fuel, will
meet the 15 ppm standard by 2010.
Given the limited ability of the
distribution system for handling
multiple grades, much if not all of the
NRLM diesel fuel that would end up in
the rural areas may meet the 15 ppm
standard even under the existing
regulations. Second, because 2011+
nonroad engines will represent an
increasing fraction of the nonroad fleet
beginning in 2010, under the existing
indefinite exemption rural communities
will be faced with the decision about
when their NRLM fuel should be
switched entirely to 15 ppm. There may
be a temptation to misfuel 2011+
engines in order to avoid having to
make this switch. If misfueling occurs,
the environmental benefits of the 2011+
nonroad engines may be lost. Finally,
there are logistical and economic
benefits for coordinating the
implementation of highway and NRLM
15 ppm sulfur standards in urban and
rural areas of Alaska and with the rest
of the nation. We believe that these
benefits exceed the costs in rural
Alaska.
The NRLM final rule exempts all
areas in Alaska from the red dye and
yellow marker requirements, and the
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59700
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
related segregation requirements that
would otherwise apply for fuels meeting
the same sulfur, aromatics and/or cetane
standards. Thus, in rural Alaska prior to
June 1, 2010, uncontrolled highway and
non-highway diesel fuels could
continue to be commingled. Beginning
June 1, 2010, the highway and NRLM
diesel fuels could continue to be
allowed to be commingled if they both
met the 15 ppm sulfur standard and
applicable aromatics and/or cetane
standards, thus eliminating the need for
segregation. The market would
determine on a case-by-case basis
whether to supply segregated or
commingled distillate fuel for highway,
NR, LM, and heating oil applications.
IV. What Is the Emissions Impact of
Today’s Proposal?
The flexibility offered by today’s
proposal would not increase diesel
emissions over current levels, but would
likely result in a delay of some sulfate
emission reduction benefits in the rural
areas of Alaska until low sulfur diesel
fuel becomes available to consumers in
those areas starting in 2010. The sulfate
emissions of pre-2007 model year
highway vehicles and engines and of all
marine engines in rural Alaska would
remain at current levels for as long as
high sulfur diesel fuel is used, but not
later than December 1, 2010.
The State of Alaska previously
indicated that there are approximately
600 diesel highway vehicles distributed
throughout the approximate 250 villages
and communities. This averages to less
than three diesel vehicles per village,
although the actual numbers may vary
considerably between the smallest and
largest villages. We believe that the
sulfate emission reductions from the
small number of pre-2007 model year
diesel highway vehicles that would be
delayed until December 1, 2010 by
today’s proposal would be very small.
The villages would receive the full
emission reduction benefits from the
2007 and later model year diesel
highway vehicles, because they would
be fueled with 15 ppm sulfur diesel
fuel, but their numbers will be very
small.
We do not know the number of NRLM
equipment and engines in rural Alaska.
However, we do know that the
consumption of distillate fuel in the
rural areas by marine engines is about
four percent, and is negligible for other
nonroad and locomotive engines (if
any). Thus, the sulfate emission benefits
from NRLM sources are almost entirely
from marine engines and would be
delayed as long as high sulfur diesel
fuel is used, but no later than December
1, 2010. At that time, given the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
distribution limitations in rural Alaska,
ULSD may also be used much more
broadly in locomotive, marine, heating,
and power generation services. If this
were the case, there would be
significantly greater sulfate PM benefits
than strictly required.
As in previous actions to grant Alaska
exemptions from the current 500 ppm
sulfur standard, we would not base any
vehicle or engine recall on emissions
exceedences caused by the use of high
sulfur fuel (greater than 500 ppm sulfur
for pre-2007 model year vehicles and
engines; greater than 15 ppm sulfur for
2007 and later vehicles and engines) in
rural Alaska during the period prior to
the proposed implementation dates of
this notice. Our in-use testing goals are
to establish whether representative
engines, when properly maintained and
used, will meet emission standards for
their useful lives. These goals are
consistent with the requirements for
recall outlined in Section 207(c)(1) of
the CAA. Further, manufacturers may
have a reasonable basis for denying
emission related warranties where
damage or failures are caused by the use
of high sulfur fuel in rural Alaska.
The Engine Manufacturers
Association commented in previous
actions to grant Alaska sulfur
exemptions that the level of protection
provided to engine manufacturers falls
short of what they believe is reasonable
and necessary. It asserted that the use of
high sulfur diesel fuel by an engine
should raise a ‘‘rebuttable presumption’’
that the fuel has caused the engine
failure, and that EPA should have the
burden of rebutting that presumption. It
also asserted that the emissions
warranty is a regulatory requirement
under Section 207, that only EPA has
the authority to exclude claims based on
the use of high sulfur diesel fuel.
We understand and concur with the
manufacturers’ concerns about in-use
testing of engines operated in an area
exempt from fuel sulfur requirements,
or in the case of today’s proposal,
engines operated in an area with an
implementation date later than that of
the rest of the country. Consequently,
we affirm that, for recall purposes, we
would not seek to conduct or cause the
in-use testing of engines we know have
been exposed to high sulfur fuels in
rural Alaska. We would likely screen
any engines used in our testing program
to see if they have been operated in
rural Alaska. We believe we can readily
obtain sufficient samples of engines
without testing engines operated in
rural Alaska. In reviewing the warranty
concerns of the Engine Manufacturers
Association associated with previous
actions to grant sulfur exemptions, we
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
have determined that our position
regarding warranties, as previously
stated and described above, is consistent
with section 207(a) and (b) of the CAA
and does not require any new or
amended regulatory language to
implement.
V. Public Participation
We request comment on all aspects of
this proposal. This section describes
how you can participate in this process.
A. How and to Whom Do I Submit
Comments?
We are opening a formal comment
period by publishing this document. We
will accept comments for the period
indicated under DATES above. If you
have an interest in the program
described in this document, we
encourage you to comment on any
aspect of this rulemaking. We request
comment on various topics throughout
this proposal. Your comments will be
most useful if you include appropriate
and detailed supporting rationale, data,
and analysis. If you disagree with parts
of the proposed program, we encourage
you to suggest and analyze alternate
approaches to meeting the air quality
goals described in this proposal. You
should send all comments, except those
containing proprietary information, to
our Air Docket (see ADDRESSES) before
the end of the comment period.
You may submit comments
electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper
receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate
docket identification number in the
subject line on the first page of your
comment. Please ensure that your
comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments
received after the close of the comment
period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not
required to consider these late
comments. Please follow the
instructions in Section I.B. Do not use
EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit CBI or
information protected by statute.
B. Will There Be a Public Hearing?
We do not plan to hold a public
hearing on this proposed rule. If you
would like to request a public hearing,
you must make that request to the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section no later
than 30 days after publication. If a
request for public hearing is made by
this date, we will publish the date and
location in a separate Federal Register
notice.
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR
51735 (October 4, 1993)) the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) 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;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.’’
It has been determined that this rule
does not meet any of the criteria above,
and thus is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under the terms of Executive
Order 12866 and is therefore not subject
to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act
stipulates that every federal agency
must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) before
collecting the same or similar
information from 10 or more members
of the public. If the Environmental
Protection Agency decides to gather
information, the appropriate program
office must prepare an Information
Collection Request (ICR) and submit it
to OMB for approval. An ICR describes
the information to be collected, gives
the reason the information is needed,
and estimates the time and cost for the
public to answer the request.
OMB has previously approved the
ICRs contained in the existing
regulations at 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. and
has assigned OMB control number
2060–0308 and EPA ICR numbers
1718.03 (dyeing of tax exempt diesel
fuel), 1718.04 (motor vehicle diesel
fuel), and 1718.05 (NRLM diesel fuel). A
copy of the OMB approved ICRs may be
obtained from Susan Auby, Collection
Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2822T); 1200
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566–1672.
Today’s proposed rule would not
establish any new requirements for
highway diesel fuel sold in Alaska, but
instead would only delay the
requirements for 15ppm fuel from 2006
to 2010 in rural areas of Alaska. Since
the burden of reporting would be
exactly the same in rural Alaska after
2010 under today’s proposed rule as it
is under the requirements of the final
rule for highway diesel sulfur, the
previously approved ICR for highway
diesel fuel still applies to rural Alaska.
Thus no new ICR or amended ICR is
required for highway fuel.
The requirements for NRLM diesel
fuel in rural Alaska as proposed in
today’s action are new, in that the
NRLM final rule did not finalize the
sulfur standards for rural Alaska
(although it did impose the requirement
that all 2011 and later engines in rural
Alaska must use diesel fuel meeting the
15ppm sulfur standard). However, these
new requirements for NRLM diesel fuel
in rural Alaska do not require a new or
amended ICR. The approved ICR for the
nonroad final rule (ICR number 1718.05;
OMB Control Number 2060–0308)
already covers all U.S. states, including
rural Alaska. For instance, this ICR
made additions to the existing fuels
regulations applicable to diesel fuel,
where ‘‘diesel fuel’’ was explicitly
defined as fuel sold in any state or
territory of the U.S. In addition, the
product transfer documents required in
the nonroad final rule explicitly
included those used to identify fuel for
use in Alaska. Finally, the calculation of
total information collection costs
associated with the nonroad final rule
represented maximum costs and
included all areas of Alaska. As a result
the existing ICR generated for the
nonroad final rule remains applicable
under the actions being proposed in
today’s action.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
59701
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
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, a small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
that meets the definitions based on the
Small Business Administration’s (SBA)
size standards; (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.
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
proposed 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.
Today’s proposed rule applies a
delayed implementation date for ultralow sulfur highway diesel fuel in rural
Alaska compared to the existing
regulations and extends this same
deadline to NRLM diesel fuel in rural
Alaska to bring those areas in line with
the national standards. Since this
proposed rule would delay the 15 ppm
highway sulfur standard in rural areas,
the regulatory burden is effectively
relieved in this respect. As a result this
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59702
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
proposed rule would not have an
adverse economic impact on small
entities in rural areas which distribute,
store, or using highway diesel fuel.
Regarding NRLM diesel fuel, the
requirements in today’s action are new
in that rural areas of Alaska were not
covered by the 15 ppm sulfur standard
in the NRLM final rule. As stated in that
rule, it was our intention to add the 15
ppm requirement to rural Alaska at the
time of the NRLM final rule, but we
deferred that action so that it could be
coordinated with our actions on
highway diesel fuel in rural Alaska.
Even though the NRLM sulfur
standards proposed in this rule are new,
they do not impose a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Within the
approximately 250 rural area villages in
Alaska, their unique circumstances limit
the number of grades of diesel fuel that
can be stored and distributed. The
efficiency and cost effectiveness of the
rural distribution and storage system
discourages the introduction of a small
volume of a specialty fuel, such that
these communities must generally
choose between using a single fuel for
all diesel applications, or purchasing
extra storage and distribution
equipment. The latter approach is
generally more expensive and would
only be pursued if the dual storage and
distribution system would be needed
long term. However, the number of
2011+ model year nonroad and marine
engines in these rural communities will
increase after 2010, requiring a greater
and greater proportion of the fuel to
meet the 15 ppm standard. Thus in the
long term, dual segregated storage and
distribution capacity would become
superfluous. In addition, since the
highway fuel used in rural areas will
already be required to meet the 15 ppm
sulfur standard by 2010, many rural
communities would simply switch
entirely to diesel fuel meeting the 15
ppm standard for all their diesel
applications at this time to avoid the
need to install additional segregated
storage and distribution capacity. This
proposal’s requirement that all NRLM
diesel fuel used in rural areas meet the
15 ppm standard starting in 2010 is
therefore unlikely to create an
additional economic burden for most
rural areas.
Therefore, after considering the
economic impacts of today’s proposed
rule on small entities, I certify that this
action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 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 costeffective 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 potentially
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.
Today’s proposal contains no Federal
mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. It would impose no
enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector,
and 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.
Rather, this proposal relieves burden by
applying a delayed implementation date
for ultra-low sulfur highway, nonroad,
locomotive and marine diesel fuel in
rural Alaska compared to the existing
regulations and the rest of the country.
Thus, today’s rule is not subject to the
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
E. 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 proposed 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 proposed
rule simply applies a delayed
implementation date for low sulfur
highway diesel fuel in the rural areas of
Alaska, and provides for inclusion of
rural Alaska in the nationwide nonroad,
locomotive and marine (NRLM) diesel
fuel program but with a delayed
implementation date. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
Although section 6 of Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this rule, EPA
did consult with representatives of the
State of Alaska, who spent much time
getting feedback from the rural
communities about our highway and
proposed NRLM diesel fuel
requirements. In fact, this proposed rule
is the direct result of, and is consistent
with, State submittals to EPA of an
alternative implementation plan for low
sulfur highway diesel fuel in rural
Alaska, and comments to the proposed
NRLM diesel rule as it relates to rural
Alaska, as mentioned previously in this
preamble. Nevertheless, in the spirit of
Executive Order 13132, and consistent
with EPA policy to promote
communications between EPA and State
and local governments, EPA specifically
solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.
F. 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
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. The regulations
that this proposed rule amends will be
implemented at the Federal level and
impose compliance costs only on diesel
fuel producers, importers, distributors,
retailers and consumers of diesel fuel.
This proposed rule relates to the
standards and deadlines that apply
specifically to the rural areas of Alaska,
and tribal governments in the rural areas
of Alaska will be affected only to the
extent they purchase and use diesel
fuel.
Nevertheless, tribal officials were
consulted by State representatives early
in the process of developing this
proposed regulation to permit them to
have meaningful and timely input into
its development. State representatives
spent much time getting feedback from
the rural communities, including tribal
representatives, about our highway and
proposed NRLM diesel fuel
requirements. That feedback was
considered in the State’s submittals to
EPA of an alternative implementation
plan for low sulfur highway diesel fuel
in rural Alaska, and comments to the
proposed NRLM diesel rule as it relates
to rural Alaska, as mentioned previously
in this preamble. EPA specifically
solicits additional comment on this
proposed rule from tribal officials.
G. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 F.R. 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:
(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under E.O.
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 proposed rule is not subject to
the Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in
E.O. 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. This
proposed action would affect only
highway diesel fuel sold in rural areas
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
59703
of Alaska which have unique
meteorological conditions and sparse
populations that make environmental
health and safety risks extremely small.
The public is invited to submit or
identify peer-reviewed studies and data,
of which the agency may not be aware,
that assessed results of early life
exposure to the sulfur-based emissions
(primarily SO2) that are proposed for
regulation in today’s action.
Dated: October 4, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
H. 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.
1. The authority citation for part 69
continues to read as follows:
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, 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
proposed rulemaking does not involve
technical standards. Therefore, EPA is
not considering the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
VII. Statutory Provisions and Legal
Authority
Statutory authority for the proposal is
found in sections 211(c) and 211(i) of
the CAA, which allow EPA to regulate
fuels that either contribute to air
pollution which endangers public
health or welfare or which impair
emission control equipment which is in
general use or has been in general use.
42 U.S.C. 7545 (c) and (i). Additional
support for the procedural and
enforcement-related aspects of fuel
controls, including record keeping
requirements, comes from sections
114(a) and 301(a) of the CAA. 42 U.S.C.
7414(a) and 7601(a).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 69
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, we propose to amend part 69
of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 69—SPECIAL EXEMPTIONS
FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
CLEAN AIR ACT
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7545(c), (g) and (i),
and 7625–1.
2. Section 69.51 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 69.51
Motor vehicle diesel fuel.
(a) Definitions. (1) Areas accessible by
the Federal Aid Highway System are the
geographical areas of Alaska designated
by the State of Alaska as being
accessible by the Federal Aid Highway
System.
(2) Areas not accessible by the Federal
Aid Highway System are all other
geographical areas of Alaska.
(b) Diesel fuel that is designated for
use only in Alaska and is used only in
Alaska, is exempt from the sulfur
standard of 40 CFR 80.29(a)(1) and the
dye provisions of 40 CFR 80.29(a)(3)
and 80.29(b) until the implementation
dates of 40 CFR 80.500, provided that:
(1) The fuel is segregated from
nonexempt diesel fuel from the point of
such designation; and
(2) On each occasion that any person
transfers custody or title to the fuel,
except when it is dispensed at a retail
outlet or wholesale purchaser-consumer
facility, the transferor must provide to
the transferee a product transfer
document stating:
‘‘This diesel fuel is for use only in Alaska.
It is exempt from the federal low sulfur
standards applicable to highway diesel fuel
and red dye requirements applicable to nonhighway diesel fuel only if it is used in
Alaska.’’
(c) Beginning on the implementation
dates under 40 CFR 80.500, motor
vehicle diesel fuel that is designated for
use in areas of Alaska accessible by the
Federal Aid Highway System, or is used
in areas of Alaska accessible by the
Federal Aid Highway System, is subject
to the applicable provisions of 40 CFR
part 80, subpart I, except as provided
under 40 CFR 69.52(c), (d), and (e) for
commingled motor vehicle and nonmotor vehicle diesel fuel.
(d) From the implementation dates of
40 CFR 80.500 until the implementation
dates specified in paragraph (e) of this
section, motor vehicle diesel fuel that is
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
59704
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 197 / Thursday, October 13, 2005 / Proposed Rules
designated for use in areas of Alaska not
accessible by the Federal Aid Highway
System, and is used in areas of Alaska
not accessible by the Federal Aid
Highway System, is exempt from the
sulfur standard of 40 CFR 80.29(a)(1),
the dye provisions of 40 CFR 80.29(a)(3)
and 40 CFR 80.29(b), and the motor
vehicle diesel fuel standards under 40
CFR 80.520 and associated
requirements, provided that:
(1) The exempt fuel is not used in
2007 and later model year highway
vehicles and engines,
(2) The exempt fuel is segregated from
nonexempt highway diesel fuel from the
point of such designation; and
(3) On each occasion that any person
transfers custody or title to the exempt
fuel, except when it is dispensed at a
retail outlet or wholesale purchaserconsumer facility, the transferor must
provide to the transferee a product
transfer document stating:
‘‘This fuel is for use only in those areas of
Alaska not accessible by the FAHS’’.
(4) The exempt fuel must meet the
labeling requirements under § 80.570,
except the following language shall be
substituted for the language on the
labels:
‘‘HIGH SULFUR DIESEL FUEL (may be
greater than 15 Sulfur ppm)
WARNING
Federal Law prohibits use in model year
2007 and later highway diesel vehicles and
engines. Its use may damage these vehicles
and engines.’’
(e) Beginning on the following
implementation dates, motor vehicle
diesel fuel that is designated for use in
areas of Alaska not accessible by the
Federal Aid Highway System, or is used
in areas of Alaska not accessible by the
Federal Aid Highway System, is subject
to the applicable provisions of 40 CFR
part 80, subpart I, except as provided
under 40 CFR 69.52(c), (d), and (e) for
commingled motor vehicle and nonmotor vehicle diesel fuel:
(1) June 1, 2010 for diesel fuel
produced or imported by any refiner or
importer,
(2) August 1, 2010 at all downstream
locations, except at retail facilities and
wholesale-purchaser consumers,
(3) October 1, 2010 at retail facilities
and wholesale-purchaser consumers,
and
(4) December 1, 2010 at all locations.
3. Section 69.52 is amended as
follows:
a. By adding paragraph (a)(4).
b. By revising paragraphs (c)(1) and
(c)(2).
c. By revising paragraphs (f) and (g).
d. By adding paragraph (h).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Oct 12, 2005
Jkt 208001
§ 69.52
Non-motor vehicle diesel fuel.
(a) * * *
(4) Heating oil has the meaning given
in 40 CFR 80.2.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) NRLM diesel fuel and heating oil
referred to in paragraphs (b) and (g) of
this section are exempt from the red dye
requirements, and the presumptions
associated with the red dye
requirements, under 40 CFR
80.520(b)(2) and 80.510(d)(5), (e)(5), and
(f)(5).
(2) NRLM diesel fuel and heating oil
referred to in paragraphs (b) and (g) of
this section are exempt from the marker
solvent yellow 124 requirements, and
the presumptions associated with the
marker solvent yellow 124
requirements, under 40 CFR 80.510(d)
through (f).
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Non-motor vehicle diesel fuel and
heating oil that is intended for use and
used only in areas of Alaska not
accessible by the Federal Aid Highway
System, are excluded from the
applicable provisions of 40 CFR Part 80,
Subpart I and 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart
IIII until the implementation dates
specified in paragraph (g) of this
section, except that:
(1) All model year 2011 and later
nonroad and stationary diesel engines
and equipment must be fueled only
with diesel fuel that meets the
specifications for NR fuel in 40 CFR
80.510(b) or (c);
(2) The following language shall be
added to any product transfer
document: ‘‘This fuel is for use only in
those areas of Alaska not accessible by
the FAHS;’’ and
(3) Pump labels for such fuel that does
not meet the specifications of 40 CFR
80.510(b) or 80.510(c) shall contain the
following language:
‘‘HIGH SULFUR DIESEL FUEL (may be
greater than 15 Sulfur ppm)
WARNING
Federal Law prohibits use in model year
2007 and later highway diesel vehicles and
engines, or in model year 2011 and later
nonroad diesel engines and equipment. Its
use may damage these vehicles and engines.’’
(g) NRLM standards. (1) Beginning on
the following implementation dates,
NRLM diesel fuel that is used or
intended for use in areas of Alaska not
accessible by the Federal Aid Highway
System is subject to the provisions of 40
CFR part 80, subpart I, except as
provided in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and
(g)(2) of this section:
(i) June 1, 2010 or diesel fuel
produced or imported by any refiner or
importer,
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(ii) August 1, 2010 at all downstream
locations, except at retail facilities and
wholesale-purchaser consumers,
(iii) October 1, 2010 at retail facilities
and wholesale-purchaser consumers,
and
(iv) December 1, 2010 at all locations.
(2) The per-gallon sulfur content
standard for all LM diesel fuel shall be
15 ppm maximum.
(3) Diesel fuel used in new stationary
internal combustion engines regulated
under 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart IIII shall
be subject to the fuel-related provisions
of that subpart beginning December 1,
2010.
(h) Alternative labels to those
specified in paragraphs (e)(3) and (f)(2)
of this section may be used as approved
by the Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–20519 Filed 10–12–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[ET Docket No. 04–295; RM–10865;
FCC 05–153]
Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act and Broadband
Access and Services
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commission (Commission) initiates this
rulemaking to explore whether the
Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act (CALEA) should apply
to providers of voice over Internet
Protocol (VoIP) services that are not
interconnected, meaning VoIP services
that do not allow users generally to
receive calls originating from and to
terminate calls to the public switched
telephone network (PSTN). This
rulemaking will also explore the
appropriateness of requiring something
less than full CALEA compliance for
certain classes or categories of providers
of facilities-based broadband Internet
access services. This rulemaking will
enhance public safety and ensure that
the surveillance needs of law
enforcement agencies continue to be
met as Internet-based communications
technologies proliferate.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
November 14, 2005, and reply
comments are due on or before
December 12, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ET Docket No. 04–295, by
any of the following methods:
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 197 (Thursday, October 13, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59690-59704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20519]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 69
[OAR-2004-0229; FRL-7982-6]
RIN 2060-AJ72
Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles and Nonroad Diesel
Engines: Alternative Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuel Transition Program for
Alaska
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing an implementation date of June 1, 2010 for
the sulfur, cetane and aromatics requirements for highway, nonroad,
locomotive and marine diesel fuel produced or imported for, distributed
to, or used in the rural areas of Alaska. As of the implementation
date, diesel fuel used in these applications would
[[Page 59691]]
have to meet a 15 ppm (maximum) sulfur content standard. This action
would allow full implementation of the programs for highway and nonroad
diesel fuels in Alaska while providing some limited additional leadtime
for development of any necessary changes to the fuel distribution
system in rural Alaska. This additional leadtime is appropriate given
the circumstances of the rural areas, including the expected delay in
time before use of new diesel engines requiring sulfur controlled
diesel fuel. In 2010 highway and nonroad fuel in rural Alaska would be
regulated according to the implementation schedule of fuel property
standards applicable in the rest of the U.S., providing the full
environmental benefits of these programs to rural Alaska as well.
Locomotive and marine diesel fuel used in rural areas of Alaska would
meet the 15ppm standard two years earlier than the rest of the U.S., so
that all NRLM diesel fuel in rural areas of Alaska would meet the 15ppm
standard in 2010. EPA is not proposing changes to or reopening the
diesel fuel rules as they apply to the other areas of Alaska. We have
not received any information that would warrant such action, and the
State has not requested such action. This proposal is consistent with
the State's request and comments on the NRLM rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 11, 2006.
However, since we do not plan to hold a public hearing on this proposed
rule, any requests for a public hearing must be received on or before
November 14, 2005. Requests for a public hearing must be made to the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2004-
0229, by one of the following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
B. Agency Website: https://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA's
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method
for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
C. E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-
2004-0229, Fax: 202-566-0805.
D. Mail: Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0229, Air Docket,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
E. Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC., Attention Docket ID No.
OAR-2004-0229. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's
normal hours of operation from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0229.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http:/
/www.epa.gov/edocket, 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 EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the federal regulations.gov websites are
``anonymous access'' systems, 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 EDOCKET or 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31,
2002 (67 FR 38102). For additional instructions on submitting comments,
go to Unit I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy at the HQ EPA Docket Center, Air Docket, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number is (202) 566-1742. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Korotney, Assessment and
Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4507; fax number: (734) 214-4051; e-
mail address: korotney.david@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Does This Action Apply to Me?
You will be regulated by this action if you produce, import,
distribute, or sell diesel fuel for use in the rural areas of Alaska.
The following table gives some examples of entities that may have to
follow the regulations. But because these are only examples, you should
carefully examine the regulations in 40 CFR part 80. If you have
questions, call the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS SIC
Examples of potentially regulated entities codes codes
\a\ \b\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum Refiners.................................... 32411 2911
Petroleum Bulk Stations, Terminals,................... 42271 5171
Petroleum and Products Wholesalers.................... 42272 5172
Diesel Fuel Trucking.................................. 48422 4212
48423 4213
Diesel Service Stations............................... 44711 5541
44719
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
\b\ Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
EDOCKET, regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is
[[Page 59692]]
claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does
not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. If you submit the copy that does not
contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming
CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0229. The official public docket
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any
public comments received, and other information related to this action.
Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not
include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket
is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at
the Air Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center
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 Reading
Room is (202) 566-1742, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is
(202) 566-1742.
Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the
public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and
comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at https://
www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the
appropriate docket identification number.
Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public
docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic
public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be
placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent
feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in
EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the
index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the
document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket.
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the docket facility identified above.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment
containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that
material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's
electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
For additional information about EPA's electronic public docket
visit EPA Dockets online or see 67 FR 38102, May 31, 2002.
Outline of This Preamble
I. Background
A. How Was Alaska Treated in the Highway Diesel Rule?
B. How Was Alaska Treated in the NRLM Diesel Rule?
C. Alaska's Highway Submission and Comments to NRLM Proposal
II. What Is EPA Proposing?
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
B. Nonroad, Locomotive, and Marine Diesel Fuel
C. Summary of Proposed Sulfur Standards for Alaska
III. Why Are We Proposing a June 1, 2010 Effective Date for Rural
Areas of Alaska?
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
1. Ensure an Adequate Supply (Either Through Production or
Imports) of 15 ppm Sulfur Diesel Fuel To Meet the Demand of Any 2007
or Later Model Year Vehicles
2. Ensure Sufficient Retail Availability of Low Sulfur Fuel for
New Vehicles in Alaska
3. Address the Growth of Supply and Availability Over Time as
More New Vehicles Enter the Fleet
4. Include Measures To Ensure Segregation of the 15 ppm Fuel and
Avoid Contamination and Misfueling
5. Ensure Enforceability
B. NRLM Diesel Fuel
IV. What is the Emissions Impact of Today's Proposal?
[[Page 59693]]
V. Public Participation
A. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?
B. Will There Be a Public Hearing?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Federalism
F. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
G. Protection of Children From Environmental Health & Safety
Risks
H. Actions that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
VII. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
I. Background
A. How Was Alaska Treated in the Highway Diesel Rule?
The nationwide implementation dates (including all of Alaska) for
highway diesel fuel at 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. (66 FR 5002, January 18,
2001) are shown in Table I.A-1.
Table IA-1.--Federal Implementation Dates for Highway Diesel Fuel 15 ppm
Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Applicable parties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2006.......................... Refiners and importers.
July 15, 2006......................... Downstream facilities except
retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
September 1, 2006..................... Retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These implementation dates begin the transition of the nation to
ultra-low sulfur (15 ppm sulfur, maximum) highway diesel fuel from the
current low sulfur (500 ppm sulfur, maximum) diesel fuel.\1\ Until
2010, at least 80 percent of each refiner's production (or imports)
must meet the 15 ppm sulfur standard, with the remaining 20 percent or
less meeting the 500 ppm sulfur standard-that is, the 80/20 Temporary
Compliance Option. Exceptions are made for EPA-approved small refiners,
which may produce all their highway fuel to the 500 ppm sulfur standard
until later years, and refiners and importers that obtain early use
credits, which would allow them to produce or import more than 20
percent of their diesel fuel to the 500 ppm sulfur standard until 2010.
However, because of the sensitivity of the 2007 and later model year
highway engines and emission control systems to fuel with high sulfur
content, those engines may not be fueled with diesel fuel having a
sulfur content of greater than 15 ppm. This requires that all 500 ppm
sulfur highway diesel fuel (i.e., from the 80/20 Temporary Compliance
Option, credit-trading, or by EPA-approved small refiners) be
segregated from the 15 ppm sulfur highway diesel fuel and labeled for
use, and dispensed, only in 2006 and earlier highway vehicles and
engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Alaska was granted an exemption from the 500 ppm standard
until June 1, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the beginning of the 500 ppm highway diesel fuel program in
1993, we have granted Alaska exemptions from both the 500 ppm highway
diesel fuel sulfur standard and the nonhighway dye provisions of 40 CFR
80.29 because of its unique geographical, meteorological, air quality,
and economic factors.\2\ We granted temporary exemptions for areas of
the State served by the Federal Aid Highway System (the urban areas),
and a permanent exemption for the remaining areas (the rural areas).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Under Section 211(i)(4) of the Clean Air Act, the States of
Alaska and Hawaii may be exempted from the 500 ppm sulfur content
standard (and cetane, automatics and dye requirements) of Section
211(i). Copies of information regarding Alaska's petition for
exemption under Section 211(i)(4), subsequent requests by Alaska,
public comments received, and actions by EPA are available in public
docket A-96-26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 12, 1995, Alaska submitted a petition for a permanent
exemption for all areas of the State served by the Federal Aid Highway
System, that is, those areas previously covered only by a temporary
exemption. While considering that petition, we started work on a
nationwide rule to consider more stringent highway diesel fuel
requirements for sulfur content. In our subsequent highway diesel final
rule (66 FR 5002, January 18, 2001) the highway engine emission
standards were applied fully in Alaska, and the permanent exemption for
rural Alaska from the 500 ppm sulfur standard of 40 CFR 80.29
terminates upon the implementation date of the new 15 ppm sulfur
standard in 2006. However, based on factors unique to Alaska, we
provided the State with: (1) an extension of the temporary exemption
from the 500 ppm sulfur standard in the urban areas until the
implementation date of the new 15 ppm sulfur standard for highway
diesel fuel in 2006, (2) an opportunity to request an alternative
implementation plan for the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel program, and (3)
a permanent exemption from the diesel fuel dye provisions. In that
rule, our goal was to establish a mechanism whereby modifications could
be made, as appropriate, for transitioning Alaska to the ultra-low
sulfur (15 ppm sulfur maximum) highway diesel fuel program in a manner
that minimizes costs while still ensuring that model year 2007 and
later highway vehicles and engines receive the 15 ppm sulfur diesel
fuel they need.
B. How Was Alaska Treated in the NRLM Diesel Rule?
The nationwide implementation date for nonroad, locomotive, and
marine (NRLM) diesel fuel at 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. (69 FR 38958, June
29, 2004) is June 1, 2007 for refiners and importers. This
implementation date begins the first step of a two-step program of
transitioning the nation to 15 ppm sulfur NRLM diesel fuel from
uncontrolled non-highway diesel fuel. In this first step beginning in
2007, all NRLM diesel fuel produced or imported must meet the 500 ppm
sulfur standard and applicable cetane or aromatic standard. Facilities
downstream of the refiners and importers must meet the 500ppm standard
on other dates depending on their location and type of facility, as
shown below:
Table I.B-1.--Federal Implementation Dates for NRLM Diesel Fuel 500 ppm Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation date for urban Alaska Implementation date for all other
and Northeast/Mid-Atlantic areas Applicable parties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2007.......................... June 1, 2007 Refiners and importers.
[[Page 59694]]
August 1, 2007........................ August 1, 2010 Downstream facilities except
retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
October 1, 2007....................... October 1, 2010 Retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
December 1, 2007...................... December 1, 2010 All facilities including farm
tanks and construction facility
tanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For most of the U.S. until June 1, 2010, NRLM diesel fuel with
uncontrolled sulfur content (and uncontrolled aromatics content and
cetane index) can be produced by EPA-approved small refiners/importers
and refiners/importers using early use credits. Until 2010 there is no
restriction in the use of this NRLM diesel fuel having uncontrolled
sulfur levels in NRLM engines. However, under the regulations applying
to the nation as a whole, other diesel fuel with uncontrolled sulfur
levels (i.e., all fuel meeting the definition of heating oil) must be
segregated from the NRLM diesel fuel, dyed with a yellow marker and red
dye, and is prohibited from being used in NRLM engines and equipment.
The NRLM rule requires that heating oil be segregated and marked
with a yellow marker and red dye to distinguish it from small refiner
or credit-using high sulfur NRLM diesel fuel (40 CFR 80.510). However,
the NRLM rule determined that a dye requirement would impose a
significant challenge to Alaska's unique distribution system. That
State's distribution system cannot easily handle another fuel type that
must be segregated, and the same transfer and storage facilities must
accommodate jet fuel that must not be contaminated by dye. Therefore
the rule exempted Alaska from the dye and marker requirements, but in
exchange precluded the use of credits and constrained the flexibility
granted to small refiners.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For the small refiner flexibilities to be used in Alaska a
refiner must first obtain approval from the Administrator for a
compliance plan (40 CFR 80.554(a)(4)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step two of the nationwide NRLM diesel fuel program implements the
15 ppm sulfur standard for nonroad diesel fuel beginning on June 1,
2010 for refiners and importers. Locomotive and marine diesel fuel
produced or imported continues to be subject to the 500 ppm sulfur
standard until June 1, 2012. The downstream implementation dates for
this second step are shown in Tables I.B-2 and I.B-3.
Table I.B-2.--Federal Implementation Dates for NR Diesel Fuel 15 ppm Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation date for urban Alaska Implementation date for all other
and Northeast/Mid-Atlantic areas Applicable parties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2010.......................... June 1, 2010.......................... Refiners and importers.
August 1, 2010........................ August 1, 2014........................ Downstream facilities except
retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
October 1, 2010....................... October 1, 2014....................... Retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
December 1, 2010...................... December 1, 2014...................... All facilities including farm
tanks and construction facility
tanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table I.B-3.--Federal Implementation Dates for LM Diesel Fuel 15 ppm Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation date for urban Alaska Implementation date for all other
and Northeast/Mid-Atlantic areas Applicable parties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2012.......................... June 1, 2012.......................... Refiners and importers.
August 1, 2012........................ n/a................................... Downstream facilities except
retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
October 1, 2012....................... n/a................................... Retailers and wholesale-
purchaser consumers.
December 1, 2012...................... n/a................................... All facilities including farm
tanks and construction facility
tanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA-approved small refiners/importers and refiners/importers using
early use credits may produce or import nonroad diesel fuel that meets
the 500 ppm sulfur standard until June 1, 2014. However, the early-use
credit provisions do not apply to Alaska. In addition, because of the
sensitivity to fuel sulfur content of the 2011 and later model year
nonroad engines and emission control systems that will be certified to
the Tier 4 emission standards, those engines are prohibited from being
fueled with diesel fuel having a sulfur content greater than 15 ppm.
Alaska submitted its suggested modification to the Agency for
highway diesel fuel in rural Alaska on June 12, 2003, after publication
of our NRLM proposal but before we had completed development of the
final NRLM rule. This Alaska submission covered only highway diesel
used in rural areas. Urban areas of Alaska were addressed in a previous
submission \4\ for highway fuel and in Alaska's comments on the NRLM
proposed rule, and in both cases the State of Alaska requested that
urban areas adhere to the federal fuel sulfur standards and
implementation schedule. The provisions for NRLM diesel fuel in urban
Alaska were finalized in the NRLM final rule, and they require that
NRLM in urban areas meet the same requirements as the contiguous 48
states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Letter from Michele Brown, Commissioner, Alaska Department
of Environmental Conservation, to Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant
Administrator of the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, April 1,
2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRLM final rule stated that our original proposal to
permanently exempt all NRLM diesel fuel in rural Alaska from the sulfur
content standards was inconsistent with the
[[Page 59695]]
action requested by the state. Under normal circumstances this would
have meant that the NRLM final rule would have included imposition of
the sulfur content standards on all NRLM diesel fuel in rural Alaska,
along with all the associated labeling, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. However, we deferred this action until now to coordinate
the NRLM and highway sulfur standards. Thus, the NRLM final rule
indicated that we would issue a supplemental proposal (i.e., today's
proposal) to address the comments submitted by the State for NRLM
diesel fuel in the rural areas, as well as the State's suggestion of an
alternative implementation plan for highway diesel fuel in the rural
areas. However, the NRLM final rule did require that 2011 model year
and later nonroad engines in rural areas, which will be manufactured to
operate on 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel, must be fueled with 15 ppm diesel
fuel (40 CFR 69.51(f)).
C. Alaska's Highway Submission and Comments to NRLM Proposal
On June 12, 2003, Alaska submitted its suggested modifications to
implementation of the highway diesel fuel sulfur standards in Alaska.
In its plan, the State indicated that the rural areas do not need the
15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel in the early stage of the highway diesel
program. (The rural areas are those areas not served by the Federal Aid
Highway System--which includes the marine highway system--as defined by
the State of Alaska.) The rural areas could use more time to plan the
switch to 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel, and would be less impacted if we
implemented a one-step transition to 15 ppm sulfur rather than a two-
step transition which would have required a minimum of 80% of each
refinery's highway diesel to meet the 15 ppm standard in 2006, with the
remainder meeting the 500 ppm standard. The State requested that the
rural areas be exempt from the nationwide program from 2006 to 2010,
and join the nationwide program in 2010 when all highway diesel fuel
must meet the 15 ppm standard. Thus, the rural areas would switch from
uncontrolled to 15 ppm sulfur for all highway diesel fuel in 2010 along
with the rest of the nation. However, since all 2007 and later model
year highway diesel vehicles will need 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel, fuel
meeting this standard would have to be made available in rural
communities that obtain one or more 2007 or later model year highway
vehicle prior to 2010. This approach would provide rural Alaska more
time to transition to the low sulfur fuel program in a manner that
minimizes costs while still ensuring that the 2007 and later model year
highway vehicles receive the low sulfur diesel fuel they need.
On September 15, 2003, Alaska submitted its comments to the May 23,
2003 NRLM proposal. In those comments, Alaska asked us to bring the
NRLM diesel fuel requirements for Alaska in line with the State's
recommendations for highway diesel fuel, as described above. The State
indicated the importance of avoiding segregation of rural Alaska's fuel
stream. Since the State previously requested June 2010 to be the
deadline for conversion of highway diesel fuel in the rural areas, it
requested June 2010 to also be the deadline for conversion of all NRLM
diesel fuel in the rural areas. This request included an acceleration
of the 15 ppm standard applicable to locomotive and marine diesel fuel
produced in or imported to rural Alaska from the June 2012 date in the
final NRLM rule to June 2010.
Although it is outside the scope of today's proposal, Alaska also
commented that in the NRLM final rule we should capture marine engines,
locomotive engines, and more engine sizes under the 15 ppm sulfur
standard, and that we should allow the State to continue to use dye-
free diesel fuel. Alaska also requested our financial and technical
assistance to perform a health study of diesel exhaust exposure in
rural Alaska because of concern about exposure to diesel exhaust from
village electric power generators.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In the June 29, 2004 NRLM final rule, we applied the 15 ppm
sulfur content standard to locomotive and marine diesel fuel, but
not until June 1, 2012, and we exempted Alaska from the dye and
marker requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What Is EPA Proposing?
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
We are proposing today to delay the implementation dates for the
requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. for highway diesel fuel produced
or imported for, distributed to, or used in the rural areas of Alaska.
We are proposing that the rural areas of Alaska would join the rest of
Alaska and the nation in implementing the 15 ppm sulfur content
standard for highway diesel fuel upon the implementation dates of the
nationwide program in 2010.\6\ The proposed implementation dates for
our highway diesel fuel requirements in the rural areas of Alaska are
shown in table II.A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Canada also requires 15 ppm sulfur highway diesel fuel
beginning June 1, 2006, and in October 2004 proposed that its NRLM
diesel fuel meet a 500 ppm limit beginning June 1, 2007, its nonroad
diesel fuel meet the 15 ppm sulfur limit beginning June 1, 2010, and
that its locomotive and marine diesel fuel meet the 15 ppm sulfur
limit beginning June 1, 2012. If finalized as proposed, the sulfur
requirements for highway and NRLM diesel fuel in Canada would be
harmonized with those of the U.S., and today's proposal would have
rural Alaska catch up to the requirements in both the U.S. and
Canada on June 1, 2010.
Table II.A-1.--Proposed Implementation Dates for Highway Diesel Fuel 15
ppm Standard in Rural Alaska
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Applicable parties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2010................ Refiners and importers.
August 1, 2010.............. Downstream facilities except retailers and
wholesale-purchaser consumers.
October 1, 2010............. Retailers and wholesale-purchaser
consumers.
December 1, 2010............ All facilities including farm tanks and
construction facility tanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The dates shown in Table II.A-1 are slightly different than the
downstream dates that mark the end of the Temporary Compliance Option
applicable to the nation as a whole. We are proposing the above dates
for highway diesel fuel because they would be more consistent with the
downstream implementation dates associated with NRLM, as described in
Section II.B below.
Prior to the dates shown in Table II.A-1, rural areas of Alaska
would continue to be exempt from the sulfur standards. However, because
of the sensitivity of the 2007 and later model year highway engines and
emission control systems to fuel sulfur content, we would still require
that diesel fuel used in those vehicles and engines meet the 15 ppm
sulfur content standard. This is the same refueling requirement that
applies in the 2006-2010 timeframe
[[Page 59696]]
for urban areas of Alaska and in all areas of the rest of the nation.
To fully implement this transition program for rural Alaska, we are
proposing to extend the current exemption from the 500 ppm sulfur
standard of 40 CFR 80.29 until the proposed implementation dates in
2010. In the absence of this proposed extension, highway diesel fuel in
the rural areas of Alaska would be required to meet the 500 ppm sulfur
standard of 40 CFR 80.29 beginning in 2006, when the current exemption
expires, regardless of the proposed exclusion under 40 CFR 80.500 et
al. Under today's proposal, highway diesel fuel in rural Alaska could
remain at uncontrolled sulfur levels until the proposed implementation
dates in 2010.
We are not proposing changes to the implementation schedule of the
highway diesel fuel requirements as they apply to the urban areas of
Alaska, and are not reopening the provisions of the highway
requirements previously adopted for urban areas. We have not received
any information that would warrant such reopening, and the State did
not request such a change and indicated the urban areas should be
subject to the national implementation schedule for highway diesel
fuel. We agree with the State's reasoning that urban areas of Alaska
may not only have a large number of 2007+ model year highway vehicles
in the 2006-2010 timeframe, but also that urban areas have the means
for distributing, storing, and segregating highway diesel fuel meeting
with 15 ppm sulfur standard.
B. Nonroad, Locomotive and Marine Diesel Fuel
In the nonroad, locomotive and marine (NRLM) diesel final rule, we
covered urban Alaska along with the rest of the nation, but held off on
finalizing any provisions for rural Alaska so they could be aligned
with the provisions for the highway diesel program in rural Alaska. We
are proposing today that NRLM diesel fuel produced or imported for,
distributed to, or used in the rural areas of Alaska be subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq., but not until 2010. Thus, during
the first step of the nationwide program from June 1, 2007 until June
1, 2010, NRLM diesel fuel in rural Alaska could remain at uncontrolled
sulfur levels. Beginning June 1, 2010, nonroad diesel fuel in rural
Alaska would join the rest of Alaska and the nation in implementing the
nonroad diesel fuel requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. However, due
to the unique circumstances in rural Alaska which limit the number of
grades of diesel fuel that can be stored and distributed, we propose
that the 15 ppm standard applicable to locomotive and marine fuel (LM)
be moved forward to 2010 to be consistent with the implementation
schedule for nonroad (NR) diesel fuel. In this way, there will only be
a single grade of NRLM diesel fuel in rural areas in 2010 and 2011
instead of the two separate grades (i.e. 15 ppm and 500 ppm) that will
exist elsewhere in the U.S. The proposed initial implementation dates
for NRLM diesel fuel sulfur standards are shown in Table II.B-1. We
request comment on the delay of the NR requirements until 2010, and
also the acceleration of the LM 15 ppm sulfur standard to 2010 instead
of 2012.
Table II.B-1.--Proposed Implementation Dates for NRLM Diesel Fuel 15 ppm
Standard in Rural Alaska
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Applicable parties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2010................ Refiners and importers.
August 1, 2010.............. Downstream facilities except retailers and
wholesale- purchaser consumers.
October 1, 2010............. Retailers and wholesale-purchaser
consumers.
December 1, 2010............ All facilities including farm tanks and
construction facility tanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the urban areas of Alaska would follow the nationwide
schedule for sulfur standards, some LM fuel meeting only the 500 ppm
standard would be available in these areas in the 2010-2012 timeframe
when nonroad engines requiring 15 ppm fuel will be available. Due to
the potential for misfueling, 2011+ nonroad engines are prohibited from
using LM fuel meeting only the 500 ppm sulfur standard. Also, heating
oil will remain uncontrolled for sulfur content in all areas of Alaska,
and would not be permitted to be used in any 2007 or later model year
highway vehicles or engines, or in any 2011 model year nonroad engines
or equipment. Finally, in order to coordinate with engine and fuel
requirements being proposed for stationary internal combustion engines,
2011+ stationary engines will also be prohibited from using fuel above
the 15 ppm sulfur standard. All diesel fuel used in engines covered by
the stationary internal combustion engine standards will also be
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 80.500 et seq. following the
implementation schedule applicable to NRLM fuel.
We are not proposing changes to the implementation schedule of the
NRLM diesel fuel requirements as they apply to the urban areas of
Alaska, and are not reopening the provisions of the NRLM requirements
previously adopted for urban areas. We have not received any
information that would warrant such reopening, and the State did not
request such a change and indicated the urban areas should be subject
to the national diesel fuel implementation schedule. We agree with the
State that urban areas have the means for distributing, storing, and
segregating NRLM diesel fuel meeting the 500 ppm standard in 2006 and
the 15 ppm standard in 2010.
C. Summary of Proposed Sulfur Standards for Alaska
Table II.C-1 shows all of the existing federal and proposed Alaskan
sulfur standards for highway and NRLM diesel fuel. Note that Alaska
must still ensure that 2007 and later highway engines and 2011 and
later nonroad engines are only fueled with fuel meeting the 15 ppm
standard.
Table II.C-1.--Summary of Existing Federal and Proposed Alaskan Sulfur Standards for Diesel Production and
Imports (Parts per Million)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area Fuel Before 2006 2006 2007-2009 2010-2011 2012+
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal........................... HW......... 500 15[Dagger] 15[Dagger] 15 15
Urban Alaska...................... HW......... none 15[Dagger] 15[Dagger] 15 15
[[Page 59697]]
Rural Alaska...................... HW......... none none none 15[dagger] 15
-----------------------------------
Federal........................... NR......... none none 500[dagger] 15[dagger] 15
Urban Alaska...................... NR......... none none 500[dagger] 15[dagger] 15
Rural Alaska...................... NR......... none none none 15[dagger] 15
-----------------------------------
Federal........................... LM......... none none 500[dagger] 500 15[dagger]
Urban Alaska...................... LM......... none none 500[dagger] 500 15[dagger]
Rural Alaska...................... LM......... none none none 15[dagger] 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[dagger] Refinery gate standard begins on June 1 of the first applicable year
[Dagger] Temporary Compliance Option in effect: Up to 20% of a refinery's production may exceed the 15 ppm
standard so long as it meets the 500ppm standard, is segregated from 15ppm, and is not used in MY2007+
engines.
III. Why Are We Proposing a June 1, 2010 Effective Date for Rural Areas
of Alaska?
Rural Alaska represents a rather unique situation. The majority of
distillate fuel used in rural Alaska is for stationary sources such as
power generation and home heating. The State estimates that highway
vehicles consume only about one percent of the distillate fuel in the
rural areas. ``Heating oil'' consumes approximately 95 percent (about
50 percent for heating and 45 percent for electricity generation) and
marine engines consume the remaining four percent. There is no
significant consumption of other nonroad or locomotive diesel fuel in
rural Alaska. Thus, in rural Alaska, only a very small proportion of
the distillate fuel used is currently regulated for sulfur content (and
aromatics content and/or cetane index).\7\ A single grade of fuel is
generally distributed to rural Alaska. In order to ensure the fuel can
be used in the arctic conditions, the fuel is usually Jet A (which has
a pour point of -50 degrees) that has been downgraded. If the
nationwide requirements were followed, either multiple grades of arctic
grade fuel would need to be transported and stored, or a single grade
of fuel meeting the 15 ppm standard would need to be used. For multiple
fuel grades, the limited transportation and storage capabilities in
rural Alaska would force communities to build additional infrastructure
to handle the additional grades. For a single grade meeting the 15 ppm
standard, these small communities would be forced to pay a premium for
fuel that is only required for a very small number of engines in the
2006-2010 timeframe. Both approaches represent significant economic
hardship for the many rural communities consisting primarily of
subsistence economies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Personal communication from Ron King, Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation. July 2, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our goal is to allow Alaska to transition to the low sulfur fuel
programs in a manner that minimizes costs while still ensuring that the
small number of model year 2007 and later highway vehicles and engines,
and the small number of model year 2011 and later nonroad engines and
equipment certified to the Tier 4 nonroad standards beginning with the
2011 model year, receive the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel they need. By
coordinating the transition of both highway and NRLM fuels to 15 ppm in
2010, rural communities can make individual decisions about retaining
only one grade of diesel fuel (e.g., ultra low) or build additional
storage tanks to handle two grades of fuel that retains space heating
and power generation production with high sulfur diesel fuel. In
addition, requiring rural areas to provide 15 ppm diesel fuel for all
NRLM applications beginning in 2010, rather than exempting them
permanently, \8\ helps those rural areas to avoid the temptation for
misfueling that may arise as the number of 2011+ engines increases and
rural communities are faced with the choice of either building
additional tankage or storing only 15 ppm fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The permanent exemption under the existing regulations would
still require all 2011+ nonroad engines to be fueled with 15 ppm
fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Highway Diesel Fuel
Under the highway diesel rule, at least 80 percent of a refinery's
highway diesel fuel production (except for that produced by small
refiners approved by EPA under 40 CFR 80.550-553), must meet the ultra-
low sulfur content standard (15 ppm sulfur, maximum) by 2006 (see Table
I.A-1). The remaining highway diesel fuel must meet the low sulfur
content standard (500 ppm sulfur, maximum) and may not be used in 2007
and later model year highway diesel vehicles. These nationwide
standards and deadlines apply to Alaska, including the rural areas.
Since the current fuel supply in rural Alaska is primarily high sulfur,
these nationwide requirements for highway fuel would cause the highway
fuel supply in rural Alaska to switch to the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel,
and possibly some to the 500 ppm sulfur diesel fuel, in 2006.
As previously discussed, Alaska has been exempt from the sulfur and
dye provisions of 40 CFR 80.29 since the beginning of the 500 ppm
highway diesel fuel program in 1993 because of its unique geographical,
meteorological, air quality, and economic factors. The rural areas have
been permanently exempt, and the urban areas have been temporarily
exempt. When we finalized the 15 ppm sulfur content standard for
highway diesel fuel, we recognized the factors unique to Alaska and
provided the State with: (1) An extension of the temporary exemption
for the urban areas from the 500 ppm sulfur standard until the
implementation date of the new 15 ppm sulfur standard for highway
diesel fuel in 2006, (2) an opportunity to request an alternative
implementation plan for the 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel program, and (3)
a permanent exemption from the diesel fuel dye provisions. As stated in
that rule and in today's proposal, our goal is to allow Alaska to
transition to the 15 ppm sulfur standard for highway diesel fuel in a
manner that minimizes costs while still ensuring that model year 2007
and later highway vehicles and engines receive the 15 ppm sulfur diesel
fuel they need. In its subsequent request for an alternative
implementation plan for the rural areas, the State indicated that the
rural areas will have few if any model year 2007 and later highway
vehicles in the early stage of the highway diesel program, and thus
will need little if any 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel in this timeframe.
The State also indicated that rural areas could use
[[Page 59698]]
more time to plan the switch to 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel, and would be
less impacted if we implemented a one-step transition to 15 ppm sulfur
rather than a two-step transition.
There are about 600 highway diesel vehicles in the rural areas of
Alaska, and their average age is about 18 years. Many replacement
vehicles are typically pre-owned, and only about five to 15 new diesel
vehicles are brought into the rural areas each year.\9\ Thus, most of
the approximately 250 rural area villages may not obtain their first
2007 or later model year diesel highway vehicle for some time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Diesel vehicle registration data (12,000 pound and greater,
unladed weight) as of October 1998 provided by the State of Alaska.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the State, the fuel storage and barge infrastructure
in rural Alaska is currently designed for one grade of diesel fuel. Jet
fuel is distributed, downgraded (and sometimes mixed with 1
diesel), sold, and used as 1 diesel because it meets arctic
specifications. This fuel is primarily high sulfur. The efficiency and
cost effectiveness of this system discourages the introduction of a
small volume of a specialty fuel, such as low or ultra-low sulfur
highway diesel fuel. However, the rural hub communities with jet
service still have to import jet fuel untainted by dye for aviation
purposes. The fuel storage tanks in the rural communities are owned and
maintained by the communities, thus, any requirement for new tankage or
additional tank maintenance will fall directly on the rural
communities, which have a subsistence economy.
We agree with the State that a 2010 implementation date in rural
Alaska is justified. We expect only a very small demand for the 15 ppm
sulfur fuel in rural Alaska between 2006 and 2010 because of the very
small number of 2007 and later highway diesel vehicles expected to
enter the rural Alaska market during those years. Requiring the rural
areas to comply with the nationwide requirements for 15 ppm fuel \10\
during the first step of the highway program (2006-2010) would cause
significant burden on rural Alaska's distribution system and
communities without corresponding environmental benefits. We also agree
that 2010 is an appropriate time to implement a sulfur content
requirement for highway diesel fuel in the rural areas. The number of
2007 and later highway vehicles, and thus the benefits of the 15 ppm
sulfur diesel fuel will be increasing. Extending the lead time for
sulfur-controlled diesel fuel by an additional four years (from 2006 to
2010) should be adequate for the distributors and rural communities to
make decisions on the most economical way to transition to sulfur-
controlled highway diesel fuel, and to make any necessary capital
improvements. Finally, 2010 marks the points at which both the
Temporary Compliance Provision for highway diesel fuel ends and the
requirement for 15ppm nonroad diesel fuel begins. Distribution of
diesel fuel to meet demand will thus be made more efficient if the same
sulfur standards apply everywhere. As a result 2010 represents an ideal
year in which to transition rural Alaska to 15 ppm fuel in a single
step.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The first step of the nationwide highway program would
require only 80% of each refinery's production to meet the 15 ppm
standard; the rest must meet a 500 ppm standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not proposing to require 500 ppm sulfur highway diesel fuel
between June 1, 2006 and June 1, 2010 as a transition to 15 ppm sulfur
highway diesel fuel. Such an interim step would create the same burden
to Alaska's distribution system and rural communities as requiring 15
ppm sulfur highway diesel fuel on June 1, 2006. As discussed in more
detail below, the primary burden of requiring low sulfur highway diesel
fuel in rural Alaska is not the source of the low-sulfur diesel fuel,
or whether it meets the 500 or 15 ppm sulfur standard, but the
distribution and storage tank constraints associated with an additional
fuel type and the associated economic burden of increased fuel costs
imposed on communities having subsistence economies. If we imposed a
500 ppm sulfur content standard on June 1, 2006 as a transition to 15
ppm sulfur highway diesel fuel, rural Alaska would not get the relief
intended by today's proposal.
As discussed in the January 18, 2001 Federal Register notice, any
revisions to the final rule for highway diesel fuel in Alaska would, at
a minimum, have to: (1) Ensure an adequate supply (either through
production or imports) of 15 ppm fuel to meet the demand of any 2007 or
later model year vehicles, (2) ensure sufficient retail availability of
low sulfur fuel for new vehicles in Alaska, (3) address the growth of
supply and availability over time as more new vehicles enter the fleet,
(4) include measures to ensure segregation of the 15 ppm fuel and avoid
contamination and misfueling, and (5) ensure enforceability. We believe
that the provisions proposed in this notice meet these criteria, as
discussed below.
1. Ensure an Adequate Supply (Either Through Production or Imports) of
15 ppm Sulfur Diesel Fuel To Meet the Demand of Any 2007 or Later Model
Year Vehicles
Alaska has nearly 9,000 highway diesel vehicles. The fuel provided
to those vehicles in the areas served by the Federal Aid Highway
System--approximately 8,400 vehicles--must meet the requirements of the
highway rule, regardless of today's proposal. At least 80 percent of
that fuel produced or imported, except that which is produced or
imported by a small refiner having EPA approval under 40 CFR 80.550-
553, must meet the 15 ppm sulfur standard beginning June 1, 2006. The
remainder of that fuel must meet the 500 ppm sulfur standard.
Consumption of highway diesel fuel in the rural areas is about
seven percent of highway diesel fuel consumption in Alaska (assuming
the same average vehicle consumption throughout the state). Consumption
of highway diesel fuel by the five to 15 new vehicles per year from
2007 through 2010 (for a total of 20 to 60 model year 2007 and later
vehicles by the end of 2010) will be much smaller--less than one
percent of the highway diesel fuel consumption in Alaska. Thus,
production or imports of 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for the model year
2007 and later highway vehicles in the rural areas until June 1, 2010
under today's proposal should not be a challenge, and is less than what
would be required under the current regulations.
The significant challenge in the rural areas is the distribution
and storage infrastructure, which is currently designed to handle only
one type of distillate fuel. The highway diesel rule would require
changes to the distribution and storage infrastructure to handle the
additional fuel type, or a shift to 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for all
purposes, to occur by July 15, 2006. However, under today's proposal,
changes to the distribution and storage infrastructure, or a shift to
15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for all purposes, would not be required to
occur in the rural areas until October 1, 2010. Thus, this proposal
would grant the rural area fuel distributors and villages four
additional years to make the necessary changes, but they would still
have to supply the required 15 ppm sulfur fuel to all 2007 and later
model year highway vehicles and engines.
Supplying 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for 2007 and later model year
diesel vehicles until October 1, 2010 can be accomplished several ways.
A village not having any 2007 or later model year
[[Page 59699]]
diesel vehicles or engines would not have a need for the new fuel and/
or infrastructure changes until October 1, 2010. When a village obtains
one or more 2007 or later model year highway vehicles or engines, 15
ppm sulfur fuel could be shipped in 55 gallon drums, or the fuel
infrastructure can be changed to handle a second diesel fuel type, or
the village could shift to 15 ppm sulfur fuel for all purposes.
The first option--using 55 gallon drums--would likely have
additional transportation costs for shipping the new fuel for the 2007
and later model year diesel vehicles, but the volume would be very low
(only 20 to 60 of those vehicles by the end of 2010 distributed among
the approximate 250 villages in rural Alaska). Thus, the overall
incremental cost of diesel fuel in rural Alaska would be negligible on
average.
The second option (changing the fuel infrastructure to handle the
additional fuel type) probably has the most cost impact because the
distributors would need to split their barge deliveries into multiple
fuel types, and the villages would need to have multiple storage,
handling, and delivery systems. All of these distribution modifications
will cost money. The need to have multiple fuel types will likely
impact the consumer by increasing the cost for all fuel, not just the
15 ppm diesel.
The third option (switching all diesel uses to 15 ppm sulfur) would
avoid any incremental transportation, storage and delivery systems
costs, but may incur the higher cost of the 15 ppm sulfur fuel for all
purposes in the villages. This probable higher fuel cost would be
imposed on heating and electricity generation, which accounts for all
but about five percent of the distillate consumption in the villages.
Under today's proposal, it is possible that all of the above
options, or a combination of these options, might be found prior to
December 1, 2010 among the villages that need the fuel. In any case, we
believe an adequate supply of 15 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for all 2007
and later model year vehicles and engines in the rural areas should
present no significant challenge in this time period.
2. Ensure Sufficient Retail Availability of Low Sulfur Fuel for New
Vehicles in Alaska
Sufficient retail availability \11\ is not an issue if adequate
supply is provided to rural Alaska. Fuel deliveries to rural Alaska are
made to village tank farms (typically one tank farm per village). Some
villages have no separate consumer tanks and pumps. In such cases the
villagers withdraw the fuel directly from the tank farm. In villages
having one or more optional refueling locations, those pumps are filled
directly from the village tank farm. Presumably, any fuel deliveries in
55 gallon drums would be delivered either to the village tank farm or
directly to the vehicle owners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ For the purpose of this discussion concerning rural Alaska,
we assume that retail availability means availability to the end
user (e.g. diesel vehicle or engine owner/operator).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Address the Growth of Supply and Availability Over Time as More New
Vehicles Enter the Fleet
Under today's proposal, all diesel fuel for 2007 and later model
year highway diesel vehicles and engines in the rural areas must meet
the 15 ppm sulfur standard, as it is required nationwide. As previously
discussed, the demand from 2007 and later model year diesel vehicles in
the rural areas is expected to be very low--between 20 and 60 vehicles
from late 2006 to December 1, 2010, the proposed implementation date by
which all highway diesel fuel in the rural area retail facilities would
have to meet the 15 ppm sulfur content standard. Whether the small
volume of fuel that would be needed for these vehicles prior to
December 1, 2010 is distributed and stored in 55 gallon drums, in
segregated tanks, or in village tanks from which diesel fuel for all
purposes is withdrawn, incremental increases to that small volume for a
few additional new vehicles should present no significant challenge.
4. Include Measures To Ensure Segregation of the 15 ppm Fuel and Avoid
Contamination and Misfueling
All segregation and contamination avoidance measures that apply
nationwide to highway diesel fuel, except for the dye requirements,
would be applicable under today's proposal to any diesel fuel used in
the rural areas between 2006 and December 1, 2010 in 2007 and later
model year highway vehicles and engines. We believe that Alaska can
meet these requirements and no additional measures beyond thes
