Draft Boutique Fuels List Under Section 1541(b) of the Energy Policy Act and Request for Public Comment, 32532-32536 [E6-8726]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
32532
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket Nos. ER06–301–000; ER06–301–
001]
Xcel Energy Services, Inc.; Notice of
Technical Conference
May 31, 2006.
Take notice that the Commission will
convene a technical conference on
Monday, June 12, 2006, at 10 a.m. (EST),
in a room to be designated at the offices
of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington DC 20426.
The technical conference will explore
the issues raised by Xcel Energy
Services, Inc.’s proposed Services H and
I, as discussed in the Commission’s
order issued on May 5, 2006.1 Those
issues include why the transfer price
proposed in Service Schedule H is
different from the transfer price
proposed in Service Schedule I, and
why Xcel needs both service schedules.
FERC conferences are accessible
under section 508 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973. For accessibility
accommodations please send an e-mail
to accessibility@ferc.gov or call toll free
(866) 208–3372 (voice) or 202–208–1659
(TTY), or send a FAX to 202–208–2106
with the required accommodations.
All interested persons are permitted
to attend. For further information please
contact Donna Brent at (202) 502–6646
or e-mail donna.brent@ferc.gov.
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–8742 Filed 6–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0340; FRL–8180–3]
Draft Boutique Fuels List Under
Section 1541(b) of the Energy Policy
Act and Request for Public Comment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Energy Policy Act of 2005
includes a number of provisions
addressing the issue of boutique fuels.
Section 1541(b) of this Act requires
EPA, in consultation with the
Department of Energy, to determine the
total number of fuels approved into all
1 Xcel Energy Services, Inc., 115 FERC ¶ 61,148
(2006).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
state implementation plans (SIPs) as of
September 1, 2004, under section
211(c)(4)(C) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The EPAct also requires us to publish a
list of such fuels, including the states
and Petroleum Administration for
Defense District (PADD) in which they
are used for public review and
comment. Today we are publishing the
draft list along with an explanation of
our rationale in developing it. The list
consists of seven different types of SIP
boutique fuels.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 7, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2006–0340, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–
0340.
• Mail: Air Docket, Attention Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0340,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery: USEPA, Air Docket,
1301 Constitution Ave, NW., Room
B102, Washington, DC 20004, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–
0340. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–
0340. Our policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
for which disclosure is restricted by
statute. Do not submit information that
you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means we 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 us without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the internet. If you
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
submit an electronic comment, we
recommend that you include your name
and other contact information in the
body of your comment and with any
disk or CD you submit. If we cannot
read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, we may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files
should avoid the use of special
characters, should not use any form of
encryption, and should be free of any
defects or viruses. For additional
information about our public docket
visit the EPA Docket Center homepage
at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/
dockets.htm. For additional instructions
on submitting comments, go to Section
I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information for which disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anne Pastorkovich, Environmental
Protection Agency, MC 6406J, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number: 202–343–
9623; fax number: 202–343–2801; e-mail
address: pastorkovich.annemarie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI
to us through https://
www.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 that you
mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD the
specific information that is claimed as
CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Notices
the comment that does not contain the
information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public
docket. Information so marked will not
be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
• Identify the rule or notice by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
• 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.
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
• Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
3. Docket Copying Costs. You may be
charged a reasonable fee for
photocopying docket materials, as
provided by 40 CFR part 2.
II. Publication of the Boutique Fuels
List
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
A. Background
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA),1 state
fuel programs respecting a fuel
characteristic or component that we
have regulated under section 211(c)(1)
are preempted. EPA may waive
preemption through approval of the fuel
program into a State Implementation
Plan (SIP). Approval into the SIP
requires a demonstration that the state
fuel program is necessary to achieve the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)2 that the plan implements.
‘‘Necessary’’ means that no other
measures exist that would bring about
timely attainment or that other measures
exist and are technically possible to
implement, but are unreasonable or
impracticable.3 These state fuels
1 See
CAA section 211(c)(1), 42 U.S.C. 7545(c)(1).
are standards for ambient levels of
certain air pollutants (e.g. ground-level ozone) and
are designed to protect public health and welfare.
3 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(i), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(i).
2 NAAQS
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
programs are often referred to as
‘‘boutique’’ fuels programs because they
differ from the Federal fuel required in
the area, and have been adopted by the
state to address a specific local air
quality issue. The issue presented by
boutique fuels is that when events (such
as hurricanes or pipeline and refinery
breakdowns) lead to fuel supply
shortages, varying fuel standards can
complicate the process of quickly
solving the problem. The Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (EPAct) amends the CAA
and places three additional restrictions
on our authority to waive preemption by
approving a state fuel into the SIP.
These restrictions are:
• First, we may not approve a state
fuel program into the SIP if it would
cause an increase in the ‘‘total number
of fuels’’ approved into SIPs as of
September 1, 2004.4 To implement this
provision, we are required to determine
the total number of fuels approved as of
that date and to publish a list
identifying the fuels, including the
states and PADD in which they are
used. We may remove a fuel from the
list if it ceases to be included in the SIP,
or if it is identical to a Federal fuel
control. This removal does not reduce
the total number of fuels authorized
under the list, but in effect ‘‘makes
room’’ for potential approval of state
fuel programs that were not on the list
as of September 1, 2004.5
• Second, in cases where our
approval would not increase the total
number of fuels on the list because the
total number of fuels in SIPs at that
point is below the number of fuels as of
the September 1, 2004, then our
approval requires a finding that the new
fuel will not cause supply or
distribution problems or have
significant adverse impacts on fuel
producibility in the affected or
contiguous areas.6
• Third, we may not approve a state
fuel unless that fuel is already approved
in at least one SIP in the applicable
PADD.7
In this Federal Register notice, we
provide our provisional interpretation of
the EPAct provisions and our
determination of the total number of
fuels approved under CAA section
211(c)(4)(C) as of September 1, 2004,
based on this interpretation, and the
4 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(I), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(I).
5 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II)–(III), 42
U.S.C. 7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(II)–(III).
6 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV).
7 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V). As discussed later in this
notice, there is an exception to the PADD restriction
for a 7.0 psi RVP program.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32533
resulting draft list of these fuels. We
invite comment on all of these matters
and after evaluating all comments we
will issue a final list.
B. Fuel Type Versus State Specific
Interpretation and Our Recommended
Approach
The first step in determining the total
number of fuels approved under section
211(c)(4)(C) is to interpret what is meant
by the term ‘‘total number of fuels.’’ The
EPAct does not define this term, and the
legislative history is relatively limited
and does not resolve what Congress
meant. We believe that the central term
‘‘total number of fuels’’ is ambiguous
and could potentially be interpreted in
one of two basic ways:
• Fuel Type Interpretation—Each
type or kind of fuel could be considered
a separate fuel, without respect to the
number of different state
implementation plans that include such
fuel. For example, all state fuels with a
Reid Vapor Pressure8 of 7.8 pounds per
square inch (psi) could be considered
one fuel in determining the total
number of fuels approved as of
September 1, 2004. While several states
had a 7.8 psi RVP program on that date,
they would not be treated as different
fuels in determining the ‘‘total number
of fuels,’’ but as different states using a
single fuel type. For ease of reference
this will be called ‘‘the fuel type
interpretation.’’ This would result in
seven (7) different fuel types.
• State Specific Interpretation—As an
alternative to the ‘‘fuel type
interpretation,’’ each individual state
using a type or kind of fuel in a SIP
could be considered a separate fuel. For
example, each state having 7.8 psi RVP
in its SIP could be treated as having a
separate fuel for purposes of
determining the ‘‘total number of fuels.’’
For ease of reference, this will be called
‘‘the state specific interpretation.’’ The
state specific interpretation would lead
to as many fuels as there are state fuel
programs in the various PADDs and
would result in 15 different fuels.
The two interpretations would lead to
different results when considering
approval of future state fuel programs.
For example, under the fuel type
interpretation, a state RVP program of
7.8 or 7.2 psi could generally be
approved under the EPAct provisions,
as long as that same RVP program was
already in a SIP within that PADD.
Under the fuel type interpretation,
approval of that state RVP program
would not increase the total number of
8 Reid Vapor Pressure is the common measure of
fuel volatility. Volatility is the tendency of fuel to
evaporate.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
32534
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Notices
approved fuels because that type of RVP
program is already on the list. It would
expand the number of states using that
fuel type, but would not increase the
number of fuel types. However, under
the state specific fuel interpretation, the
same state RVP program could not be
approved unless some other state fuel
program had been removed from the
list, in effect ‘‘making room’’ for the
newer program.
EPA recognizes that a few states had
a 9.0 psi RVP fuel program in their SIP
as of September 1, 2004. We do not
believe that state RVP programs that
require 9.0 psi should be included in
the boutique fuels list required by
EPAct. Beginning in 1989, we set RVP
standards under CAA section 211(c) for
gasoline sold during the summertime, in
two phases (Phase I and II). Generally,
under Phase I, which was effective in
the summer of 1989, we set the RVP
level at 10.5 psi in the northern states,
and under Phase II, which was effective
in the summer of 1992, we set RVP
levels at 9.0 psi in the northern states.
Between 1989 and 1992, we also
approved state 9.0 psi RVP fuel
programs into the SIPs for several
northeastern states, under CAA section
211(c)(4)(C). These fuel programs
continue to be included in the state
SIPs. As earlier mentioned, the EPAct
requires that we publish a list based on
the total number of fuels approved into
SIPs under section 211(c)(4)(C) as of
September 1, 2004.9 We are also
required to remove a fuel from the
published list if the fuel is ‘‘identical to
a Federal fuel formulation implemented
by the Administrator.’’10 Because the
current Federal RVP requirement in all
of these northeastern states is 9.0 psi
RVP, reading these provisions literally
would require EPA to include 9.0 psi
RVP on the list but to remove it from the
list at the same time. We believe,
however, that Congress would not have
intended this somewhat illogical
approach, and we also do not believe
that 9.0 psi RVP would be viewed as
contributing to the proliferation of ‘‘fuel
islands’’ that Congress was concerned
about in enacting this new provision.
We believe the appropriate way to
reconcile these apparently conflicting
provisions are not to include the current
state 9.0 psi RVP programs on the list.
In evaluating these two
interpretations, we also looked to the
EPAct provisions related to the boutique
fuels list. The EPAct requires that we
publish a list based on the total number
9 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(II).
10 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(III).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
of fuels approved into SIPs as of
September 2004, identifying usage by
state and PADD.11 Under the state
specific fuel interpretation, the
requirement to ‘‘includ[e] the states
* * * in which they are used’’ in the
published list of fuels would appear to
be redundant, as under that
interpretation the identification of the
fuel is by definition state specific.
Under the fuel type interpretation, the
requirement to provide usage by state
and PADD is logically included for
informational purposes.
We must remove a fuel from the
published list if the fuel is removed
from ‘‘a [SIP]’’ or if ‘‘a fuel in a [SIP]’’
is identical to a federal fuel.12 Under the
state specific interpretation, the use of
the word ‘‘a’’ would mean that
modification of a single SIP program
would affect the list of fuels, regardless
of fuel type. Under the fuel type
interpretation, ‘‘a [SIP]’’would have to
be read to mean all SIPs. A fuel type
would be removed from the list only if
it was removed from all SIPs with that
type of fuel program.
The EPAct refers to a ‘‘new fuel.’’ 13
Specifically, it provides that before
approving a ‘‘new fuel’’ into a SIP,
where there is room on the list for
additional fuels, we must make a
finding concerning impact on fuel
supply, distribution, and producibility.
Under the state specific fuel
interpretation, a ‘‘new fuel’’ would be a
new state specific fuel that EPA has not
already approved into a SIP. Under the
fuel type interpretation, the term ‘‘new
fuel’’ is problematic. A new fuel type
would be a fuel type that is not already
on the list. However, the PADD
restriction14 would already preclude the
approval of a new fuel type, because a
new fuel type would not already be
approved into a SIP in a PADD. There
is, however, an exception to the PADD
restriction, for a 7.0 psi RVP program,
such that there are limited
circumstances that would give meaning
to the term ‘‘new fuel’’ under the fuel
type interpretation.
The EPAct constrains our approval of
‘‘any fuel unless that fuel’’ was already
approved into at least one SIP in the
applicable PADD.15 Under the state
specific fuel interpretation, a state fuel
could not be approved unless ‘‘that
fuel’’ had already been approved into
another state’s SIP. In that context, ‘‘that
fuel’’ would have to refer to the type of
fuel, not the state specific fuel, as the
state specific fuel could not be already
approved into another state’s SIP. Under
the fuel type interpretation, this
provision requires that at least one SIP
in the PADD already have a program for
that fuel type.16
We believe that the EPAct boutique
fuels provisions are ambiguous and are
susceptible to two plausible
interpretations. However, the fuel type
interpretation appropriately balances
the concerns at the heart of the EPAct
provision by preserving some flexibility
for states to adopt state fuel programs
that can be useful in attaining the
NAAQS, while limiting the potential for
fuel supply and distribution concerns
by controlling the growth in state
boutique fuel programs.17 We recognize
that the PADD restriction 18 places a
strong constraint on future approval of
state specific fuels under either
interpretation because it effectively
limits state fuels to the types currently
in existence and to the PADDs in which
they are currently found. For a state fuel
program to be approved into a SIP in the
future, the fuel type must have been
approved into a SIP in that PADD as of
September 1, 2004 (with the one
exception for 7.0 psi RVP programs).
Under the fuel type interpretation, states
could generally adopt fuels programs
but only in those limited cases where
that fuel type is already found in their
PADD. This addresses the ‘‘fuel islands’’
concerns, while preserving an important
degree of state flexibility in developing
a state’s air pollution control program.
Under the state specific interpretation
there is little, if any, opportunity for a
state to adopt a fuel program in the
future. This is because, in addition to
the PADD restriction, some other state’s
fuel program would have to be removed
from the list to make room for addition
of the new state fuel program.
We believe the fuel type
interpretation is the more appropriate of
the two interpretations from the
standpoint of state flexibility in
establishing air pollution control
programs. Our suggested interpretation
would also strictly limit the burden of
new state fuel programs upon regulated
11 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(II).
12 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(III).
13 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV).
14 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V).
15 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V).
16 As noted above, Congress exempted 7.0 psi
RVP programs from this PADD restriction. While
the other EPAct provisions on boutique fuels do
apply to 7.0 psi RVP programs, the specific
limitation on PADD usage in section
211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V) does not apply. This is the case
under either interpretation.
17 See 51 Cong. Rec. H6949–01, 6968–6969.
18 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V).
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Notices
industry, including small businesses.
The fuel type interpretation, combined
with the PADD restriction, clearly limits
the introduction of new boutique fuels,
avoiding future pressure on the
production, distribution and storage of
fuels, including small entities involved
in those industries. We believe that
issuing this list will reduce future
burdens on all parties in the fuel
production and distribution system,
whether large entities or small entities.
We believe that issuing this list will
have no adverse impact on any such
parties.
For the reasons described above, we
are issuing a draft list of seven (7) fuel
32535
types, as described in the following
section.
C. Draft Boutique Fuel List
A list of the seven (7) fuel types
approved into SIPs under section
211(c)(4)(C) as of September 1, 2004, the
states, and the PADD they are used in
is set forth in the following Table:
TOTAL NUMBER OF FUELS APPROVED IN STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (SIPS) UNDER CAA SECTION 211(C)(4)(C) AS
OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2004
[Draft based upon fuel type interpretation]
Type of fuel control
PADD
RVP of 7.8 psi ..................................................................................
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
5
1
3
5
5
RVP of 7.2 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.0 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.0 psi with sulfur provisions ...............................................
Low Emission Diesel ........................................................................
Cleaner Burning Gasoline ................................................................
Winter Gasoline (aromatics & sulfur) ...............................................
We would use this recommended list
in implementing the three EPAct criteria
for approval of a state fuel into a SIP.
Specifically:
• We could not approve a state fuel
if it would cause an increase in the total
number of fuel types on the list.19
• We would remove a fuel from the
list if that fuel type either ceased to be
Region—state
1—ME (May 1–Sept. 15).
3—PA
5—IN
5—MI
6—TX (May 1–Oct. 1)
5—IL
7—KS
7—MO
4—AL
6—TX
9—AZ (June 1–Sept. 30).
4—GA
6—TX
9—AZ
9—NV
included in any SIP or if it became
identical to a Federal fuel. Removal of
a fuel type from the list, however,
would not change or impact the total
number of fuel types authorized.20
Our authority to approve a state fuel
is limited to fuel types that are already
in a SIP in that PADD.21 This restriction
would not extend to the 7.0 psi RVP fuel
type. EPA’s approval of a 7.0 psi RVP
program would, however, be subject to
the other EPAct provisions.
We are not recommending a state
specific interpretation, as explained
above. However, we have generated the
following table to illustrate the list
under that alternative:
TOTAL NUMBER OF FUELS APPROVED IN STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (SIPS) UNDER CAA SECTION 211(C)(4)(C) AS
OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 ALTERNATE APPROACH
[Draft based upon state specific interpretation]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Type of fuel control
PADD
RVP of 7.0 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.0 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.0 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.0; extended summer season from June 1 to September
30.
RVP** of 7.0 psi; includes a provision addressing sulfur content ....
RVP of 7.0 psi; sulfur content and crediting provision expired in
2004, when overtaken by Federal Tier 2 limit.
RVP of 7.2 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.8 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.8 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.8 psi ..................................................................................
RVP of 7.8 psi; extended summer season from May 1 to September 15.
RVP of 7.8; extended summer season from May 1 to October 1 ...
Low emission diesel fuel with maximum 10% volume aromatic hydrocarbon content and minimum cetane of 48 required. (Allows
substitute Plans w/equivalent NOX reductions).
Cleaner Burning Gasoline; similar to Federal RFG or California
RFG in summer; in winter similar only to California RFG.
19 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(I), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(I).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
Area/state
2
2
3
5
Kansas City, MO (3 counties).
Kansas City, KS (2 counties).
El Paso, TX (El Paso County).
Phoenix, AZ (Maricopa County).
1
3
Atlanta, GA (45 county area).
Birmingham, AL (2 counties).
2
1
2
2
1
E. St. Louis, IL (3 counties near St. Louis, MO).
Pittsburgh, PA (7 county area).
Clark & Floyd, IN (2 counties near Louisville, KY).
Detroit, MI (7 counties).
Southern, ME (7 county area).
3
3
Central & Eastern, TX (95 county area).
Houston & Dallas, TX.
5
Phoenix, AZ (Maricopa County).
20 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(III).
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21 See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V) and footnote 14.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
32536
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 6, 2006 / Notices
TOTAL NUMBER OF FUELS APPROVED IN STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (SIPS) UNDER CAA SECTION 211(C)(4)(C) AS
OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 ALTERNATE APPROACH—Continued
[Draft based upon state specific interpretation]
Type of fuel control
PADD
Winter gasoline controls on aromatic hydrocarbons and sulfur .......
We invite comment on all elements of
this notice, especially with regard to the
recommended and alternate lists and
our interpretation of the relevant
provisions of the EPAct. Interested
parties should submit comments
according to the guidelines described at
the beginning of this notice. After fully
considering comments received, we will
generate and publish a final list in the
Federal Register.
Dated: May 31, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6–8726 Filed 6–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–8180–5]
Request for Nominations to the
National and Governmental Advisory
Committees to the U.S. Representative
to the Commission for Environmental
Cooperation
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of request for
nominations.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is inviting
nominations of qualified candidates to
be considered for appointment to fill
vacancies on the National Advisory
Committee (NAC) and the Governmental
Advisory Committee (GAC) to the U.S.
Representative to the Commission for
Environmental Cooperation (CEC).
Vacancies on these two committees are
expected to be filled by November, so
we encourage nominations to be
submitted by July 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit nominations to:
Oscar Carrillo, Designated Federal
Officer, Office of Cooperative
Environmental Management, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(1601–E), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Oscar Carrillo, Designated Federal
Officer, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (1601–E), Washington, DC
20004; telephone (202) 233–0072; fax
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Jun 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
5
Area/state
Las Vegas, NV.
(202) 233–0060; e-mail
carrillo.oscar@epa.gov.
The
National Advisory Committee and the
Governmental Advisory Committee
advise the EPA Administrator in his
capacity as the U.S. Representative to
the CEC Council. The Committees are
authorized under Articles 17 and 18 of
the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC),
the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) Implementation
Act, Public Law 103–182, and as
directed by Executive Order 12915,
entitled ‘‘Federal Implementation of the
North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation.’’ The
Committees are responsible for
providing advice to the United States
Representative on a wide range of
strategic, scientific, technological,
regulatory and economic issues related
to implementation and further
elaboration of the (NAAEC). The
National Advisory Committee consists
of 12 representatives from
environmental groups and non-profit
entities, business and industry, and
educational institutions. The
Governmental Advisory Committee
consists of 12 representatives from state,
local, and tribal governments. Members
are appointed by the EPA Administrator
for a two-year term with the possibility
of reappointment. The Committees
usually meet 3 times annually and the
average workload for Committee
members is approximately 10 to 15
hours per month. Members serve on the
Committees in a voluntary capacity.
However, EPA provides reimbursement
for travel expenses associated with
official government business. The
following criteria will be used to
evaluate nominees:
• Extensive professional knowledge
of the subjects the Committees examine,
including trade and the environment,
the NAFTA, the NAAEC, and the CEC.
• Represent a sector or group that is
involved in the issues the Committees
evaluate.
• Senior-level experience that fills a
need on the Committees for their
particular expertise.
• A demonstrated ability to work in a
consensus building process with a wide
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
range of representatives from diverse
constituencies.
Nominees will also be considered
with regard to the mandates of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act that
require the Committees to maintain
diversity across a broad range of
constituencies, sectors, and groups.
Nominations for membership must
include a cover letter and a resume
describing the professional and
educational qualifications of the
nominee and the nominee’s current
business address and daytime telephone
number.
Dated: May 16, 2006.
Oscar Carrillo,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. E6–8724 Filed 6–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–ORD–2006–0384; FRL–8081–6]
Human Studies Review Board; Notice
of Public Meeting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA or Agency)
Office of the Science Advisor (OSA)
announces a public meeting of the
Human Studies Review Board (HSRB) to
advise the Agency on EPA’s scientific
and ethical reviews of human subjects’
research.
DATES: The public meeting will be held
June 28–30, 2006 from 8:30 a.m. to
approximately 5 p.m., eastern time.
Location: One Potomac Yard, 2777
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202.
Meeting Access: Seating at the
meeting will be on a first-come basis.
Individuals requiring special
accommodations at this meeting,
including wheelchair access and
assistance for the hearing impaired,
should contact the Designated Federal
Officer (DFO) at least 10 business days
prior to the meeting using the
information under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT so that
appropriate arrangements can be made.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 6, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32532-32536]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8726]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0340; FRL-8180-3]
Draft Boutique Fuels List Under Section 1541(b) of the Energy
Policy Act and Request for Public Comment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Energy Policy Act of 2005 includes a number of provisions
addressing the issue of boutique fuels. Section 1541(b) of this Act
requires EPA, in consultation with the Department of Energy, to
determine the total number of fuels approved into all state
implementation plans (SIPs) as of September 1, 2004, under section
211(c)(4)(C) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPAct also requires us to
publish a list of such fuels, including the states and Petroleum
Administration for Defense District (PADD) in which they are used for
public review and comment. Today we are publishing the draft list along
with an explanation of our rationale in developing it. The list
consists of seven different types of SIP boutique fuels.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 7, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0340, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-1741, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0340.
Mail: Air Docket, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-
0340, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery: USEPA, Air Docket, 1301 Constitution Ave,
NW., Room B102, Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0340. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's
normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0340. Our policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
confidential business information (CBI) or other information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://
www.regulations.gov. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means we 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 us without going
through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, we recommend that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD you submit. If we cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, should not use any form of encryption, and should
be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about our
public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
for which disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material,
such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air
Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Pastorkovich, Environmental
Protection Agency, MC 6406J, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9623; fax number: 202-343-2801; e-
mail address: pastorkovich.anne-marie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI to us through https://
www.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 that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD as CBI and
then identify electronically within the disk or CD the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of
[[Page 32533]]
the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must
be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rule or notice by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
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.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
3. Docket Copying Costs. You may be charged a reasonable fee for
photocopying docket materials, as provided by 40 CFR part 2.
II. Publication of the Boutique Fuels List
A. Background
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA),\1\ state fuel programs respecting a
fuel characteristic or component that we have regulated under section
211(c)(1) are preempted. EPA may waive preemption through approval of
the fuel program into a State Implementation Plan (SIP). Approval into
the SIP requires a demonstration that the state fuel program is
necessary to achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)\2\ that the plan implements. ``Necessary'' means that no other
measures exist that would bring about timely attainment or that other
measures exist and are technically possible to implement, but are
unreasonable or impracticable.\3\ These state fuels programs are often
referred to as ``boutique'' fuels programs because they differ from the
Federal fuel required in the area, and have been adopted by the state
to address a specific local air quality issue. The issue presented by
boutique fuels is that when events (such as hurricanes or pipeline and
refinery breakdowns) lead to fuel supply shortages, varying fuel
standards can complicate the process of quickly solving the problem.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) amends the CAA and places three
additional restrictions on our authority to waive preemption by
approving a state fuel into the SIP. These restrictions are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See CAA section 211(c)(1), 42 U.S.C. 7545(c)(1).
\2\ NAAQS are standards for ambient levels of certain air
pollutants (e.g. ground-level ozone) and are designed to protect
public health and welfare.
\3\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(i), 42 U.S.C. 7545(c)(4)(C)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, we may not approve a state fuel program into the
SIP if it would cause an increase in the ``total number of fuels''
approved into SIPs as of September 1, 2004.\4\ To implement this
provision, we are required to determine the total number of fuels
approved as of that date and to publish a list identifying the fuels,
including the states and PADD in which they are used. We may remove a
fuel from the list if it ceases to be included in the SIP, or if it is
identical to a Federal fuel control. This removal does not reduce the
total number of fuels authorized under the list, but in effect ``makes
room'' for potential approval of state fuel programs that were not on
the list as of September 1, 2004.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(I), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(I).
\5\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II)-(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(II)-(III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, in cases where our approval would not increase the
total number of fuels on the list because the total number of fuels in
SIPs at that point is below the number of fuels as of the September 1,
2004, then our approval requires a finding that the new fuel will not
cause supply or distribution problems or have significant adverse
impacts on fuel producibility in the affected or contiguous areas.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, we may not approve a state fuel unless that fuel is
already approved in at least one SIP in the applicable PADD.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V). As discussed later in this notice, there is an
exception to the PADD restriction for a 7.0 psi RVP program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this Federal Register notice, we provide our provisional
interpretation of the EPAct provisions and our determination of the
total number of fuels approved under CAA section 211(c)(4)(C) as of
September 1, 2004, based on this interpretation, and the resulting
draft list of these fuels. We invite comment on all of these matters
and after evaluating all comments we will issue a final list.
B. Fuel Type Versus State Specific Interpretation and Our Recommended
Approach
The first step in determining the total number of fuels approved
under section 211(c)(4)(C) is to interpret what is meant by the term
``total number of fuels.'' The EPAct does not define this term, and the
legislative history is relatively limited and does not resolve what
Congress meant. We believe that the central term ``total number of
fuels'' is ambiguous and could potentially be interpreted in one of two
basic ways:
Fuel Type Interpretation--Each type or kind of fuel could
be considered a separate fuel, without respect to the number of
different state implementation plans that include such fuel. For
example, all state fuels with a Reid Vapor Pressure\8\ of 7.8 pounds
per square inch (psi) could be considered one fuel in determining the
total number of fuels approved as of September 1, 2004. While several
states had a 7.8 psi RVP program on that date, they would not be
treated as different fuels in determining the ``total number of
fuels,'' but as different states using a single fuel type. For ease of
reference this will be called ``the fuel type interpretation.'' This
would result in seven (7) different fuel types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Reid Vapor Pressure is the common measure of fuel
volatility. Volatility is the tendency of fuel to evaporate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Specific Interpretation--As an alternative to the
``fuel type interpretation,'' each individual state using a type or
kind of fuel in a SIP could be considered a separate fuel. For example,
each state having 7.8 psi RVP in its SIP could be treated as having a
separate fuel for purposes of determining the ``total number of
fuels.'' For ease of reference, this will be called ``the state
specific interpretation.'' The state specific interpretation would lead
to as many fuels as there are state fuel programs in the various PADDs
and would result in 15 different fuels.
The two interpretations would lead to different results when
considering approval of future state fuel programs. For example, under
the fuel type interpretation, a state RVP program of 7.8 or 7.2 psi
could generally be approved under the EPAct provisions, as long as that
same RVP program was already in a SIP within that PADD. Under the fuel
type interpretation, approval of that state RVP program would not
increase the total number of
[[Page 32534]]
approved fuels because that type of RVP program is already on the list.
It would expand the number of states using that fuel type, but would
not increase the number of fuel types. However, under the state
specific fuel interpretation, the same state RVP program could not be
approved unless some other state fuel program had been removed from the
list, in effect ``making room'' for the newer program.
EPA recognizes that a few states had a 9.0 psi RVP fuel program in
their SIP as of September 1, 2004. We do not believe that state RVP
programs that require 9.0 psi should be included in the boutique fuels
list required by EPAct. Beginning in 1989, we set RVP standards under
CAA section 211(c) for gasoline sold during the summertime, in two
phases (Phase I and II). Generally, under Phase I, which was effective
in the summer of 1989, we set the RVP level at 10.5 psi in the northern
states, and under Phase II, which was effective in the summer of 1992,
we set RVP levels at 9.0 psi in the northern states. Between 1989 and
1992, we also approved state 9.0 psi RVP fuel programs into the SIPs
for several northeastern states, under CAA section 211(c)(4)(C). These
fuel programs continue to be included in the state SIPs. As earlier
mentioned, the EPAct requires that we publish a list based on the total
number of fuels approved into SIPs under section 211(c)(4)(C) as of
September 1, 2004.\9\ We are also required to remove a fuel from the
published list if the fuel is ``identical to a Federal fuel formulation
implemented by the Administrator.''\10\ Because the current Federal RVP
requirement in all of these northeastern states is 9.0 psi RVP, reading
these provisions literally would require EPA to include 9.0 psi RVP on
the list but to remove it from the list at the same time. We believe,
however, that Congress would not have intended this somewhat illogical
approach, and we also do not believe that 9.0 psi RVP would be viewed
as contributing to the proliferation of ``fuel islands'' that Congress
was concerned about in enacting this new provision. We believe the
appropriate way to reconcile these apparently conflicting provisions
are not to include the current state 9.0 psi RVP programs on the list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(II).
\10\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In evaluating these two interpretations, we also looked to the
EPAct provisions related to the boutique fuels list. The EPAct requires
that we publish a list based on the total number of fuels approved into
SIPs as of September 2004, identifying usage by state and PADD.\11\
Under the state specific fuel interpretation, the requirement to
``includ[e] the states * * * in which they are used'' in the published
list of fuels would appear to be redundant, as under that
interpretation the identification of the fuel is by definition state
specific. Under the fuel type interpretation, the requirement to
provide usage by state and PADD is logically included for informational
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(II).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We must remove a fuel from the published list if the fuel is
removed from ``a [SIP]'' or if ``a fuel in a [SIP]'' is identical to a
federal fuel.\12\ Under the state specific interpretation, the use of
the word ``a'' would mean that modification of a single SIP program
would affect the list of fuels, regardless of fuel type. Under the fuel
type interpretation, ``a [SIP]''would have to be read to mean all SIPs.
A fuel type would be removed from the list only if it was removed from
all SIPs with that type of fuel program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPAct refers to a ``new fuel.'' \13\ Specifically, it provides
that before approving a ``new fuel'' into a SIP, where there is room on
the list for additional fuels, we must make a finding concerning impact
on fuel supply, distribution, and producibility. Under the state
specific fuel interpretation, a ``new fuel'' would be a new state
specific fuel that EPA has not already approved into a SIP. Under the
fuel type interpretation, the term ``new fuel'' is problematic. A new
fuel type would be a fuel type that is not already on the list.
However, the PADD restriction\14\ would already preclude the approval
of a new fuel type, because a new fuel type would not already be
approved into a SIP in a PADD. There is, however, an exception to the
PADD restriction, for a 7.0 psi RVP program, such that there are
limited circumstances that would give meaning to the term ``new fuel''
under the fuel type interpretation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(IV).
\14\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPAct constrains our approval of ``any fuel unless that fuel''
was already approved into at least one SIP in the applicable PADD.\15\
Under the state specific fuel interpretation, a state fuel could not be
approved unless ``that fuel'' had already been approved into another
state's SIP. In that context, ``that fuel'' would have to refer to the
type of fuel, not the state specific fuel, as the state specific fuel
could not be already approved into another state's SIP. Under the fuel
type interpretation, this provision requires that at least one SIP in
the PADD already have a program for that fuel type.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V).
\16\ As noted above, Congress exempted 7.0 psi RVP programs from
this PADD restriction. While the other EPAct provisions on boutique
fuels do apply to 7.0 psi RVP programs, the specific limitation on
PADD usage in section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V) does not apply. This is the
case under either interpretation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe that the EPAct boutique fuels provisions are ambiguous
and are susceptible to two plausible interpretations. However, the fuel
type interpretation appropriately balances the concerns at the heart of
the EPAct provision by preserving some flexibility for states to adopt
state fuel programs that can be useful in attaining the NAAQS, while
limiting the potential for fuel supply and distribution concerns by
controlling the growth in state boutique fuel programs.\17\ We
recognize that the PADD restriction \18\ places a strong constraint on
future approval of state specific fuels under either interpretation
because it effectively limits state fuels to the types currently in
existence and to the PADDs in which they are currently found. For a
state fuel program to be approved into a SIP in the future, the fuel
type must have been approved into a SIP in that PADD as of September 1,
2004 (with the one exception for 7.0 psi RVP programs). Under the fuel
type interpretation, states could generally adopt fuels programs but
only in those limited cases where that fuel type is already found in
their PADD. This addresses the ``fuel islands'' concerns, while
preserving an important degree of state flexibility in developing a
state's air pollution control program. Under the state specific
interpretation there is little, if any, opportunity for a state to
adopt a fuel program in the future. This is because, in addition to the
PADD restriction, some other state's fuel program would have to be
removed from the list to make room for addition of the new state fuel
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 51 Cong. Rec. H6949-01, 6968-6969.
\18\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe the fuel type interpretation is the more appropriate of
the two interpretations from the standpoint of state flexibility in
establishing air pollution control programs. Our suggested
interpretation would also strictly limit the burden of new state fuel
programs upon regulated
[[Page 32535]]
industry, including small businesses. The fuel type interpretation,
combined with the PADD restriction, clearly limits the introduction of
new boutique fuels, avoiding future pressure on the production,
distribution and storage of fuels, including small entities involved in
those industries. We believe that issuing this list will reduce future
burdens on all parties in the fuel production and distribution system,
whether large entities or small entities. We believe that issuing this
list will have no adverse impact on any such parties.
For the reasons described above, we are issuing a draft list of
seven (7) fuel types, as described in the following section.
C. Draft Boutique Fuel List
A list of the seven (7) fuel types approved into SIPs under section
211(c)(4)(C) as of September 1, 2004, the states, and the PADD they are
used in is set forth in the following Table:
Total Number of Fuels Approved in State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
Under CAA Section 211(c)(4)(C) as of September 1, 2004
[Draft based upon fuel type interpretation]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of fuel control PADD Region--state
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RVP of 7.8 psi..................... 1 1--ME (May 1-Sept. 15).
1 3--PA
2 5--IN
2 5--MI
3 6--TX (May 1-Oct. 1)
RVP of 7.2 psi..................... 2 5--IL
RVP of 7.0 psi..................... 2 7--KS
2 7--MO
3 4--AL
3 6--TX
5 9--AZ (June 1-Sept. 30).
RVP of 7.0 psi with sulfur 1 4--GA
provisions.
Low Emission Diesel................ 3 6--TX
Cleaner Burning Gasoline........... 5 9--AZ
Winter Gasoline (aromatics & 5 9--NV
sulfur).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would use this recommended list in implementing the three EPAct
criteria for approval of a state fuel into a SIP. Specifically:
We could not approve a state fuel if it would cause an
increase in the total number of fuel types on the list.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(I), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would remove a fuel from the list if that fuel type
either ceased to be included in any SIP or if it became identical to a
Federal fuel. Removal of a fuel type from the list, however, would not
change or impact the total number of fuel types authorized.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(III).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our authority to approve a state fuel is limited to fuel types that
are already in a SIP in that PADD.\21\ This restriction would not
extend to the 7.0 psi RVP fuel type. EPA's approval of a 7.0 psi RVP
program would, however, be subject to the other EPAct provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See CAA section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(V), 42 U.S.C.
7545(c)(4)(C)(v)(V) and footnote 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not recommending a state specific interpretation, as
explained above. However, we have generated the following table to
illustrate the list under that alternative:
Total Number of Fuels Approved in State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
Under CAA Section 211(c)(4)(c) As of September 1, 2004 Alternate
Approach
[Draft based upon state specific interpretation]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of fuel control PADD Area/state
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RVP of 7.0 psi..................... 2 Kansas City, MO (3
counties).
RVP of 7.0 psi..................... 2 Kansas City, KS (2
counties).
RVP of 7.0 psi..................... 3 El Paso, TX (El Paso
County).
RVP of 7.0; extended summer season 5 Phoenix, AZ (Maricopa
from June 1 to September 30. County).
RVP** of 7.0 psi; includes a 1 Atlanta, GA (45 county
provision addressing sulfur area).
content.
RVP of 7.0 psi; sulfur content and 3 Birmingham, AL (2
crediting provision expired in counties).
2004, when overtaken by Federal
Tier 2 limit.
RVP of 7.2 psi..................... 2 E. St. Louis, IL (3
counties near St. Louis,
MO).
RVP of 7.8 psi..................... 1 Pittsburgh, PA (7 county
area).
RVP of 7.8 psi..................... 2 Clark & Floyd, IN (2
counties near Louisville,
KY).
RVP of 7.8 psi..................... 2 Detroit, MI (7 counties).
RVP of 7.8 psi; extended summer 1 Southern, ME (7 county
season from May 1 to September 15. area).
RVP of 7.8; extended summer season 3 Central & Eastern, TX (95
from May 1 to October 1. county area).
Low emission diesel fuel with 3 Houston & Dallas, TX.
maximum 10% volume aromatic
hydrocarbon content and minimum
cetane of 48 required. (Allows
substitute Plans w/equivalent NOX
reductions).
Cleaner Burning Gasoline; similar 5 Phoenix, AZ (Maricopa
to Federal RFG or California RFG County).
in summer; in winter similar only
to California RFG.
[[Page 32536]]
Winter gasoline controls on 5 Las Vegas, NV.
aromatic hydrocarbons and sulfur.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We invite comment on all elements of this notice, especially with
regard to the recommended and alternate lists and our interpretation of
the relevant provisions of the EPAct. Interested parties should submit
comments according to the guidelines described at the beginning of this
notice. After fully considering comments received, we will generate and
publish a final list in the Federal Register.
Dated: May 31, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-8726 Filed 6-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
