Approval of States' Requests To Relax the Federal Reid Vapor Pressure Volatility Standard in Florida, and the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Areas in North Carolina, 17889-17896 [2014-06863]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations § 62.11652 Effective date. The effective date of the plan for existing sewage sludge incineration units is April 30, 2014. [FR Doc. 2014–06963 Filed 3–28–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 80 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0787; FRL–9908–13– OAR] Approval of States’ Requests To Relax the Federal Reid Vapor Pressure Volatility Standard in Florida, and the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Areas in North Carolina Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve requests from Florida and North Carolina for the EPA to relax the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) Standard applicable to gasoline introduced into commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each year in six counties in Florida, and in counties in the Raleigh-DurhamChapel Hill Area (also referred to as the ‘‘Triangle Area’’) and the Greensboro/ Winston-Salem/High Point Area (also referred to as the ‘‘Triad Area’’) in North Carolina. Specifically, the EPA is approving amendments to the regulations to change the RVP standard for six counties in Florida, and for the counties in the Triangle and Triad Areas from 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) to 9.0 psi for gasoline. The EPA has determined that these changes to the federal RVP regulation are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). This action is being taken without prior proposal because the EPA believes that this final rulemaking is noncontroversial, for the reasons set forth in this preamble, and due to the limited scope of this action. DATES: This direct final rule will become effective May 30, 2014 without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by April 30, 2014. If the EPA receives such comments, the Agency will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2013–0787, by one of the following methods: emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 3. Fax: 202–566–9744. 4. Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include two copies. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Headquarters Library, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. 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–2013– 0787. The EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through www.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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the Agency 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 the EPA’s public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/ epahome/dockets.htm. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 17889 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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 1742. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rudolph Kapichak, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 734–214– 4574; fax number 734–214–4052; email address: kapichak.rudolph@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble. Table of Contents I. General Information II. Actions Being Taken III. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement IV. EPA’s Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards in Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as Attainment Areas V. EPA’s Analysis of Florida’s Request To Relax the Federal RVP Requirements in the State VI. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s Requests To Relax the Federal RVP Requirements in the Triangle and Triad Areas VII. Final Actions VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews IX. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions I. General Information Throughout this document, ‘‘the Agency’’ is used to mean the EPA. A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule? The EPA is making these revisions as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the EPA views these revisions as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse comment. The rationale for this rulemaking is described in detail below. If the EPA receives no adverse comment, the Agency will not take further action on the proposed rule. If the EPA receives adverse comment on the rule or any portion of the rule, the Agency will withdraw the direct final E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 17890 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 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. B. Does this action apply to me? • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at Entities potentially affected by this your estimate in sufficient detail to rule are fuel producers and distributors who do business in Florida and in North allow for it to be reproduced. • Provide specific examples to Carolina. Regulated entities include: illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. Examples of potentially NAICS regulated entities codes a • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity Petroleum refineries ....................... 324110 or personal threats. Gasoline Marketers and Distribu• Make sure to submit your tors .............................................. 424710 comments by the comment period 424720 deadline identified. Gasoline Retail Stations ................. 447110 rule or the portion of the rule that received adverse comment. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rulemaking. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. Gasoline Transporters .................... a North American System (NAICS). Industry 484220 484230 Classification This table provides only a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. You should carefully examine the regulations in 40 CFR 80.27 to determine whether your facility is impacted. If you have further questions, call the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA? 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. 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 the 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 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. 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 rulemaking 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 II. Actions Being Taken This final rule approves a request from Florida to change the summertime RVP standard for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas counties in Florida from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi by amending the EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). Additionally, this final rule approves a request from North Carolina to change the summertime RVP standard for the Triangle and Triad Areas from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi by amending the EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). The Triangle Area is comprised of Durham and Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County. The Triad Area is comprised of the counties of Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford in their entirety, and the portion of Davie County bounded by the Yadkin River, Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina Highway 801, Fulton Creek and back to Yadkin River. In previous rulemakings, the EPA approved state implementation plan (SIP) revisions from Florida and North Carolina which provided technical analyses that demonstrated that removal of the Federal RVP requirements of 7.8 psi for gasoline sold between June 1 and September 15 of each year in the six counties in Florida, and the North Carolina Triangle and Triad Areas would not interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in these areas. For more information on Florida’s SIP revision for the six Florida counties and the EPA’s analysis of Florida’s SIP revision refer to the January 6, 2014, final rule at 79 FR 573; on North Carolina’s SIP revision for the Triangle Area refer to the January 2, 2014 final rule at 79 FR 47; and on North PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Carolina’s SIP revision for the Triad Area refer to the January 24, 2014 final rule at 79 FR 4082. As mentioned above, this final rule approves requests from Florida and North Carolina to change the summertime RVP standard for six Florida counties, and for the Triangle and Triad Areas from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi by amending the EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). The preamble for this rulemaking is organized as follows. Section III provides the history of federal gasoline volatility regulation. Section IV describes the policy regarding relaxation of volatility standards in ozone nonattainment areas that are redesignated as attainment areas. Section V provides information specific to Florida’s request for the six counties currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements. Section VI provides information specific to North Carolina’s requests for the counties in the Triangle and Triad Areas that are currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements. Finally, Section VII presents the final actions in response to the requests from Florida and North Carolina. III. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), the EPA determined that gasoline nationwide was becoming increasingly volatile, causing an increase in evaporative emissions from gasolinepowered vehicles and equipment. Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic compounds (VOC), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone and contribute to the nation’s ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to groundlevel ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people with heart and lung disease. The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c) of the CAA, the EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868) that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the regulatory control periods that were established on a stateby-state basis in the final rule. The regulatory control periods addressed the portion of the year when peak ozone concentrations were expected. These regulations constituted Phase I of a twophase nationwide program, which was designed to reduce the volatility of commercial gasoline during the high ozone season. On June 11, 1990 (55 FR E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 23658), the EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls as Phase II of the volatility control program. These requirements established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on the state, the month, and the area’s initial ozone attainment designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS). The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires the EPA to promulgate regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense, supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone season. Section 211(h) prohibits the EPA from establishing a volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area, except that the Agency may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to attainment. On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), the EPA modified the Phase II volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA. The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23658), which included the 7.8 psi ozone season limitation for certain areas. As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility controls and reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility standards published in 1991, the EPA will rely on states to initiate changes to the volatility program. The EPA’s policy for approving such changes is described in Section IV of this notice. Florida and North Carolina have initiated these changes by requesting that the EPA relax the 7.8 psi RVP standard for counties that are in ozone maintenance areas. Accordingly, the States revised their original modeling and maintenance demonstrations for these areas to reflect continued attainment under the relaxed 9.0 psi RVP standard that the states have requested. See Section V of this action for information specific to Florida’s request for the six counties currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements. See Section VI of this action for information specific to North Carolina’s requests for the counties in the Triangle and Triad Areas that are currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 IV. EPA’s Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards in Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as Attainment Areas As stated in the preamble for the EPA’s amended Phase II volatility standards (56 FR 64706), any change in the volatility standard for a nonattainment area that was subsequently redesignated as an attainment area must be accomplished through a separate rulemaking that revises the applicable standard for that area. Thus, for former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas where the EPA mandated a Phase II volatility standard of 7.8 psi RVP in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the 7.8 psi RVP will remain in effect, even after such an area is redesignated to attainment, until a separate rulemaking is completed that revises the RVP standard in that area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. As explained in the December 12, 1991, rulemaking, the EPA believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard is best accomplished in conjunction with the redesignation process. In order for an ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to section 175A of the Act, that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years. Depending on the area’s circumstances, this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten years without the more stringent volatility standard or that the more stringent volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain its attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request for redesignation, the EPA will not relax the volatility standard unless the state requests a relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the EPA, that the area will maintain attainment for ten years without the need for the more stringent volatility standard. V. EPA’s Analysis of Florida’s Request To Relax the Federal RVP Requirements in the State On November 6, 1991, the EPA designated and classified the Southeast Florida area (i.e., Broward, Dade and Palm Beach counties) as Moderate; the Jacksonville area (i.e., Duval County) as Transitional; and the Tampa area (i.e., Hillsborough and Pinellas counties) as Marginal nonattainment areas for the 1hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). Among the requirements applicable to PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 17891 nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain RVP standards for gasoline sold commercially during the high ozone season. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). Thus, the RVP requirements for gasoline sold in these three 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas was 7.8 psi from June 1 through September 15 of each year. Subsequently, each area was redesignated to attainment for the 1hour ozone NAAQS.1 Florida’s redesignation requests did not include a request for relaxation of the gasoline volatility standard.2 3 On August 15, 2013, the State of Florida, through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), submitted a request for the EPA to relax the Federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi in Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties in Florida. The State also submitted a technical analysis which demonstrated that the less-stringent RVP in these counties would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS or any other applicable standard.4 Specifically, the State updated the 10-year maintenance plans that were submitted for the three 1-hour ozone maintenance areas under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.5 As required, these section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans provided for continued attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from the effective date of these areas’ designation as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These plans also included components demonstrating how each area will continue to attain the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS, and provided contingency measures should an area violate the NAAQS. Florida’s previous ozone redesignation requests and maintenance plans for these areas did 1 60 FR 41, (January 3, 1995); 60 FR 10326 (February 24, 1995); and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995), respectively). 2 Effective on June 15, 2004, Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 23857. 3 Effective on July 20, 2012, the same counties were designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088. 4 Maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone standard designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard are required to submit a maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA demonstrating maintenance out to 10 years after designation. See 69 FR 23996 (April 30, 2004). 5 The EPA has determined that redesignated 1hour ozone attainment areas that are designated 8hour ozone attainment areas may rely on the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for purposes of requesting relaxation of the more stringent volatility standard. See 73 FR 8202, 8205 (February 13, 2008). E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 17892 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations not remove the 7.8 psi RVP standard. See 75 FR 29671 (May 27, 2010). As mentioned above, on August 15, 2013, FDEP submitted changes to the three section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans that collectively cover Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties in Florida. Florida’s August 15, 2013, SIP revision modifies the existing section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans to account for a less stringent applicable RVP gasoline requirement of 9.0 psi for these areas. Specifically, Florida’s August 15, 2013, SIP revision included an evaluation of the impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards, and on other applicable NAAQS. The EPA evaluated Florida’s August 15, 2013, SIP revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject to public notice-and-comment and no comments were received. The EPA approved Florida’s August 15, 2013, SIP revision on January 6, 2014. See 79 FR 573 In this action, based on the previous approval of Florida’s August 15, 2013, SIP revision, and the fact that the areas are currently attaining all ozone NAAQS, the EPA is approving Florida’s request to relax the high ozone season RVP standard for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas counties from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES VI. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s Requests To Relax the Federal RVP Requirements in the Triangle and Triad Areas The following two sections provide the EPA’s analysis of North Carolina’s requests to relax the Federal RVP requirements in the Triangle and Triad Areas. A. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s Requests To Relax the Federal RVP Requirement in the Triangle Area On November 6, 1991, the EPA designated and classified Durham and Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County (also known as the Triangle Area at the time) as a Moderate nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). Among the requirements applicable to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain RVP standards for gasoline sold commercially during the high ozone season. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). Thus, the RVP requirement for gasoline sold in the Triangle Area was 7.8 psi from June 1 through September 15 of each year. On April 18, 1994, the Triangle Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 standard. See 59 FR 18300. North Carolina’s redesignation request for the Triangle Area did not include a request for relaxation of the gasoline volatility standard.6 7 8 On March 27, 2013, the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment, and Natural Resources (NC DENR), submitted a request for the EPA to relax the Federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi in Wake and Durham Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County that was originally included in the 1-hour ozone nonattainment area. The State also submitted a technical analysis which demonstrated that the less-stringent RVP in these counties would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS or any other applicable standard. Specifically, the State updated the 10-year maintenance plan that was submitted for the Triangle 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area under section 175A of the CAA. As required, this section 175A maintenance plan provided for continued attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from the EPA’s redesignation of the area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This plan also included components demonstrating how the area will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and provided contingency measures should the area violate the NAAQS. North Carolina’s previous ozone redesignation requests and maintenance plans for this area did not remove the 7.8 psi RVP standard. See 72 FR 72948 (December 26, 2007). As mentioned above, on March 27, 2013, NC DENR submitted changes to the 175A maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision modifies the existing section 175A maintenance plan to account for a less stringent applicable RVP gasoline requirement of 9.0 psi for the Triangle Area. Specifically, North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision included an evaluation of the impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards, and on other applicable NAAQS. The EPA evaluated North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject to public notice-andcomment, and no adverse comments and one supportive comment were received on that proposed action. The EPA approved North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision on January 2, 2014. See 79 FR 47. In this action, based on the EPA’s previous approval of North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision, and the fact that the Triangle Area is currently attaining all ozone NAAQS, the EPA is approving North Carolina’s request to relax the RVP standard for Wake and Durham Counties, and a portion of Granville County in North Carolina from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi from June 1 through September 15 of each year. 6 Effective on June 15, 2004, the nonattainment area for the Triangle Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS was expanded from Durham and Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County, to also include Franklin, Johnston, Orange, and Person Counties, and the remainder of Granville County and Baldwin, Center, New Hope and Williams Townships in Chatham County. See 69 FR 23857. 7 On December 26, 2007 the Triangle Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 72 FR 72948. 8 Effective on July 20, 2012, the same counties were designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088. 9 Effective June 15, 2004 for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the Triad Area was designated as nonattainment with a deferred effective date as part of the Early Action Compact (EAC) program. As part of this action the Triad Area was expanded to include the entire county of Davie, and Alamance, Caswell, Randolph, and Rockingham Counties in their entirety. See 69 FR 23857. 10 For more information on the EAC program, see, http://www.epa.gov/airquality/eac/fs20080331_ eac.html. 11 The Triad Area attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS and on February 2, 2008, the EPA finalized an action for 13 nonattainment areas with deferred effective dates, including the Triad Area, PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 B. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s Requests To Relax the Federal RVP Requirement in the Triad Area On November 6, 1991, the EPA designated Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford counties in their entirety and the portion of Davie County bounded by the Yadkin River, Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina Highway 801, Fulton Creek and back to Yadkin River in the Triad Area as a Moderate nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). Among the requirements applicable to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain RVP standards for gasoline sold commercially during the ozone season. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). Thus, the RVP requirement for gasoline sold in the Triad Area was 7.8 psi from June 1 through September 15 of each year. On April 18, 1994, the Triad Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard. See 59 FR 18300. North Carolina’s redesignation request for the Triad Area did not include a request for the relaxation of the gasoline volatility standard.9 10 11 12 E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES On April 12, 2013, the State of North Carolina, through NC DENR, submitted a request for the EPA to relax the Federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi in Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and the relevant portion of Davie County. The State also submitted a technical analysis which demonstrated that the less-stringent RVP in the aforementioned counties would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS or any other applicable standard. Specifically, the State updated the 10-year maintenance plan that was submitted for the Triad 1-hour ozone maintenance area under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.13 As required, this section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan provided for continued attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from the effective date of the area’s designation as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This plan also included components demonstrating how the area will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and provided contingency measures should the area violate the NAAQS. North Carolina’s previous ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan for this area did not remove the 7.8 psi RVP standard. See 77 FR 3611 (January 25, 2012). As mentioned above, on April 12, 2013, NC DENR submitted changes to the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for the Triad Area. North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision modifies the existing section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan to account for a less stringent applicable RVP gasoline requirement of 9.0 psi for the area. Specifically, North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision included an evaluation of the impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards, and on other applicable NAAQS. The EPA evaluated North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject to public notice-andcomment and no adverse comments and designating these areas attainment for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS. However, as a former 1-hour ozone maintenance area the Triad Area was required to submit a 10-year maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. See 73 FR 17897. 12 Effective July 20, 2012, the Triad Area counties were designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088. 13 The EPA has determined that redesignated 1hour ozone attainment areas that are designated 8hour ozone attainment areas may rely on the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for purposes of requesting relaxation of the more stringent volatility standard. 73 FR 8202, 8205 (February 13, 2008). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 one supportive comment were received on that proposed action. The EPA approved North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision on January 24, 2014. See 79 FR 4082. In this action, based on the previous approval of North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision, and the fact that the Triad Area is currently attaining all ozone NAAQS, the EPA is approving North Carolina’s request to relax the high ozone season RVP standard for Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and a portion of Davie County from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. VII. Final Action The EPA is taking direct final action to approve requests from Florida and North Carolina for the EPA to relax the RVP applicable to gasoline introduced into commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each year in six counties in Florida, and in the counties of the Triangle and Triad Areas in North Carolina. Specifically, this action amends the applicable RVP standard from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi provided at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2) for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas counties in Florida; Wake and Durham Counties, and a portion of Dutchville Township in Granville County in the Triangle Area in North Carolina; and Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and a portion of Davie County in the Triad Area. The EPA is making these revisions without prior proposal because the Agency views these revisions as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register publication, the EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve these revisions to the RVP standards that apply in Florida and in the North Carolina Triangle and Triad Areas should adverse comments be filed. This rule will become effective May 30, 2014 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by April 30, 2014. If the EPA receives adverse comment on the rule or any portion of the rule, the Agency will withdraw the direct final rule or the portion of the rule that received adverse comment. The EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register indicating which provisions will become effective and which provisions are being withdrawn. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on the subsequent final action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. If no such PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 17893 comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will become effective on May 30, 2014 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review As of January 24, 2014, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), determined that this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). B. Paperwork Reduction Act This action does not impose any new information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and therefore is not subject to these requirements. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the Agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of today’s rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. After considering the economic impacts of today’s final rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small entities directly regulated by this final rule are refiners, importers or blenders of gasoline that choose to produce or import low RVP gasoline for sale in the Florida and North Carolina areas and gasoline distributors and retail stations in those areas. E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 17894 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES This action will relax the federal RVP standard for gasoline sold in portions of Florida and North Carolina, during the ozone control season (June 1 to September 15), from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi, and is therefore expected not to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rule does not impose any requirements or create impacts on small entities beyond those, if any, already required by or resulting from the CAA Section 211(h) Volatility Control program. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104–4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. The EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 the private sector in any one year. Today’s final rule affects portions of Florida and North Carolina of which the EPA estimates lower fuel costs as a result of this action, therefore reducing cost on businesses and consumers. Today’s final rule, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. The EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. As discussed above, the rule relaxes an existing standard and affects only the gasoline industry. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 13132, entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255 August 10, 1999), requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have federalism implications’’ is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.’’ This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.’’ This rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined under Executive PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs the 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 the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, the EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards. J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 17895 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. The EPA has determined that this rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not affect the applicable 8-hour ozone NAAQS which establish the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. This rule will relax the applicable volatility standard of gasoline during the summer possibly resulting in slightly higher mobile source emissions. However, Florida and North Carolina have demonstrated in maintenance plans that this action will not interfere with attainment of the 8hour ozone NAAQS and therefore disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations are not an anticipated result. K. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2). This rule will become effective May 30, 2014 unless the EPA receives adverse written comments by April 30, 2014. L. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 30, 2014. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed Rules section of today’s Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2). IX. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions Authority for this final action is in sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7545(h) and 7601(a). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Motor vehicle and motor vehicle engines, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: March 19, 2014. Gina McCarthy, Administrator. Title 40, chapter I, part 80 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 80—REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES 1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545 and 7601(a). 2. In § 80.27(a)(2)(ii), the table is amended by: ■ a. Revising the entry for Florida; ■ b. Revising the entry for North Carolina; and ■ c. Adding footnotes 5, 6, and 7. The revisions and additions read as follows: ■ § 80.27 Controls and prohibitions on gasoline volatility. (a) * * * (2) * * * (ii) * * * APPLICABLE STANDARDS 1 1992 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS State May June * * * Florida ................................................................................... Southeast Florida, Tampa Bay and Jacksonville 5 ............... * * * * North Carolina: Triad 6 ............................................................................ Triangle 7 ....................................................................... All other volatility nonattainment areas ......................... * * * 9.0 9.0 * 9.0 9.0 August * 9.0 9.0 7.8 * 9.0 9.0 * 9.0 9.0 7.8 * 9.0 9.0 * 9.0 9.0 7.8 * * 9.0 9.0 7.8 * * * * * standard for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties from June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through 2013 was 7.8 psi. 6 The standard for Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and a portion of Davie County from June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through 2013 was 7.8 psi. 7 The standard for Durham and Wake Counties, and a portion of Dutchville Township in Granville County from June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through 2013 was 7.8 psi. 5 The emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES September * 9.0 9.0 * 9.0 9.0 9.0 * July VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1 17896 * * Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations * * send electronic mail to jeff.vogel@ dot.gov. * [FR Doc. 2014–06863 Filed 3–28–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 45 CFR Part 147 Health Insurance Reform Requirements for the Group and Individual Health Insurance Markets CFR Correction In Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 1 to 199, revised as of October 1, 2013, on page 700, in § 147.130, paragraphs (a)(1)(iv)(A) and (B) are removed. ■ [FR Doc. 2014–07217 Filed 3–28–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505–01–D DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Maritime Administration 46 CFR Part 308 RIN 2133–AB82 Retrospective Review Under E.O. 13563: War Risk Insurance Maritime Administration, Department of Transportation. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: In accordance with Executive Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ the Maritime Administration (MARAD) is evaluating the continued accuracy of its rules and determining whether they effectively address current issues and provide the regulated public with necessary guidance. As part of this review, MARAD is issuing this final rule to correct numerous citations in accordance with the codification of Title 46 of the United States Code, update relevant agency contact and underwriting agent information, and remove obsolete references to lighter aboard ship barges in Part 308. This rulemaking will have no substantive effect on the regulated public. DATES: This rule is effective April 30, 2014. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: You may contact Jeff R. Vogel, AttorneyAdvisor, Office of Chief Counsel, at (202) 493–0307. You may send mail to Mr. Vogel at Office of Chief Counsel, MAR–222, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–0001. You may FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:18 Mar 28, 2014 On January 18, 2011, President Obama issued Executive Order 13563, which outlined a plan to improve regulation and regulatory review (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). Executive Order 13563 reaffirms and builds upon governing principles of contemporary regulatory review, including Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), by requiring Federal agencies to design cost-effective, evidence-based regulations that are compatible with economic growth, job creation and competitiveness. The President’s plan recognizes that these principles should not only guide the Federal government’s approach to new regulations, but to existing ones as well. To that end, Executive Order 13563 requires agencies to promote retrospective analysis of rules that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient or excessively burdensome. Accordingly, MARAD identified its regulations governing its war risk insurance program for improvement consistent with the President’s order. The regulations were deemed inconsistent with current agency practices and provided out-of-date information for those participating in, or potentially interested in, the war risk insurance program. As authorized by 46 U.S.C. 53902, and delegated under 46 CFR 1.93, MARAD may provide war risk insurance adequate for the needs of the waterborne commerce of the United States, if such insurance coverage cannot be obtained on reasonable terms and conditions from companies authorized to conduct an insurance business in a State of the United States. MARAD’s authority to issue marine war risk insurance, as provided by 46 U.S.C. 53912, currently expires on December 31, 2020, subject to a further extension of the program by Congress. This U.S. Government war risk insurance program is a standby emergency program and becomes effective simultaneously with the automatic termination of ocean marine commercial war risk insurance policies. This program makes it possible for applicants to obtain war risk insurance from the U.S. Government when such insurance is unavailable on reasonable terms and conditions in the commercial market. The program is mutually-beneficial to the United States and to the shipowner in that it assures continued flow of essential U.S. trade and protection of the shipowner from loss by risks of war. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 The war risk insurance statutory provisions were codified at 46 U.S.C. Chapter 539 pursuant to Public Law 109–304 on October 6, 2006. In order to alleviate any confusion caused by the current war risk insurance regulations, all statutory references have been amended to reflect the correct sections of Title 46 of the United States Code. In addition, all contact information contained in 46 CFR Part 308 has been updated to ensure that program participants and the general public have access to all current information. In their current form, the regulations also make repeated reference to the ‘‘American War Risk Agency’’ as MARAD’s underwriter. The American War Risk Agency was operated by the American Hull Insurance Syndicate, as successor to the American Marine Insurance Syndicate ‘‘C’’, which was created at the insistence of the House Subcommittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and was approved by such Committee and the United States Shipping Board on June 28, 1920. The American War Risk Agency served as MARAD’s underwriter until December 2012 when it ceased operation. All references to the American War Risk Agency have been replaced in Part 308, and subsequent underwriters will be contracted for in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations. Finally, this final rule removes references to lighter aboard ship (LASH) barges in sections 308.102 and 308.202. The regulations now make general reference to binder fees for all barges in lieu of specifically referencing LASH barges. Rulemaking Analysis and Notices Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures Under E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 18, 2011) and DOT policies and procedures, MARAD must determine whether a regulatory action is ‘‘significant,’’ and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one 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 government or communities. (2) Create E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM 31MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 61 (Monday, March 31, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17889-17896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06863]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0787; FRL-9908-13-OAR]


Approval of States' Requests To Relax the Federal Reid Vapor 
Pressure Volatility Standard in Florida, and the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel 
Hill and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Areas in North Carolina

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct 
final action to approve requests from Florida and North Carolina for 
the EPA to relax the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) Standard applicable to 
gasoline introduced into commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each 
year in six counties in Florida, and in counties in the Raleigh-Durham-
Chapel Hill Area (also referred to as the ``Triangle Area'') and the 
Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Area (also referred to as the 
``Triad Area'') in North Carolina. Specifically, the EPA is approving 
amendments to the regulations to change the RVP standard for six 
counties in Florida, and for the counties in the Triangle and Triad 
Areas from 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) to 9.0 psi for gasoline. 
The EPA has determined that these changes to the federal RVP regulation 
are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA 
or Act). This action is being taken without prior proposal because the 
EPA believes that this final rulemaking is noncontroversial, for the 
reasons set forth in this preamble, and due to the limited scope of 
this action.

DATES: This direct final rule will become effective May 30, 2014 
without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by 
April 30, 2014. If the EPA receives such comments, the Agency will 
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal 
Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0787, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: 202-566-9744.
    4. Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include two 
copies.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
EPA Headquarters Library, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. 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-
2013-0787. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through 
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without 
going through www.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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due 
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the 
Agency 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 the 
EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. 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 through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA 
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air 
Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rudolph Kapichak, Office of 
Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4574; 
fax number 734-214-4052; email address: kapichak.rudolph@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Organization of this document. The following 
outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Actions Being Taken
III. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement
IV. EPA's Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards in 
Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as Attainment Areas
V. EPA's Analysis of Florida's Request To Relax the Federal RVP 
Requirements in the State
VI. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's Requests To Relax the Federal 
RVP Requirements in the Triangle and Triad Areas
VII. Final Actions
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
IX. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions

I. General Information

    Throughout this document, ``the Agency'' is used to mean the EPA.

A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is making these revisions as a direct final rule without 
prior proposal because the EPA views these revisions as 
noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse comment. The rationale for 
this rulemaking is described in detail below. If the EPA receives no 
adverse comment, the Agency will not take further action on the 
proposed rule. If the EPA receives adverse comment on the rule or any 
portion of the rule, the Agency will withdraw the direct final

[[Page 17890]]

rule or the portion of the rule that received adverse comment. All 
public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final 
rule based on this proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period on this rulemaking. Any parties interested in commenting 
must do so at this time.

B. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this rule are fuel producers and 
distributors who do business in Florida and in North Carolina. 
Regulated entities include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  NAICS
          Examples of potentially regulated entities              codes
                                                                   \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum refineries..........................................    324110
Gasoline Marketers and Distributors...........................    424710
                                                                  424720
Gasoline Retail Stations......................................    447110
Gasoline Transporters.........................................    484220
                                                                  484230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

    This table provides only a guide for readers regarding entities 
likely to be regulated by this action. You should carefully examine the 
regulations in 40 CFR 80.27 to determine whether your facility is 
impacted. If you have further questions, call the person listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA 
through www.regulations.gov or email. 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 the 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 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. 
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 rulemaking 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.

II. Actions Being Taken

    This final rule approves a request from Florida to change the 
summertime RVP standard for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm 
Beach and Pinellas counties in Florida from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi by 
amending the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). Additionally, 
this final rule approves a request from North Carolina to change the 
summertime RVP standard for the Triangle and Triad Areas from 7.8 psi 
to 9.0 psi by amending the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). The 
Triangle Area is comprised of Durham and Wake Counties, and the 
Dutchville Township portion of Granville County. The Triad Area is 
comprised of the counties of Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford in their 
entirety, and the portion of Davie County bounded by the Yadkin River, 
Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina Highway 801, Fulton Creek and back to 
Yadkin River.
    In previous rulemakings, the EPA approved state implementation plan 
(SIP) revisions from Florida and North Carolina which provided 
technical analyses that demonstrated that removal of the Federal RVP 
requirements of 7.8 psi for gasoline sold between June 1 and September 
15 of each year in the six counties in Florida, and the North Carolina 
Triangle and Triad Areas would not interfere with maintenance of the 
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in these areas. For more 
information on Florida's SIP revision for the six Florida counties and 
the EPA's analysis of Florida's SIP revision refer to the January 6, 
2014, final rule at 79 FR 573; on North Carolina's SIP revision for the 
Triangle Area refer to the January 2, 2014 final rule at 79 FR 47; and 
on North Carolina's SIP revision for the Triad Area refer to the 
January 24, 2014 final rule at 79 FR 4082.
    As mentioned above, this final rule approves requests from Florida 
and North Carolina to change the summertime RVP standard for six 
Florida counties, and for the Triangle and Triad Areas from 7.8 psi to 
9.0 psi by amending the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). The 
preamble for this rulemaking is organized as follows. Section III 
provides the history of federal gasoline volatility regulation. Section 
IV describes the policy regarding relaxation of volatility standards in 
ozone nonattainment areas that are redesignated as attainment areas. 
Section V provides information specific to Florida's request for the 
six counties currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP 
requirements. Section VI provides information specific to North 
Carolina's requests for the counties in the Triangle and Triad Areas 
that are currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements. 
Finally, Section VII presents the final actions in response to the 
requests from Florida and North Carolina.

III. History of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement

    On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), the EPA determined that gasoline 
nationwide was becoming increasingly volatile, causing an increase in 
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment. 
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic 
compounds (VOC), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone 
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to 
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma 
or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to 
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people 
with heart and lung disease.
    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in 
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c) 
of the CAA, the EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 
11868) that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the 
regulatory control periods that were established on a state-by-state 
basis in the final rule. The regulatory control periods addressed the 
portion of the year when peak ozone concentrations were expected. These 
regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase nationwide program, 
which was designed to reduce the volatility of commercial gasoline 
during the high ozone season. On June 11, 1990 (55 FR

[[Page 17891]]

23658), the EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls as Phase 
II of the volatility control program. These requirements established 
maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on the state, 
the month, and the area's initial ozone attainment designation with 
respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS).
    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to 
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires the EPA to promulgate 
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense, 
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce 
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone 
season. Section 211(h) prohibits the EPA from establishing a volatility 
standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area, except that 
the Agency may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any former 
ozone nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
    On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), the EPA modified the Phase II 
volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA. 
The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP 
above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning 
in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations 
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55 
FR 23658), which included the 7.8 psi ozone season limitation for 
certain areas. As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility 
controls and reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility 
standards published in 1991, the EPA will rely on states to initiate 
changes to the volatility program. The EPA's policy for approving such 
changes is described in Section IV of this notice.
    Florida and North Carolina have initiated these changes by 
requesting that the EPA relax the 7.8 psi RVP standard for counties 
that are in ozone maintenance areas. Accordingly, the States revised 
their original modeling and maintenance demonstrations for these areas 
to reflect continued attainment under the relaxed 9.0 psi RVP standard 
that the states have requested. See Section V of this action for 
information specific to Florida's request for the six counties 
currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements. See 
Section VI of this action for information specific to North Carolina's 
requests for the counties in the Triangle and Triad Areas that are 
currently subject to the 7.8 psi summertime RVP requirements.

IV. EPA's Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards in Ozone 
Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as Attainment Areas

    As stated in the preamble for the EPA's amended Phase II volatility 
standards (56 FR 64706), any change in the volatility standard for a 
nonattainment area that was subsequently redesignated as an attainment 
area must be accomplished through a separate rulemaking that revises 
the applicable standard for that area. Thus, for former 1-hour ozone 
nonattainment areas where the EPA mandated a Phase II volatility 
standard of 7.8 psi RVP in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the 7.8 
psi RVP will remain in effect, even after such an area is redesignated 
to attainment, until a separate rulemaking is completed that revises 
the RVP standard in that area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.
    As explained in the December 12, 1991, rulemaking, the EPA believes 
that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard is best accomplished in 
conjunction with the redesignation process. In order for an ozone 
nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment area, section 
107(d)(3) of the Act requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to 
section 175A of the Act, that the area is capable of maintaining 
attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years. Depending on the area's 
circumstances, this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the 
area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten years without the 
more stringent volatility standard or that the more stringent 
volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain its 
attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request 
for redesignation, the EPA will not relax the volatility standard 
unless the state requests a relaxation and the maintenance plan 
demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the EPA, that the area will 
maintain attainment for ten years without the need for the more 
stringent volatility standard.

V. EPA's Analysis of Florida's Request To Relax the Federal RVP 
Requirements in the State

    On November 6, 1991, the EPA designated and classified the 
Southeast Florida area (i.e., Broward, Dade and Palm Beach counties) as 
Moderate; the Jacksonville area (i.e., Duval County) as Transitional; 
and the Tampa area (i.e., Hillsborough and Pinellas counties) as 
Marginal nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 
56694 (November 6, 1991). Among the requirements applicable to 
nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to 
meet certain RVP standards for gasoline sold commercially during the 
high ozone season. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). Thus, the RVP 
requirements for gasoline sold in these three 1-hour ozone 
nonattainment areas was 7.8 psi from June 1 through September 15 of 
each year. Subsequently, each area was redesignated to attainment for 
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ Florida's redesignation requests did not 
include a request for relaxation of the gasoline volatility 
standard.2 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 60 FR 41, (January 3, 1995); 60 FR 10326 (February 24, 
1995); and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995), respectively).
    \2\ Effective on June 15, 2004, Broward, Dade, Duval, 
Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties were designated 
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 
23857.
    \3\ Effective on July 20, 2012, the same counties were 
designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 15, 2013, the State of Florida, through the Florida 
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), submitted a request for 
the EPA to relax the Federal RVP requirement of 7.8 psi in Broward, 
Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties in Florida. 
The State also submitted a technical analysis which demonstrated that 
the less-stringent RVP in these counties would not interfere with 
continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS or any other 
applicable standard.\4\ Specifically, the State updated the 10-year 
maintenance plans that were submitted for the three 1-hour ozone 
maintenance areas under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS.\5\ As required, these section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans 
provided for continued attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from the effective date of these 
areas' designation as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These 
plans also included components demonstrating how each area will 
continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and provided 
contingency measures should an area violate the NAAQS. Florida's 
previous ozone redesignation requests and maintenance plans for these 
areas did

[[Page 17892]]

not remove the 7.8 psi RVP standard. See 75 FR 29671 (May 27, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone standard designated 
attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard are 
required to submit a maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) of the 
CAA demonstrating maintenance out to 10 years after designation. See 
69 FR 23996 (April 30, 2004).
    \5\ The EPA has determined that redesignated 1-hour ozone 
attainment areas that are designated 8-hour ozone attainment areas 
may rely on the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for purposes of 
requesting relaxation of the more stringent volatility standard. See 
73 FR 8202, 8205 (February 13, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, on August 15, 2013, FDEP submitted changes to 
the three section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans that collectively cover 
Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties in 
Florida. Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision modifies the existing 
section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans to account for a less stringent 
applicable RVP gasoline requirement of 9.0 psi for these areas. 
Specifically, Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision included an 
evaluation of the impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP 
requirement would have on maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone 
standards, and on other applicable NAAQS. The EPA evaluated Florida's 
August 15, 2013, SIP revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject 
to public notice-and-comment and no comments were received. The EPA 
approved Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision on January 6, 2014. 
See 79 FR 573 In this action, based on the previous approval of 
Florida's August 15, 2013, SIP revision, and the fact that the areas 
are currently attaining all ozone NAAQS, the EPA is approving Florida's 
request to relax the high ozone season RVP standard for Broward, Dade, 
Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas counties from 7.8 psi to 
9.0 psi.

VI. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's Requests To Relax the Federal 
RVP Requirements in the Triangle and Triad Areas

    The following two sections provide the EPA's analysis of North 
Carolina's requests to relax the Federal RVP requirements in the 
Triangle and Triad Areas.

A. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's Requests To Relax the Federal RVP 
Requirement in the Triangle Area

    On November 6, 1991, the EPA designated and classified Durham and 
Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County 
(also known as the Triangle Area at the time) as a Moderate 
nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 
(November 6, 1991). Among the requirements applicable to nonattainment 
areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain 
RVP standards for gasoline sold commercially during the high ozone 
season. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). Thus, the RVP requirement for 
gasoline sold in the Triangle Area was 7.8 psi from June 1 through 
September 15 of each year. On April 18, 1994, the Triangle Area was 
redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard. See 59 FR 
18300. North Carolina's redesignation request for the Triangle Area did 
not include a request for relaxation of the gasoline volatility 
standard.6 7 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Effective on June 15, 2004, the nonattainment area for the 
Triangle Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS was expanded from Durham and 
Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville 
County, to also include Franklin, Johnston, Orange, and Person 
Counties, and the remainder of Granville County and Baldwin, Center, 
New Hope and Williams Townships in Chatham County. See 69 FR 23857.
    \7\ On December 26, 2007 the Triangle Area was redesignated to 
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 72 FR 72948.
    \8\ Effective on July 20, 2012, the same counties were 
designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 27, 2013, the State of North Carolina, through the North 
Carolina Department of Environment, and Natural Resources (NC DENR), 
submitted a request for the EPA to relax the Federal RVP requirement of 
7.8 psi in Wake and Durham Counties, and the Dutchville Township 
portion of Granville County that was originally included in the 1-hour 
ozone nonattainment area. The State also submitted a technical analysis 
which demonstrated that the less-stringent RVP in these counties would 
not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
or any other applicable standard. Specifically, the State updated the 
10-year maintenance plan that was submitted for the Triangle 1997 8-
hour ozone maintenance area under section 175A of the CAA. As required, 
this section 175A maintenance plan provided for continued attainment 
and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years 
from the EPA's redesignation of the area from nonattainment to 
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This plan also included 
components demonstrating how the area will continue to attain the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS, and provided contingency measures should the area 
violate the NAAQS. North Carolina's previous ozone redesignation 
requests and maintenance plans for this area did not remove the 7.8 psi 
RVP standard. See 72 FR 72948 (December 26, 2007).
    As mentioned above, on March 27, 2013, NC DENR submitted changes to 
the 175A maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. North Carolina's March 
27, 2013, SIP revision modifies the existing section 175A maintenance 
plan to account for a less stringent applicable RVP gasoline 
requirement of 9.0 psi for the Triangle Area. Specifically, North 
Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision included an evaluation of the 
impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on 
maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards, and on other 
applicable NAAQS. The EPA evaluated North Carolina's March 27, 2013, 
SIP revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject to public 
notice-and-comment, and no adverse comments and one supportive comment 
were received on that proposed action. The EPA approved North 
Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision on January 2, 2014. See 79 FR 
47. In this action, based on the EPA's previous approval of North 
Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision, and the fact that the Triangle 
Area is currently attaining all ozone NAAQS, the EPA is approving North 
Carolina's request to relax the RVP standard for Wake and Durham 
Counties, and a portion of Granville County in North Carolina from 7.8 
psi to 9.0 psi from June 1 through September 15 of each year.

B. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's Requests To Relax the Federal RVP 
Requirement in the Triad Area

    On November 6, 1991, the EPA designated Davidson, Forsyth and 
Guilford counties in their entirety and the portion of Davie County 
bounded by the Yadkin River, Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina Highway 
801, Fulton Creek and back to Yadkin River in the Triad Area as a 
Moderate nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 
(November 6, 1991). Among the requirements applicable to nonattainment 
areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain 
RVP standards for gasoline sold commercially during the ozone season. 
See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). Thus, the RVP requirement for gasoline 
sold in the Triad Area was 7.8 psi from June 1 through September 15 of 
each year. On April 18, 1994, the Triad Area was redesignated to 
attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard. See 59 FR 18300. North 
Carolina's redesignation request for the Triad Area did not include a 
request for the relaxation of the gasoline volatility 
standard.9 10 11 12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Effective June 15, 2004 for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the Triad 
Area was designated as nonattainment with a deferred effective date 
as part of the Early Action Compact (EAC) program. As part of this 
action the Triad Area was expanded to include the entire county of 
Davie, and Alamance, Caswell, Randolph, and Rockingham Counties in 
their entirety. See 69 FR 23857.
    \10\ For more information on the EAC program, see, http://www.epa.gov/airquality/eac/fs20080331_eac.html.
    \11\ The Triad Area attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS and on 
February 2, 2008, the EPA finalized an action for 13 nonattainment 
areas with deferred effective dates, including the Triad Area, 
designating these areas attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
However, as a former 1-hour ozone maintenance area the Triad Area 
was required to submit a 10-year maintenance plan under section 
110(a)(1) of the CAA. See 73 FR 17897.
    \12\ Effective July 20, 2012, the Triad Area counties were 
designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 17893]]

    On April 12, 2013, the State of North Carolina, through NC DENR, 
submitted a request for the EPA to relax the Federal RVP requirement of 
7.8 psi in Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and the relevant 
portion of Davie County. The State also submitted a technical analysis 
which demonstrated that the less-stringent RVP in the aforementioned 
counties would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS or any other applicable standard. Specifically, the 
State updated the 10-year maintenance plan that was submitted for the 
Triad 1-hour ozone maintenance area under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA 
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.\13\ As required, this section 110(a)(1) 
maintenance plan provided for continued attainment and maintenance of 
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from the effective 
date of the area's designation as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. This plan also included components demonstrating how the area 
will continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and provided 
contingency measures should the area violate the NAAQS. North 
Carolina's previous ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan 
for this area did not remove the 7.8 psi RVP standard. See 77 FR 3611 
(January 25, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The EPA has determined that redesignated 1-hour ozone 
attainment areas that are designated 8-hour ozone attainment areas 
may rely on the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for purposes of 
requesting relaxation of the more stringent volatility standard. 73 
FR 8202, 8205 (February 13, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, on April 12, 2013, NC DENR submitted changes to 
the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for the Triad Area. North 
Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision modifies the existing section 
110(a)(1) maintenance plan to account for a less stringent applicable 
RVP gasoline requirement of 9.0 psi for the area. Specifically, North 
Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision included an evaluation of the 
impact that the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on 
maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards, and on other 
applicable NAAQS. The EPA evaluated North Carolina's April 12, 2013, 
SIP revision in a previous rulemaking that was subject to public 
notice-and-comment and no adverse comments and one supportive comment 
were received on that proposed action. The EPA approved North 
Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision on January 24, 2014. See 79 FR 
4082. In this action, based on the previous approval of North 
Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision, and the fact that the Triad 
Area is currently attaining all ozone NAAQS, the EPA is approving North 
Carolina's request to relax the high ozone season RVP standard for 
Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and a portion of Davie County 
from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.

VII. Final Action

    The EPA is taking direct final action to approve requests from 
Florida and North Carolina for the EPA to relax the RVP applicable to 
gasoline introduced into commerce from June 1 to September 15 of each 
year in six counties in Florida, and in the counties of the Triangle 
and Triad Areas in North Carolina. Specifically, this action amends the 
applicable RVP standard from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi provided at 40 CFR 
80.27(a)(2) for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and 
Pinellas counties in Florida; Wake and Durham Counties, and a portion 
of Dutchville Township in Granville County in the Triangle Area in 
North Carolina; and Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and a 
portion of Davie County in the Triad Area.
    The EPA is making these revisions without prior proposal because 
the Agency views these revisions as noncontroversial and anticipates no 
adverse comment. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, the EPA is publishing a separate document that 
will serve as the proposal to approve these revisions to the RVP 
standards that apply in Florida and in the North Carolina Triangle and 
Triad Areas should adverse comments be filed. This rule will become 
effective May 30, 2014 without further notice unless the Agency 
receives adverse comments by April 30, 2014.
    If the EPA receives adverse comment on the rule or any portion of 
the rule, the Agency will withdraw the direct final rule or the portion 
of the rule that received adverse comment. The EPA will publish a 
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register indicating which provisions 
will become effective and which provisions are being withdrawn. All 
public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final 
rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period on the subsequent final action. Any parties interested 
in commenting must do so at this time. If no such comments are 
received, the public is advised that this rule will become effective on 
May 30, 2014 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    As of January 24, 2014, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 
determined that this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) 
and is therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq., and therefore is not subject to these requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the Agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small 
entities directly regulated by this final rule are refiners, importers 
or blenders of gasoline that choose to produce or import low RVP 
gasoline for sale in the Florida and North Carolina areas and gasoline 
distributors and retail stations in those areas.

[[Page 17894]]

    This action will relax the federal RVP standard for gasoline sold 
in portions of Florida and North Carolina, during the ozone control 
season (June 1 to September 15), from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi, and is 
therefore expected not to have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The rule does not impose any 
requirements or create impacts on small entities beyond those, if any, 
already required by or resulting from the CAA Section 211(h) Volatility 
Control program.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the 
EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal 
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector of $100 million 
or more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a 
written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires 
EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory 
alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost effective or least 
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The 
provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with 
applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the 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 the 
EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it 
must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government 
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying affected small 
governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have 
meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory 
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and 
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with 
the regulatory requirements.
    The EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal 
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for 
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private 
sector in any one year. Today's final rule affects portions of Florida 
and North Carolina of which the EPA estimates lower fuel costs as a 
result of this action, therefore reducing cost on businesses and 
consumers. Today's final rule, therefore, is not subject to the 
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. The EPA has 
determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements that 
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. As discussed 
above, the rule relaxes an existing standard and affects only the 
gasoline industry.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255 August 
10, 1999), requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
    ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' This rule does not 
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997) applies to 
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental 
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a 
disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs the 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 the 
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency 
decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus 
standards. This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, 
the EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high

[[Page 17895]]

and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the applicable 8-hour ozone NAAQS which establish the level of 
protection provided to human health or the environment. This rule will 
relax the applicable volatility standard of gasoline during the summer 
possibly resulting in slightly higher mobile source emissions. However, 
Florida and North Carolina have demonstrated in maintenance plans that 
this action will not interfere with attainment of the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS and therefore disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations are not an 
anticipated result.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as 
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing 
this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United 
States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A 
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in 
the Federal Register. This action is not a major rule as defined by 5 
U.S.C. section 804(2). This rule will become effective May 30, 2014 
unless the EPA receives adverse written comments by April 30, 2014.

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 30, 2014. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final 
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel 
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed 
Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an 
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so 
that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the 
comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged 
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 
307(b)(2).

IX. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions

    Authority for this final action is in sections 211(h) and 301(a) of 
the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7545(h) and 7601(a).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Motor vehicle and 
motor vehicle engines, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 19, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    Title 40, chapter I, part 80 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 80--REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545 and 7601(a).


0
2. In Sec.  80.27(a)(2)(ii), the table is amended by:
0
a. Revising the entry for Florida;
0
b. Revising the entry for North Carolina; and
0
c. Adding footnotes 5, 6, and 7.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  80.27  Controls and prohibitions on gasoline volatility.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *

                               Applicable Standards \1\ 1992 and Subsequent Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              State                     May            June            July           August         September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Florida.........................             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0
Southeast Florida, Tampa Bay and             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0
 Jacksonville \5\...............
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
North Carolina:
    Triad \6\...................             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0
    Triangle \7\................             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0             9.0
    All other volatility                     9.0             7.8             7.8             7.8             7.8
     nonattainment areas........
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
\5\ The standard for Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Palm Beach and Pinellas Counties from June 1 until
  September 15 in 1992 through 2013 was 7.8 psi.
\6\ The standard for Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties and a portion of Davie County from June 1 until
  September 15 in 1992 through 2013 was 7.8 psi.
\7\ The standard for Durham and Wake Counties, and a portion of Dutchville Township in Granville County from
  June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through 2013 was 7.8 psi.


[[Page 17896]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-06863 Filed 3-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P