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
<![CDATA[
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 https://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,
https://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 https://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, https://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
