Jump to main content.

Approval of Colorado's Petition to Relax the Federal Gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure Volatility Standard for 1998, 1999, and 2000 



[Federal Register: June 10, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 111)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 31682-31684]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10jn98-41]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL-6106-5]

 
Approval of Colorado's Petition to Relax the Federal Gasoline 
Reid Vapor Pressure Volatility Standard for 1998, 1999, and 2000

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) 
proposes to approve the State of Colorado's January 21, 1998, petition 
to relax the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) standard that applies to 
gasoline introduced into commerce in the Denver-Boulder area from June 
1 to September 15. The Agency proposes to approve a relaxation of the 
federal RVP standard for this area from 7.8 pounds per square inch 
(psi) to 9.0 psi for the years 1998, 1999, and 2000, as an amendment to 
EPA's gasoline volatility regulations. In the final rules section of 
this Federal Register, the EPA is promulgating this amendment as a 
direct final rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a 
noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed 
rationale for this action is set forth in the direct final rule. If no 
relevant adverse comments are received in response to that direct final 
rule, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this proposed 
rule. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule 
will be withdrawn and all relevant comments received will be addressed 
in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this rulemaking.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received in writing by 
July 10, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this rulemaking have been placed in 
Docket A-98-04 by EPA. The docket is located at the Docket Office of 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, 
DC, 20460, Room M-1500 in Waterside Mall and may be inspected from 8:30 
a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. A duplicate public docket CO-
RVP-98 has been established at U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO, 80202-2466, and is 
available for inspection during normal working hours. Interested 
persons wishing to examine the documents in this docket should make

[[Page 31683]]

an appointment with the appropriate contact at least 24 hours before 
the visiting day. Contact Scott P. Lee at (303) 312-6736. As provided 
in 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket 
material. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate if possible) to 
the dockets listed above, with a copy forwarded to Marilyn Winstead 
McCall, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fuels and Energy 
Division, 401 M Street, SW. (Mail Code: 6406J), Washington, D. C. 
20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Winstead McCall at (202) 564-
9029.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Public Participation and Effective Date

    The direct final rule will become effective on July 27, 1998 
without further notification unless the Agency receives relevant 
adverse comments on this proposed rulemaking within 30 days of this 
document. Should the Agency receive such comments, it will publish a 
document informing the public that the rule did not take effect. All 
relevant public comments received within the 30-day comment period will 
then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposal. No 
second comment period on this rule will be instituted.

B. Environmental Impact

    This proposed amendment is not expected to have any adverse 
environmental effects. The Denver-Boulder six-county area has met the 
1-hour NAAQS for ozone since 1987. Current air quality is expected to 
be further maintained by a 9.0 psi RVP gasoline standard.

C. Economic Impact

    The proposed continued relaxation of the 7.8 psi RVP gasoline 
standard to 9.0 psi will avoid a cost increase in gasoline supply 
levels in the Denver-Boulder area. No new economic burdens will be 
placed on the local refining industry to implement a change in the RVP 
standard.

D. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866,\1\ the Agency must determine whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB 
review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) raise novel, legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    It has been determined that this proposed rule is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 
12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB review. Specifically, this 
proposed rule will not have an annual effect on the economy in excess 
of $100 million, have a significant adverse impact on competition, 
investment, employment or innovation, or result in a major price 
increase. In fact, as discussed elsewhere, this proposed action will 
reduce the cost of compliance with Federal requirements in this area.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501, EPA must 
obtain OMB clearance for any activity that will involve collecting 
substantially the same information from ten or more non-Federal 
respondents. This proposed rule does not create any new information 
requirements or contain any new information collection activities.

F. Regulatory Flexibility

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to 
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice 
and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that 
the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small 
governmental jurisdictions. This proposed rule would not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because 
the overall impact of this proposed rule is a net decrease in 
requirements on all entities including small entities. Therefore, I 
certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.

G. Unfunded Mandates

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 
that the Agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before 
promulgating a rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in 
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or 
by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Section 
203 requires the Agency to establish a plan for obtaining input from 
and informing, educating, and advising any small governments that may 
be significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
    Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must 
be prepared. The Agency must select from those alternatives the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the Agency explains why 
this alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative 
is inconsistent with the law.
    The Agency has determined that this proposed rule does not include 
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. This proposed rule reduces costs to 
such entities by relaxing a regulatory requirement. Because small 
governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by this 
proposed rule, the Agency is not required to develop a plan with regard 
to small governments.

H. 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 August 10, 1998. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of the final rule 
does not affect the finality of the rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

I. Electronic Copies of Rulemaking

    A copy of this proposed action is available on the Internet at 
www.epa.gov/OMSWWW under the title: ``Relaxation of Federal Gasoline 
RVP Standard in Denver-Boulder Metropolitan Area.''

[[Page 31684]]

J. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for the action proposed in this notice 
today is granted to EPA by sections 211 and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act 
as amended (42 U.S.C. 7545 and 7601(a)).

K. Children's Health Protection

    This proposed rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not involve 
decisions on environmental health risks or safety risks that may 
disproportionately affect children.

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: May 28, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-15450 Filed 6-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.