[Federal Register: October 7, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 194)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 57815-57820]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07oc03-11]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[FRL-7566-6 ]
Use of Alternative Analytical Test Methods in the Reformulated
Gasoline, Anti-Dumping, and Tier 2 Gasoline Sulfur Control Programs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This direct final rule allows the use of certain alternative
analytical test methods for measuring sulfur in gasoline and butane to
be used in the Federal reformulated gasoline (RFG) and anti-dumping
program and the Federal gasoline sulfur control program. This direct
final rule also establishes that a refinery may use any reasonable test
method designed for measuring the sulfur content of butane until
January 1, 2004. After that date, either the designated analytical test
method or an allowed alternative analytical test method must be used.
The purpose of today's rule is to grant temporary flexibility until we
issue a comprehensive performance-based analytical test methods rule
and to fulfill the terms of a recent settlement agreement related to
gasoline sulfur test methods.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective December 8, 2003, unless we
receive adverse comments or a request for a public hearing by November
6, 2003. If the Agency receives adverse comments or a request for
public hearing, we will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
December 8, 2003.
ADDRESSES: To request a public hearing, please contact Anne
Pastorkovich, Attorney/Advisor, Transportation & Regional Programs
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., (6406J), Washington, DC 20460 or by e-mail to pastorkovich.anne-marie@epa.gov. No confidential business information
(CBI) should be submitted by e-mail.
EPA has established a public docket for this direct final rule
under Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0050, which is available for public
viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (EPA/DC)
in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center is (202) 566-1742. An electronic version of the
public docket is available through EPA Dockets (EDOCKET) at http://www.epa.gov/edocket.
Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments,
access the index listings of the contents of the public docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the
docket ID number identified above.
Any comments related to the direct final rule should be submitted
to EPA within 30 days of this notice, and according to the following
detailed instructions: Submit your comments to EPA online using EDOCKET
(our preferred method) or by mail to EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency (6102T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
20460.
EPA's policy is the public comments, whether submitted
electronically or in paper format, will be made available for public
viewing in EDOCKET as EPA receives them and without charge, unless the
comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
public disclosure is otherwise restricted by statute, is not included
in the official public docket, and will not be available for public
[[Page 57816]]
viewing in EDOCKET. For further information about the electronic
docket, see EPA's Federal Register notice describing the electronic
docket at 67 FR 38102 (May 31, 2002), or go to http://www.epa.gov/edocket
.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you would like further information
about this rule or to request a hearing, contact Anne Pastorkovich,
Attorney/Advisor, Transportation & Regional Programs Division, (202) 564-8987 or by e-mail at pastorkovich.anne-marie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by the action are those that use
analytical test methods to comply with the RFG, anti-dumping, and
gasoline sulfur control program. Regulated categories and entities
include:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICSs SIC Codes
Category Codes \a\ \b\ Examples of potentially regulated parties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry......................... 324110 2911 Petroleum refiners.
Industry......................... 422710 5171 Gasoline Marketers and Distributors.
422720 5172
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
\b\ Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists all entities that we are now aware could
potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not
listed in this table could also be regulated by this action. To
determine whether your business is regulated by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability criteria in part 80 of Title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations. If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
person listed in the preceding section of this document.
II. Background and Summary of Today's Action
Section 211(k) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) directs EPA to establish
standards requiring the greatest reduction in emissions of ozone
forming volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and toxic air emissions
achievable through the reformulation of conventional gasoline,
considering cost, other health and environmental factors and energy
requirements. The Act requires that RFG meet certain content standards
for oxygen, benzene, and heavy metals. RFG must be used in certain
ozone nonattainment areas, called ``covered areas.'' The CAA also
requires EPA to establish anti-dumping standards applicable to
conventional gasoline used in the rest of the country. The
Administrator signed the final RFG and anti-dumping regulations on
December 15, 1993\1\ and these regulations became effective in January
1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Standards for
Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline--Final Rule,'' 59 FR 7812
(February 16, 1994). See 40 CFR part 80 subparts D, E, and F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2000, EPA issued regulations establishing lower sulfur content
requirements for all gasoline \2\ and establishing stricter tailpipe
emissions standards for all passenger vehicles, including sport utility
vehicles (SUVs), minivans, vans and pick-up trucks. The gasoline sulfur
control program begins phasing-in in 2004, and, in general, refiners
must meet a refinery average sulfur standard of 30 ppm beginning in
2005 and a per gallon cap standard of 80 ppm beginning in 2006 (with
the exception of challenged refiners, and gasoline sold in certain
western states subject to geographic phase-in).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Tier 2
Motor Vehicles Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control
Requirements--Final Rule,'' 65 FR 6698 (February 10, 2000). See also
40 CFR part 80 subpart H for regulations applicable to gasoline
sulfur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the RFG, anti-dumping and gasoline sulfur program, refiners,
importers, and oxygenate blenders are required to test RFG and
conventional gasoline for certain parameters, including sulfur levels,
aromatic content, benzene content, and oxygen content. Test methods for
determining these parameters are specified in the regulation. For the
sulfur content of gasoline, 40 CFR 80.46(a)(1) specifies American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard method D-2622-98,
entitled, ``Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products by
Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry'' as the
designated test method. In addition, the gasoline sulfur rulemaking
required a test method for determining the sulfur content of butane
blended into gasoline--ASTM standard method D 3246-96, entitled
``Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Gas by Oxidative
Microcoulometry.''
In the gasoline sulfur control rulemaking, we specifically
requested comments on the designated test method. We also requested
comments on other ASTM methods. After considering comments received
from the regulated industry during the gasoline sulfur rulemaking
process, including comments supportive of ASTM D 2622-98 as the
designated method, we decided to require the use of ASTM D 2622-98 for
measuring sulfur content. We did not name any alternative analytical
test methods because we anticipated that a comprehensive performance-
based analytical test method approach rule would be issued in the near
future. A comprehensive performance based test methods approach would
allow anyone to qualify additional analytical test methods for use in
demonstrating compliance with program requirements. We now know that a
comprehensive performance based test methods rulemaking will take more
time to complete than originally anticipated. We feel that permitting
specific ASTM test methods to be used as alternative analytical test
methods now provides a bridge to a more comprehensive performance based
test methods approach in the future and grants refiners, importers and
blenders significant flexibility and potential cost savings in meeting
their testing requirements.
As discussed in a May 16, 2003 Federal Register notice,\3\ Antek
Instruments, which manufactures testing equipment, filed a petition
challenging the final gasoline sulfur control rule. EPA and Antek
entered into negotiations and reached a proposed settlement agreement.
The proposed settlement agreement outlined a proposed rule which would
identify ASTM D 5453-00e1 as an alternative test method
refiners and importers could use to comply with the requirement to test
gasoline for sulfur content, provided
[[Page 57817]]
the test result is correlated with ASTM D 2622-98. In today's action,
EPA is revising its regulations to include such a provision. The
proposed settlement agreement was available for comment until June 16,
2003. No adverse comments were received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See ``Notice of Proposed Settlement Agreement; Request for
Public Comment,'' 68 FR 26604 (May 16, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons discussed above, we are revising 40 CFR 80.46(a) to
allow the use of ASTM D 5453-00e1, entitled ``Standard Test
Method for Determination of Total Sulfur in Light Hydrocarbons, Motor
Fuels and Oils by Ultraviolet Fluorescence,'' ASTM D 6428-99, entitled
``Test Method for Total Sulfur in Liquid Aromatic Hydrocarbons and
Their Derivatives by Oxidative Combustion and Electrochemical
Detection,'' and ASTM D 3120-96 (Reapproved 2002)e1,
entitled ``Standard Test Method for Trace Quantities of Sulfur in Light
Petroleum Hydrocarbons by Oxidative Microcoulometry.'' Refiners and
importers would be able to choose which of these test methods best fits
their needs for compliance measurements. We believe that permitting the
use of these test methods is desirable from the standpoint of
permitting regulated parties more flexibility. A refiner or importer
would be able to determine gasoline sulfur content using ASTM D 5453-
00e1 or any of the specified alternative analytical test
methods named in the rule, provided that the refiner or importer result
is correlated to ASTM D 2622-98.
In order to ``correlate'' a test result from an alternative test
method to the designated test method, a laboratory would have to
develop and apply a ``correlation equation'' to the alternative test
method result. Because the ``correlation equation'' is designed to
provide a prediction of the designated test method result from the use
of an alternative test method, the ``correlation equation'' eliminates
bias between the designated test method and the alternative test
method, so results may be compared between these methods. After
applying the correlation equation, the results obtained from an
alternative test method should be equivalent to the result you would
obtain if you had used the designated test method. Users of a
correlation equation should periodically verify its correlation to the
designated test method.
This direct final rule also permits the use of ASTM D 4468-85
(Reapproved 2000), ``Standard Test Method for Total Sulfur in Gaseous
Fuels by Hydrogenolysis and Rateometric Colorimetry'' as an alternative
test method for butane, because it is an ASTM approved method that some
refiners may elect to use. If a refiner, importer, or blender chooses
to measure butane levels with this alternative analytical test method,
the results must be correlated to D 3246-96, ``Standard Test Method for
Sulfur in Petroleum Gas by Oxidative Microcoulometry,'' which is the
test method currently designated in the existing rule.
Some refiners and butane suppliers expressed concern that the
designated test method is not currently in wide use. When we issued the
final gasoline sulfur control regulations, we did not intend to require
the use of this method until January 1, 2004. However, the final
regulation inadvertently did not specify that date and we are
clarifying the effective date by this action. Until January 1, 2004,
any test method may be used to test the sulfur content of butane.
We believe that this direct final rule, and our intent to establish
a comprehensive performance based test method approach in the future,
will advance the purposes of the ``National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995,'' (NTTAA) section 12(d) of Public Law 104-113,
and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119. Both of these
documents are designed to encourage the adoption of standards developed
by ``voluntary consensus bodies'' and to reduce reliance on government-
unique standards where such consensus standards would suffice. This
direct final rule would provide for the use of alternative test methods
for the measurement of sulfur in gasoline and butane under the RFG,
anti-dumping, and gasoline sulfur control programs. Allowing these test
methods, which are widely available and approved by ASTM, a ``voluntary
consensus body,'' is directly consistent with the goals of the NTTAA
and OMB Circular A-119.
Any environmental effects of today's proposed action would be
minimal, as it would merely grant limited flexibility to regulated
parties in their choice of test method for determining the sulfur
content of gasoline and butane. The economic effects of today's
proposed action are expected to be positive, since it permits regulated
parties the flexibility to choose the test method they will use to
comply with existing regulations.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51,735 (October 4, 1993)) the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.''
This direct final rule is not a significant regulatory action
within the meaning of the Executive Order. It will not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more and is not expected to
have any adverse economic effects as described in the Order. This
direct final rule does not raise issues of consistency with the actions
taken or planned by other agencies, will not materially alter the cited
budgetary impacts, and does not raise any novel legal or policy issues
as defined in the Order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This direct final rule would not add any new requirements involving
the collection of information as defined by the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Today's rule would only permit more
flexibility to parties in their choice of analytical test methods. OMB
has approved the information collection requirements contained in the
final reformulated gasoline (RFG) and anti-dumping rulemaking and
gasoline sulfur control rulemaking has assigned OMB control number
2060-0277.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of
[[Page 57818]]
information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of today's direct final rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that has not
more than 1,500 employees (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, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
We have therefore concluded that today's direct final rule will
relieve regulatory burden for all small entities. By permitting
alternative analytical test methods for the measurement of sulfur in
gasoline and butane, smaller entities will be granted greater
flexibility in performing compliance testing.
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, 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 EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
Today's rule contains no federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for state, local or tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duty
on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This direct 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. The direct final
rule is limited to permitting flexibility in the choice of test
methods. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this direct
final 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 6, 2000),
requires 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.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This direct final rule does not have tribal implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
This proposed rule would apply to parties required to test gasoline and
butane for gasoline and butane and does not impose any enforceable
duties on communities of Indian tribal governments. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
[[Page 57819]]
feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. This direct final 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.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This direct final rule is not an economically ``significant energy
action'' as defined in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it does not have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This direct final rule advances the goals of the NTTAA by adopting
test methods developed by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 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. 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.
804(2). This direct final rule will be effective December 8, 2003.
K. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
Statutory authority for today's direct final rule comes from
sections 211(c), 211(i) and 211(k) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7545(c) and
(k)). Section 211(c) and 211(i) allows EPA to regulate fuels that
contribute to air pollution which endangers public health or welfare,
or which impairs emission control equipment. Section 211(k) prescribes
requirements for RFG and conventional gasoline and requires EPA to
promulgate regulations establishing these requirements. Additional
support for the fuels controls in today's rule comes from sections
114(a) and 301(a) of the CAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Fuel additives,
Gasoline, Diesel, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 24, 2003.
Marianne Lamont Horinko,
Acting Administrator.
0
For the reasons described in the preamble, part 80 of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 80--[AMENDED]
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. Section 80.46 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (h) to read
as follows:
Sec. 80.46 Measurement of reformulated gasoline fuel parameters.
(a) Sulfur. Sulfur content of gasoline and butane must be
determined by use of the following methods:
(1) The sulfur content of gasoline must be determined by use of
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard method D
2622-98, entitled ``Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum
Products by Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry'' or
by one of the alternative methods specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section.
(2) Beginning January 1, 2004, the sulfur content of butane must be
determined by the use of ASTM standard method D 3246-96, entitled
``Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Gas by Oxidative
Microcoulometry'' or by the alternative method specified in paragraph
(a)(4) of this section.
(3) Any refiner or importer may use any of the following methods
for determining the sulfur content of gasoline; provided the refiner or
importer test result is correlated with the method specified in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section:
(i) ASTM standard method D 5453-00e1, entitled,
``Standard Test Method for Determination of Total Sulfur in Light
Hydrocarbons, Motor Fuels and Oils by Ultraviolet Fluorescence,'' or
(ii) ASTM standard method D 6428-99, entitled, ``Test Method for
Total Sulfur in Liquid Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Their Derivatives by
Oxidative Combustion and Electrochemical Detection,'' or
(iii) ASTM standard method D 3120-96 (Reapproved
2002)e1, entitled ``Standard Test Method for Trace
Quantities of Sulfur in Light Petroleum Hydrocarbons by Oxidative
Microcoulometry.''
(4) Beginning January 1, 2004, any refiner or importer may
determine the sulfur content of butane using ASTM standard method D
4468-85 (Reapproved 2000), ``Standard Test Method for Total Sulfur in
Gaseous Fuels by Hydrogenolysis and Rateometric Colorimetry, ``
provided that the refiner or importer result is correlated with the
method specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
(h) Incorporations by reference. ASTM standard methods D 3606-99,
entitled ``Standard Test Method for Determination of Benzene and
Toluene in Finished Motor and Aviation Gasoline by Gas
Chromatography;'' D 1319-02a, entitled ``Standard Test Method for
Hydrocarbon Types in Liquid Petroleum Products by Fluorescent Indicator
Adsorption;'' D 4815-99, entitled ``Standard Test Method for
Determination of MTBE, ETBE, TAME, DIPE, tertiary-Amyl Alcohol and
C1 to C4 Alcohols in Gasoline by Gas
Chromatography;'' D 2622-98, entitled ``Standard Test Method for Sulfur
in Petroleum Products by Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence
Spectrometry;'' D 3246-96, entitled ``Standard Test
[[Page 57820]]
Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Gas by Oxidative Microcoulometry;'' D
5191-01, entitled, ``Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of
Petroleum Products (Mini Method);'' D 5599-00, entitled, ``Standard
Test Method for Determination of Oxygenates in Gasoline by Gas
Chromatography and Oxygen Selective Flame Ionization Detection;'' D
5769-98, entitled, ``Standard Test Method for Determination of Benzene,
Toluene, and Total Aromatics in Finished Gasolines by Gas
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry,'' D 86-01, entitled, ``Standard Test
Method for Distillation of Petroleum Products at Atmospheric
Pressure;'' D 5453-00e1, entitled, ``Standard Test Method
for Determination of Total Sulfur in Light Hydrocarbons, Motor Fuels
and Oils by Ultraviolet Fluorescence;'' D 6428-99, entitled, ``Test
Method for Total Sulfur in Liquid Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Their
Derivatives by Oxidative Combustion and Electrochemical Detection;'' D
3120-96 (Reapproved 2002)e1, entitled ``Standard Test Method
for Trace Quantities of Sulfur in Light Petroleum Hydrocarbons by
Oxidative Microcoulometry;'' and D 4468-85 (Reapproved 2000),
``Standard Test Method for Total Sulfur in Gaseous Fuels by
Hydrogenolysis and Rateometric Colorimetry `` are incorporated by
reference in this section. These incorporations by reference were
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from the
American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. Copies may be inspected at the Air Docket
Center, room B-108, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Docket Nos.
A-97-03, A-2002-15 and OAR-2003-0050, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20460, or at the Office of the Federal Register,
National Archives and Records Administration, 800 North Capitol Street,
NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC.
0
3. Section 80.330 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.330 What are the sampling and testing requirements for
refiners and importers?
* * * * *
(c) Test method for measuring sulfur content of gasoline. (1) For
purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, refiners and importers shall
use the method provided in Sec. 80.46(a)(1) or one of the alternative
test methods listed in Sec. 80.46(a)(3) to measure the sulfur content
of gasoline they produce or import.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 80.340 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2)(ii) to read
as follows:
Sec. 80.340 What standards and requirements apply to refiners
producing gasoline by blending blendstocks into previously certified
gasoline (PCG)?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The testing must be performed by the method specified in Sec.
80.46(a)(2) or by the alternative method specified in Sec.
80.46(a)(4).
* * * * *
0
5. Section 80.350 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.350 What alternative sulfur standards and requirements apply
to importers who transport gasoline by truck?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) The sampling and testing shall be performed using the methods
specified in Sec. 80.330(b) and Sec. 80.46(a)(1) or one of the
alternative test methods listed in Sec. 80.46(a)(3), respectively.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-25133 Filed 10-6-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P