Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Modifications to
Reformulated Gasoline Covered Area Provisions
Related Material
[Federal Register: June 4, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 107)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 38398-38403]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04jn02-15]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[FRL-7222-5]
RIN 2060-AK07
Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Modifications to
Reformulated Gasoline Covered Area Provisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In today's final action, EPA is making several minor
modifications to its reformulated gasoline (RFG) regulations to reflect
changes in the covered areas for the federal RFG program, and to delete
obsolete language and clarify existing language in the provisions
listing the federal RFG covered areas. These changes include: Deleting
the seven southern counties in Maine from the RFG covered areas list,
reflecting their opt-out of the RFG program as of March 10, 1999;
adding the Sacramento Metro and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas
to the list of RFG covered areas, reflecting the Sacramento Metro
Area's inclusion in the RFG program as of June 1, 1996 and the San
Joaquin Valley Area's inclusion in the RFG program on December 10,
2002; and deleting the text which extended the RFG opt-in provisions to
all ozone nonattainment areas including previously designated ozone
nonattainment areas, reflecting a court decision in January, 2000,
which invalidated this language. This direct final action also makes
certain other minor changes in the provisions listing the RFG covered
areas for purposes of clarification.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on August 5, 2002, without
further notice, unless EPA receives substantive adverse comments by
July 5, 2002. If substantive adverse comments are received, EPA will
publish a timely
[[Page 38399]]
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that this direct final rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be mailed (in duplicate if possible) to John
Brophy, Office of Transportation and Air Quality (mail code 6406J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Building, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20460, and to the following
docket address: Docket A-2001-32, Air Docket Section, Mail
Code 6102, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460, in room M-1500 Waterside Mall. Materials
relevant to today's rulemaking have been placed in the Docket
A-2001-32 at the docket address \saves\rules.xmllisted
above, and may be inspected on business days from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket material.
Materials relevant to today's rulemaking regarding the removal of
the seven Maine counties from the federal RFG program are also
available for public inspection during normal business hours, by
appointment at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA-New England, One Congress Street, 11th
floor, Boston, MA and the Bureau of Air Quality Control, Department of
Environmental Protection, 71 Hospital Street, Augusta, ME 04333. For
further information, contact Robert C. Judge at (617) 918-1045.
Materials relevant to today's rulemaking regarding the self-
executing change in status of the Sacramento Metro and San Joaquin
Valley nonattainment areas are also available for inspection during
normal business hours in the Air Docket, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. This rule and the Technical Support
Documents for the proposed actions are also available in the air
programs section of EPA Region 9's website, http://www.epa.gov/
region09/air. Interested persons may make an appointment with Ms.
Virginia Peterson at (415) 744-1265, to inspect the docket
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying
docket material.
There are several other dockets that may also contain related
materials of interest to the public:
Materials relevant to EPA's approval of a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maine are available for public
inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the Office
of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA;
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Room M-1500, 401 M Street, (Mail Code 6102),
SW., Washington, DC; and the Bureau of Air Quality Control, Department
of Environmental Protection, 71 Hospital Street, Augusta, ME 04333. For
further information, contact Robert C. Judge at (617) 918-1045.
Materials regarding the reclassification of the Sacramento Metro
Area as a "Severe" ozone nonattainment area are in Docket
A-94-09. The docket is located at the Air Docket Section,
Mail Code 6102, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20460, in room M-1500 Waterside Mall.
Documents may be inspected on business days from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket material.
Materials regarding the reclassification of the San Joaquin Valley
Area as a "Severe" ozone nonattainment area are available
for inspection during normal business hours in the Air Docket, EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. This rule and
the Technical Support Documents for the proposed actions are also
available in the air programs section of EPA Region 9's website, http:/
/www.epa.gov/region09/air. Interested persons may make an appointment
with Ms. Virginia Peterson at (415) 744-1265, to inspect the
docket between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket material.
Materials regarding the extension of the RFG opt-in provisions to
all ozone nonattainment areas including previously designated ozone
nonattainment areas, and the January, 2000, court decision, are in
Docket A-96-30. The docket is located at the Air Docket
Section, Mail Code 6102, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460, in room M-1500 Waterside Mall.
Documents may be inspected on business days from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket material.
Materials relevant to the removal of the Phoenix area from the
federal RFG program are in Docket A-98-23. The docket is
located at the Air Docket Section, Mail Code 6102, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460, in room
M-1500 Waterside Mall. Documents may be inspected on business
days from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying docket material.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Brophy, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW (Mail Code 6406J), Washington, DC 20460, (202) 564-9068, e-
mail address: brophy.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability on the Internet
Copies of this final rule are available electronically from the EPA
Internet Web site. This service is free of charge, except for your
existing cost of Internet connectivity. An electronic version is made
available on the day of publication on the primary Internet site listed
below. The EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality will also
publish this final rule on the secondary Web site listed below.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/ (either select desired date
or use Search feature),
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ (look in What's New or under the specific
rulemaking topic).
Please note that due to differences between the software used to
develop the document and the software into which the document may be
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc. may occur.
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this action are those which
produce, import, supply or distribute gasoline. Regulated categories
and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry........................ Refiners, importers, oxygenate
blenders, terminal operators,
distributors, retail gasoline
stations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your business would have been regulated by this action, you should
carefully examine the list of areas covered by the reformulated
gasoline program in Sec. 80.70 of Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR). If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
[[Page 38400]]
I. Opt-Out of Maine Nonattainment Areas
EPA's reformulated gasoline (RFG) regulations include a list of
geographic areas that are covered areas for purposes of the RFG
program. 40 CFR 80.70. Section 80.70(j) identifies the nonattainment
areas that opted into the RFG program at the beginning of the program.
Seven Maine counties opted into the RFG program at that time and are
listed in Sec. 80.70(j)(5). Section 80.70(l) provides that,
upon the effective date for removal under Sec. 80.72(a), a
geographic area that has opted out of the RFG program shall no longer
be considered a covered area.
On March 5, 1999, EPA approved an opt-out petition submitted by the
Governor of Maine, and the seven Maine counties of Androscoggin;
Cumberland; Kennebec; Knox; Lincoln; Sagadahoc; and York were removed
from the RFG program effective March 10, 1999.\1\ With today's direct
final rule, EPA is amending Sec. 80.70(j)(5) of EPA's RFG
regulations by removing the seven listed Maine counties to reflect that
they are no longer covered areas in the federal RFG program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Published elsewhere in the Notice section of today's
Federal Register EPA announces and describes its approval of Maine's
opt-out petition according to the procedures set forth in 40 CFR
80.72. These regulatory provisions were established pursuant to
authority under sections 211(c) and (k) and 301(a) of the Clean Air
Act to provide criteria and general procedures for a state to opt-
out of the RFG program where the state had previously voluntarily
opted into the program. See 61 FR 35673 (July 8, 1996); 62 FR 54552
(October 20, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Inclusion of Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley as Covered Areas
Under Clean Air Act section 211(k)(10)(D), any ozone nonattainment
area that is reclassified as a Severe ozone nonattainment area becomes
an RFG covered area effective one year after its reclassification. 42
U.S.C. 7545(k)(10)(D).
Effective June 1, 1995, the Sacramento, California, ozone
nonattainment area was reclassified from a Serious to a Severe ozone
nonattainment area. 60 FR 20237 (April 25, 1995). The Sacramento ozone
nonattainment area, therefore, became an RFG covered area as of June 1,
1996.
Effective December 10, 2001, the San Joaquin Valley, California,
ozone nonattainment area was reclassified from a Serious to a Severe
ozone nonattainment area.\2\ The San Joaquin Valley ozone nonattainment
area, therefore, will become an RFG covered area as of December 10,
2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In a final rulemaking, EPA took action to change the
boundary for the San Joaquin Valley serious ozone nonattainment area
by separating out the eastern portion of Kern County into its own
nonattainment area. See 66 FR 56483 (November 8, 2001). EPA extended
the attainment deadline for the new East Kern County serious ozone
nonattainment area from November 15, 1999 to November 15, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In today's direct final rule, EPA is amending Sec. 80.70 to
reflect that the Sacramento nonattainment area became a covered area in
the federal RFG program by operation of law on June 1, 1996 and that
the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area will become a covered area in
the federal RFG program by operation of law on December 10, 2002.\3\
These amendments, in combination with the amendment described in
Section I above, will bring the regulations into conformity with the
existing status of "covered areas" in the RFG program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published on July
11, 1997, EPA proposed to update the list of RFG covered areas in
Sec. 80.70 to include the Sacramento nonattainment area. See
62 FR 37338. In that notice EPA proposed regulatory text describing
the Sacramento covered area by its geographic boundaries, however,
in today's final rule we are instead describing the Sacramento
covered area by reference to the geographic description of its
nonattainment area boundaries as specified in 40 CFR part 81,
subpart C. We note also that the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley
areas currently receive gasoline that complies with California's
State reformulated gasoline (CaRFG) program, and that such gasoline
is generally covered by EPA enforcement exemptions. See 64 FR 49992
(Sept. 15, 1999); 40 CFR 80.81.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Deletion of Opt-In Language
Section 80.70(k) of the RFG rule as originally promulgated provided
that any area classified as a Marginal, Moderate, Serious, or Severe
ozone nonattainment area may be included as an RFG covered area (i.e,
"opt-in") upon petition of the governor of the state in
which the area is located.\4\ EPA subsequently modified this language
to provide that any area "currently or previously designated as a
nonattainment area for ozone" may be included as an RFG covered
area. 63 FR 52094 (September 29, 1998). This modification was
subsequently challenged in the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit, which found that EPA lacked authority to
promulgate this modification. American Petroleum Institute v. EPA., 198
F.3d 275 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Therefore, with today's direct final rule,
EPA is amending Sec. 80.70 to remove the text which extended
the opt-in provisions and reinstate the language of this section as
originally promulgated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 59 FR. 7716 (February 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Additional Changes to Sec. 80.70
Today's rule revises the introductory text of Sec. 80.70(j)
to distinguish the nonattainment areas that have opted into the RFG
program from those that are required to be in the program under the
Clean Air Act. In addition, today's rule revises the text of sections
80.70(l) and (n) to make these provisions clearer. These minor
revisions are strictly organizational and do not change the substance
or intent of these provisions in any way. Today's rule also removes the
current provisions of Sec. 80.70(m) relating to Phoenix as an
opt-in covered area, since the Phoenix area is no longer a covered area
as of June 10, 1998.\5\ The provisions for the Sacramento and San
Joaquin Valley covered areas, described above, are included in a new
Sec. 80.70(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Published on August 11, 1998, in the Federal Register
(at 63 FR 43044) is a public announcement of EPA's approval of the
Arizona Governor's petition and the effective date of the Phoenix
opt-out. The opt-out effective date for the Phoenix area was June
10, 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Public Participation
EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. This rule will be effective August 5, 2002, without
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by July 5,
2002. If EPA receives substantive adverse comments on this action, we
will publish in the Federal Register a timely withdrawal of the direct
final rule informing the public that this direct final rule will not
take effect. EPA considers each element of today's direct final rule to
be independent and severable, therefore, if we receive adverse comment
we will withdraw only those elements (an amendment, section or
paragraph) of this action that are addressed by such comments.
EPA is publishing separately, in the "Proposed Rules"
section of today's Federal Register, a notice of proposed rulemaking
that incorporates each of the regulatory amendments included in this
direct final rule. In the event that EPA receives adverse comment on
all or part of this direct final rule, we will proceed according to
ordinary notice and comment rulemaking procedures. We will address all
adverse public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
rule. Any parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at
this time.
Today's amendments to the CFR reflect changes that have occurred in
separate actions in accordance with EPA's regulations and the CAA. This
rule is not itself an approval of Maine's or Arizona's opt-out
request Agency
[[Page 38401]]
action approving those petitions occurred earlier in separate
administrative proceedings. Similarly, neither the reclassification of
the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas, nor the
self-executing change in status of these areas to RFG "covered
areas," are dependent on today's action. EPA is simply modifying
the list of covered areas in the RFG regulations, 40 CFR 80.70, so the
list will reflect EPA's earlier approval of the Maine and Arizona opt-
out requests, and the self-executing change in the status of the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas. Thus, the
various elements of today's direct final rule involve little or no
exercise of agency discretion. Rather today's actions essentially are
ministerial regulatory amendments.
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (Oct. 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 entitlement, 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 rule is not a "significant
regulatory action" under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and
is therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
Today's rule merely amends EPA's regulations to reflect the current
status of covered areas within the RFG program. These various changes
in status are not dependant on today's rulemaking, but have occurred
(or will occur) as the result of separate agency action and self-
executing statutory provisions. However, the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information collection
requirements contained in the existing [RFG]
regulations [CFR
citation 40 CFR part 80, Subparts D, E an F,]
under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0277 (EPA ICR No. 1591.13).
Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, by
mail at the Office of Environmental Information, Collection Strategies
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822); 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at
farmer.sandy@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy
may also be downloaded off the internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr.
Include the ICR and / or OMB number in any correspondence.
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 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. 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 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.
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 rule, therefore, is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
D. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks 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 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.
EPA interprets Executive Order 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 final rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 because it does
[[Page 38402]]
not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.
E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, entitled "Federalism" (64 FR
43255, Aug. 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 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. This final rule simply makes
several minor modifications in the regulations to reflect changes in
the covered areas for the federal RFG program, and to delete obsolete
language and clarify existing language in the provisions listing the
federal RFG covered areas. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to this rule.
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 ("NTTAA"), Pub L. No. 104-113, section
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 action does not involve technical standards. This final rule
simply makes several minor modifications in the regulations to reflect
changes in the covered areas for the federal RFG program, and to delete
obsolete language and clarify existing language in the provisions
listing the federal RFG covered areas. Therefore, EPA did not consider
the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
G. Congressional Review
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 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. 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(a).
H. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.
EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule. EPA has also
determined that this rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. For purposes of assessing
the impact of today's rule on small entities, small entities are
defined as: (1) A firm having no more than 1,500 employees and no more
than 75,000 barrels per day capacity of petroleum-based inputs,
including crude oil or bona fide feedstocks; \6\ according to
Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards established under
the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS); (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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Capacity includes owned or leased facilities as well
as facilities under a processing agreement or an agreement such as
an exchange agreement or a throughput. The total product to be
delivered under the contract must be at least 90 percent refined by
the successful bidder form either crude oil or bona fide feedstocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
This final rule will not impose any requirements on small entities.
Today's rule revises the introductory text of Sec. 80.70(j) to
distinguish the nonattainment areas that have opted into the RFG
program from those that are required to be in the program under the
Clean Air Act. In addition, today's rule revises the text of
Sec. 80.70(l) and (n) to make these provisions clearer. These
minor revisions are strictly organizational and do not change the
substance or intent of these provisions in any way. Today's rule also
removes the current provisions of Sec. 80.70(m) relating to
Phoenix as an opt-in covered area, since the Phoenix area is no longer
a covered area as of June 10, 1998. Published on August 11, 1998, in
the Federal Register (at 63 FR 43044) is a public announcement of EPA's
approval of the Arizona Governor's petition and the effective date of
the Phoenix opt-out. The opt-out effective date for the Phoenix area
was June 10, 1998. The provisions for the Sacramento and San Joaquin
Valley covered areas, described above, are included in a new
Sec. 80.70(m).
Today's amendments to the CFR reflect changes that have occurred in
separate actions in accordance with EPA's regulations and the CAA. This
rule is not itself an approval of Maine's or Arizona's opt-out
request Agency action approving those petitions occurred earlier
in separate administrative proceedings. Similarly, neither the
reclassification of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment
areas, nor the self-executing change in status of these areas to RFG
"covered areas," are dependent on today's action. EPA is
simply modifying the list of covered areas in the RFG regulations, 40
CFR 80.70, so the list will reflect EPA's earlier approval of the Maine
and Arizona opt-out requests, and the self-executing change in the
status of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas.
Thus, the various elements of today's direct final rule involve little
or no exercise of agency discretion. Rather today's actions essentially
are ministerial regulatory amendments.
I. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled "Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments" (59 FR 22951, Nov.
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
[[Page 38403]]
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."
Today's rule does not have tribal implications and 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 final rule simply makes several minor modifications in the
regulations to reflect changes in the covered areas for the federal RFG
program, and to delete obsolete language and clarify existing language
in the provisions listing the federal RFG covered areas. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
J. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, "Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use" (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
VII. Statutory Authority
The Statutory authority for the action today is granted to EPA by
sections 211(c) and (k), 301, and 307 of the Clean Air Act, as amended;
42 U.S.C. 7545(c) and (k), 7601, 7607; and 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
VIII. 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 5, 2002. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Imports,
Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 23, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
40 CFR part 80 is amended as follows:
PART 80 [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 114, 211, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545 and 7601(a)).
2. Section 80.70 is amended by revising the paragraph (j)
introductory text, removing and reserving paragraph (j)(5), revising
paragraphs (k), (l), and (m) and removing paragraph (n) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.70 Covered areas.
* * * * *
(j) Any other area classified under 40 CFR part 81, subpart C as a
marginal, moderate, serious, or severe ozone nonattainment area may be
included as a covered area on petition of the Governor of the State in
which the area is located. The ozone nonattainment areas listed in this
paragraph (j) opted into the reformulated gasoline program prior to the
start of the reformulated gasoline program. These areas are covered
areas for purposes of subparts D, E, and F of this part. The geographic
extent of each covered area listed in this paragraph (j) shall be the
nonattainment area boundaries as specified in 40 CFR part 81, subpart
C.
* * * * *
(k) The ozone nonattainment areas included in this paragraph (k)
have opted into the reformulated gasoline program since the beginning
of the program, and are covered areas for purposes of subparts D, E,
and F of this part. The geographic extent of each covered area listed
in this paragraph (k) shall be the nonattainment area boundaries as
specified in 40 CFR part 81, subpart C.
(1) The St. Louis, Missouri, ozone nonattainment area is a covered
area beginning June 1, 1999. The prohibitions of section 211(k)(5) of
the Clean Air Act apply to all persons in the St. Louis, Missouri,
covered area, other than retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers,
beginning May 1, 1999. The prohibitions of section 211(k)(5) of the
Clean Air Act apply to retailers and wholesale purchase-consumers in
the St. Louis, Missouri, area beginning June 1, 1999.
(2) [Reserved]
(l) Upon the effective date for removal of any opt-in area or
portion of an opt-in area included in an approved petition under
Sec. 80.72(a), the geographic area covered by such approval
shall no longer be considered a covered area for purposes of subparts
D, E, and F of this part.
(m) Effective one year after an area has been reclassified as a
Severe ozone nonattainment area under section 181(b) of the Clean Air
Act, such Severe area shall also be a covered area under the
reformulated gasoline program. The ozone nonattainment areas included
in this paragraph (m) were reclassified as Severe ozone nonattainment
areas, and are covered areas for purposes of subparts D, E, and F of
this part. The geographic extent of each covered area listed in this
paragraph (m) shall be the nonattainment area boundaries as specified
in 40 CFR part 81, subpart C.
(1) The Sacramento, California, ozone nonattainment area, was
redesignated as a Severe ozone nonattainment area effective June 1,
1995, and is a covered area for purposes of subparts D, E, and F of
this part beginning on June 1, 1996.
(2) The San Joaquin Valley, California, ozone nonattainment area
was redesignated as a Severe ozone nonattainment area effective
December 10, 2001, and is a covered area for purposes of subparts D, E,
and F of this part beginning on December 10, 2002.
[FR Doc. 02-13976 Filed 6-3-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20090510215222im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}