Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41731 

(5) First Checked Bag; 

(6) Second Checked Bag; 

(7) Excess Baggage (i.e., third checked 

bag or more); 

(8) Overweight/Oversized Baggage/ 

Sports Equipment; 

(9) Carry-On Baggage; 

(10) In-Flight Medical Equipment; 

(11) In-Flight Entertainment/Internet 

Access; 

(12) Sleep Sets; 

(13) In-Flight Food/Non Alcoholic 

Drinks; 

(14) Alcoholic Drinks; 

(15) Pets; 

(16) Seating Assignments; 

(17) Reservation Cancellation and 

Change Fees; 

(18) Charges for Lost Tickets; 

(19) Unaccompanied Minor/Passenger 

Assistance Fee; 

(20) Frequent Flyer Points/Points 

Acceleration (includes fees for 

purchasing travel with points or fees for 

purchases with points close to departure 

dates; Points Acceleration are fees for 

increased frequent flyer point 

accumulation); 

(21) Commissions on Travel 

Packages—Hotel/Car Rental/etc.; 

(22) Commissions on Travel 

Insurance; 

(23) Duty-Free and Retail Sales; 

(24) One-Time Access to Lounges; and 

(25) Other. 

P–9.1 Statement of Ancillary Revenues 

(a) This scheduled shall be filed 

semiannually by Group I air carriers 

with annual operating revenues below 

$20 million. 

(b) Data reported on this schedule 

shall be for ancillary revenues as 

defined as those charges paid by airline 

passengers that are not included in the 

passenger revenues. 

(c) Carriers shall submit the data 

using a comma separated value format 

as follows: 

(1) Carrier code; 

(2) Period end date (yyyymmdd); 

(3) Booking Fees (includes fees for 

telephone reservations, paper tickets, 

delivery); 

(4) Priority Check-In and Security 

Screening; 

(5) First Checked Baggage; 

(6) Second Checked Baggage; 

(7) Excess Baggage (i.e., third checked 

baggage or more); 

(8) Overweight/Oversized Baggage/ 

Sports Equipment; 

(9) Carry-On Baggage; 

(10) In-Flight Medical Equipment; 

(11) In-Flight Entertainment/Internet 

Access; 

(12) Sleep Sets; 

(13) In-Flight Food/Non Alcoholic 

Drinks; 

(14) Alcoholic Drinks; 

(15) Pets; 

(16) Seating Assignments; 

(17) Reservation Cancellation and 

Change Fees; 

(18) Charges for Lost Tickets; 

(19) Unaccompanied Minor/Passenger 

Assistance Fee; 

(20) Frequent Flyer Points/Points 

Acceleration (includes fees for 

purchasing travel with points or fees for 

purchases with points close to departure 

dates; Points Acceleration are fees for 

increased frequent flyer point 

accumulation); 

(21) Commissions on Travel 

Packages—Hotel/Car Rental/etc.; 

(22) Commissions on Travel 

Insurance; 

(23) Duty-Free and Retail Sales; 

(24) One-Time Access to Lounges; and 

(25) Other. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 7, 2011 

under authority delegated by 14 CFR 

385.19(a). 

Anne Suissa, 

Director, Office of Airline Information. 

[FR Doc. 2011–17652 Filed 7–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–HY–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 51 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–1076; FRL–9439–4] 

RIN 2060–AQ97 

Air Quality: Widespread Use for 

Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery 

and Stage II Waiver 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing criteria 

for determining whether onboard 

refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) is in 

widespread use for purposes of 

controlling motor vehicle refueling 

emissions throughout the motor vehicle 

fleet. The EPA is also proposing to 

determine the date at which such 

widespread use of ORVR will occur. 

Once the Administrator has determined 

that widespread use has occurred, the 

Administrator may waive Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act) statutory requirements for 

states to implement Stage II gasoline 

vapor recovery systems at gasoline 

dispensing facilities in areas classified 

‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ or ‘‘Extreme’’ for 

nonattainment of the ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). 

Based on the proposed criteria, the EPA 

is proposing to determine that June 30, 

2013, will be the date when 

‘‘widespread use’’ will occur and the 

Stage II waiver will be effective. This 

rulemaking was identified as an 

example of examining rules to make 

sure they are still achieving the 

environmental benefit that was 

originally intended. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 13, 2011. 

Public Hearing: If anyone contacts us 

requesting to speak at a public hearing 

on or before August 1, 2011, we will 

hold a public hearing. Additional 

information about the hearing would be 

published in a subsequent Federal 

Register notice. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–1076, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-rdocket@epamail.epa.gov, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

1076 

• Fax: 202–566–1541, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

1076 

• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, Attention Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–1076, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460, Mailcode: 6102T. Please 

include two copies if possible. 

• Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, 

Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–1076, Environmental 

Protection Agency in the EPA 

Headquarters Library, Room Number 

3334 in the EPA West Building, located 

at 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC. 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–2010– 

1076. 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 

http://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 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or e-mail. The 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
41732 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

http://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 e-mail 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through http:// 

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 EPA may not 

be able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about the EPA’s public docket, visit the 

EPA Docket Center homepage at 

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/ 

dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

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, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center in the EPA 

Headquarters Library, Room Number 

3334 in the EPA West Building, located 

at 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Lynn Dail, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Policy Division, Mail code C539–02, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

telephone (919) 541–2363; fax number: 

919–541–0824; e-mail address: 

dail.lynn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities directly affected by this 

action include states (typically state air 

pollution control agencies) and, in some 

cases, local governments that develop 

air pollution control rules that apply to 

areas classified as ‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ 

or ‘‘Extreme’’ for nonattainment of the 

ozone NAAQS. Individuals and 

companies that operate gasoline 

dispensing facilities may be indirectly 

affected by virtue of state action in State 

Implementation Plans (SIPs) that 

implement provisions resulting from 

final rulemaking on this action; many of 

these sources are in the following 

groups: 

Industry group SIC a NAICSb

Gasoline stations ......................................................................................................................................... 5541 447110, 447190 

aStandard Industrial Classification. 

b North American Industry Classification System. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to the EPA through 

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. 

C. How can I find information about a 

possible public hearing? 

Public Hearing: To request a public 

hearing or information pertaining to a 

public hearing on this document, 

contact Ms. Pamela S. Long, Air Quality 

Policy Division, Mail code C504–03, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

telephone (919) 541–0641, facsimile 

number (919) 541–5509, email address: 

long.pam@epa.gov. 

D. How is this preamble organized? 

The information presented in this 

preamble is organized as follows. 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

C. How can I find information about a 

possible public hearing? 

D. How is this preamble organized? 

II. Background 

A. What requirements for Stage II gasoline 

vapor recovery apply for ozone 

nonattainment areas? 

B. Stage II Vapor Recovery Systems 

C. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery 

(ORVR) Systems 

D. Incompatibility Between Some Vapor 

Recovery Systems 

E. Analytical Approach to Determining 

Whether ORVR Is In Widespread Use 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Estimated Cost Savings 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41733 

1See CAA section 182(b)(3), 42 U.S.C. 

7511a(b)(3). Originally, the section 182(b)(3) Stage 

II requirement also applied in all Moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas. However, under section 

202(a)(6) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(6), the 

requirements of section 182(b)(3) no longer apply in 

Moderate ozone nonattainment areas after EPA 

promulgated ORVR standards on April 6, 1994, 59 

FR 16262, codified at 40 CFR parts 86 (including 

86.098–8), 88 and 600. Under implementation rules 

issued in 2002 for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, 

EPA retained the Stage II-related requirements 

under section 182(b)(3) and as they applied for the 

1-hour ozone standard. 40 CFR 51.900(f)(5) and 40 

CFR 51.916(a). 

2Section 182(b)(3)(B) has the following effective 

date requirements for implementation of Stage II 

after the adoption date by a state of a Stage II rule: 

6 months after adoption of the state rule, for gas 

stations built after the enactment date (which for 

newly designated areas would be the designation 

date); 1 year after adoption date, for gas stations 

pumping at least 100,000 gal/month based on 

average monthly sales over 2-year period before 

adoption date; and 2 years after adoption, for all 

others. 

3See, e.g., Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, and Margo Tsirigotis Oge, Director, 

Office of Transportation and Air Quality, to 

Regional Air Division Directors, ‘‘Removal of Stage 

II Vapor Recovery in Situations Where Widespread 

Use of Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery is 

Demonstrated’’ (Dec. 12, 2006); see also, 

Memorandum from Stephen D. Page and Margo 

Tsirigotis Oge, ‘‘Removal of Stage II Vapor Recovery 

from Refueling of Corporate Fleets’’ (Nov. 28, 2007). 

Both of these memoranda are included in the 

docket for this proposed rulemaking, docket 

number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–1076. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Determination Under Section 307(d) 

VI. Statutory Authority 

II. Background 

A. What requirements for Stage II 

gasoline vapor recovery apply for ozone 

nonattainment areas? 

Under CAA section 182(b)(3), Stage II 

vapor recovery systems are required to 

be used at larger gasoline dispensing 

facilities located in ‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ 

and ‘‘Extreme’’ nonattainment areas for 

ozone.1 Based on deadlines established 

in the Act, within 24 months from the 

effective date of the initial area 

designation and classification, states 

must adopt a Stage II program into their 

SIPs, and the controls must be installed 

according to specified deadlines 

following state rule adoption. For 

existing facilities, the installation 

deadlines depend on the date the 

facilities were built and the monthly 

volume of gasoline dispensed. See CAA 

sections 182(b)(3)(A)–(B), and 324(a)– 

(c).2

However, the CAA provides 

discretionary authority to the EPA 

Administrator to, by rule, revise or 

waive the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement after the Administrator 

determines that ORVR is in widespread 

use throughout the motor vehicle fleet. 

See CAA section 202(a)(6). The EPA 

first began the phase-in of ORVR by 

requiring that 40 percent of passenger 

cars manufactured in model year 1998 

be equipped with ORVR. The ORVR 

requirement for passenger cars was 

increased to 100 percent by model year 

2000. Phase-in continued for other 

vehicle types and ORVR has been a 

requirement on virtually all new 

gasoline-powered motor vehicles 

(passenger cars, light trucks, and 

complete heavy-duty gasoline powered 

vehicles under 10,000 lbs gross vehicle 

weight rating (GVWR)) sold since model 

year 2006. See 40 CFR part 86. 

Currently, ORVR-equipped vehicles 

comprise approximately 64 percent of 

the in-service vehicle fleet nationwide, 

and account for around 74 percent of 

the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the 

nationwide fleet. The percentage of nonORVR vehicles and the percentage of 

VMT driven by those vehicles declines 

each year as these older vehicles wear 

out and are removed from service. Since 

certain vehicles are not required to have 

ORVR, including motorcycles and 

incomplete heavy-duty gasoline 

powered truck chassis, under current 

requirements the nationwide motor 

vehicle fleet would never be entirely 

equipped with ORVR. 

The EPA has been evaluating 

appropriate criteria for determining 

when widespread use of ORVR has 

occurred and for granting waivers to the 

section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirement 

and has issued policy memoranda 

addressing the issue in limited 

contexts.3 As discussed in these 

memoranda, the EPA interprets section 

202(a)(6) of the CAA to give discretion 

to the Administrator to revise or waive 

the section 182(b)(3) requirement when 

widespread use occurs either through a 

single national rulemaking or separate 

determinations for specific areas. By its 

terms, section 202(a)(6) does not specify 

the scope or type of motor vehicle fleet 

for which the EPA must find ORVR is 

in widespread use before revising or 

waiving the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement. Nor does the statutory 

language preclude revising or waiving 

the requirement for individual 

‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe’’ or ‘‘Extreme’’ 

nonattainment areas, or distinguishing 

between different types of areas (e.g., 

the EPA could determine widespread 

use has occurred at different times for 

different areas, and revise or waive 

section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirements 

accordingly). Therefore, the EPA retains 

significant discretion in this matter. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

available data and appropriate criteria 

for determining that widespread use of 

ORVR has occurred, the EPA is 

proposing a determination of ORVR 

widespread use and a general waiver of 

the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement effective nationwide, on 

June 30, 2013. If promulgated, this 

would apply to any area that currently 

requires a Stage II program under 

section 182(b)(3). Additionally, any 

nonattainment area classified ‘‘Serious,’’ 

‘‘Severe,’’ or ‘‘Extreme’’ for the first time 

after approximately January 1, 2011, 

would not be required to adopt and 

implement a new Stage II program 

under section 182(b)(3). This is because 

such areas, under the terms of section 

182(b)(3), would not be required to 

implement Stage II programs until 2 and 

a half years after such classification, 

which would be the effective date of the 

proposed widespread use determination 

and section 182(b)(3) waiver. 

We also propose that individual states 

(with or without existing Stage II 

programs) may separately submit SIP 

revisions to the EPA that demonstrate 

that ORVR widespread use has occurred 

(or will occur) on a date earlier than 

June 30, 2013, for areas in their states, 

and request that the EPA revise or waive 

the section 182(b)(3) requirement as it 

applies to only those areas. Such a 

separate demonstration would require 

an EPA rulemaking and the 

Administrator’s approval before it could 

be effective. States may use the 

procedures discussed in Section II E. 

titled Analytical Approaches to 

Determining Whether ORVR is in 

Widespread Use with area-specific data 

rather than the generalized, national 

data shown in Table 1 in that section. 

Subsequent to the effective waiver 

date of the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement, areas currently 

implementing SIP-approved Stage II 

programs, as a result of obligations 

under the 1-hour or 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, would be required to continue 

implementing these programs until an 

EPA SIP revision approves removal of 

the requirement from the state’s ozone 

implementation plan. Although the EPA 

is proposing to determine that ORVR is 

in widespread use as of June 30, 2013, 

states may prepare and submit SIP 

revisions before that date so that the 

EPA can review and approve such SIP 

revisions as soon as possible after June 

30, 2013. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
41734 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

4This designation is to distinguish them from 

vapor recovery systems on the transport tanker 

trucks that deliver gasoline to the service stations, 

which are known as Stage I systems. Stage I systems 

direct vapors from the underground storage tank at 

the service station back into the tanker truck as the 

underground tank is filled with liquid gasoline from 

the tanker truck. 

5The Petroleum Equipment Institute has 

published recommended installation practices (PEI/ 

RP300–93) and most states require inspection, 

testing, and evaluation before a system is 

commissioned for use. 

6 ‘‘Enforcement Guidance for Stage II Vehicle 

Refueling Control Programs’’ U.S. EPA, Office of Air 

and Radiation, Office of Mobile Sources, December 

1991. 

7 ‘‘Technical Guidance—Stage II Vapor Recovery 

Systems for Control of Vehicle Refueling at 

Gasoline Dispensing Facilities Volume I: Chapters’’ 

EPA–450/3–91–022a, November 1991. 

8Unlike Stage II, which is a requirement only in 

ozone nonattainment areas, ORVR requirements 

apply to vehicles everywhere. More detail on ORVR 

is available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/orvr.htm. 

To approve a SIP revision removing 

Stage II provisions, the EPA must ensure 

that such removal would not interfere 

with other applicable CAA requirements 

under section 110(l), which precludes 

the Administrator from approving a SIP 

revision if it would interfere with 

applicable CAA requirements (including 

attainment and maintenance of the 

ozone NAAQS). This is discussed in 

more detail in Section III of this 

preamble. Of course, even after the EPA 

takes final action to find widespread use 

of ORVR has occurred and issues a 

waiver of the section 182(b)(3) 

requirement, states remain free under 

CAA section 116 to choose to 

implement Stage II programs in any 

area, and would not be forced to remove 

existing Stage II provisions from a SIP. 

B. Stage II Vapor Recovery Systems 

When an automobile or other vehicle 

is brought into a service station to be 

refueled, the empty portion of the fuel 

tank on the vehicle contains gasoline 

vapors. When liquid gasoline is pumped 

into the partially empty gas tank the 

vapors are forced out of the tank as the 

tank fills with liquid gasoline. Where air 

pollution control technology is not 

used, these vapors are emitted into the 

air. In the atmosphere, these vapors can 

react with sunlight, nitrogen oxides and 

other volatile organic compounds to 

form ozone. In order to prevent this, the 

1990 CAA Amendments added section 

182(b)(3), requiring owners or operators 

of gasoline dispensing facilities in 

Moderate, Severe or Extreme ozone 

nonattainment areas to install and 

operate a system for recovery of gasoline 

vapor from the fueling of motor 

vehicles. This requirement only applies 

to facilities that sell more than a 

specified number of gallons per month 

and is set forth in sections 182(b)(3)(A)– 

(C) and 324(a)–(c). States were required 

to adopt rules for this requirement no 

later than 2 years after the enactment of 

the 1990 CAA Amendments. As a 

consequence of these provisions, gas 

station owners and operators in 

Moderate, Severe, or Extreme 

nonattainment areas have installed 

these vapor control systems, known as 

‘‘Stage II controls.’’ 4

Stage II control systems often have a 

rubber boot around the gasoline nozzle 

spout that fits snugly up to a vehicle’s 

gasoline fill pipe during refueling of the 

vehicle. Gasoline vapors from the fill 

pipe are forced into this sleeve (rubber 

boot) rather than emitted into the air. 

Typically, a separate hose allows the 

vapor to flow back into the underground 

gasoline storage tank. A concentric hose 

(one hose inside another) is commonly 

used; gasoline flows through one of the 

hoses into the vehicle and vapors flow 

back through the other hose into the 

dispenser and from there through 

underground piping to the underground 

storage tank. 

There are two basic approaches to 

Stage II vapor recovery: balance and 

vacuum assist. With a balance system, 

when gasoline in the underground tank 

is pumped into a vehicle, a positive 

pressure differential is created between 

the vehicle tank and the underground 

tank. This pressure differential draws 

the gasoline vapors from the vehicle fill 

pipe through the rubber boot and the 

concentric hoses and underground 

piping into the underground tank. This 

is known as a balance system, since the 

gasoline vapors from the vehicle tank 

flow into the underground tank to 

balance pressures. 

Another type of Stage II system uses 

a vacuum pump on the vapor return line 

to help draw vapors from the 

automobile fill pipe into the 

underground storage tank. An advantage 

of this type of system is that the rubber 

boot around the nozzle can be smaller 

and lighter (or not used at all) and still 

draw the vapors into the vapor return 

hose. This makes for an easier-to-handle 

nozzle, which is popular with 

customers. This type of Stage II system 

is known as a vacuum assist system. 

The in-use efficiency of a Stage II 

program is directly proportional to the 

proper installation, operation, and 

maintenance of the control equipment at 

the gasoline dispensing facilities.5

Damaged, missing, or improperly 

operating components or systems can 

significantly degrade the control 

effectiveness of a Stage II system. 

Experience has shown that frequent 

inspections are necessary to ensure that 

the Stage II equipment is working as 

designed. Although new Stage II 

equipment may be required to achieve 

95 percent control effectiveness at 

certification, studies have shown that 

in-use control efficiency depends on 

frequent inspection by state agencies 

and operator actions. The EPA guidance 

specifies minimum training, inspection, 

and testing criteria, and most states have 

adopted and supplemented these as 

deemed necessary for balance and 

vacuum assist systems.6 However, inuse effectiveness ultimately depends on 

the consistency of inspections, followup by state agencies, and follow through 

by operators to perform inspections and 

conduct maintenance in a correct and 

timely manner. The EPA studies have 

calculated in-use efficiencies of 92 

percent with semi-annual inspections, 

86 percent with annual inspections and 

62 percent with minimal or less 

frequent state inspections.7 In-use Stage 

II vapor recovery system efficiency 

depends heavily on inspection 

frequency and maintenance efforts and 

the vigilance of station owners and 

states in these areas. Thus, the in-use 

effectiveness of Stage II within any state 

or nonattainment area may vary over 

time. Nonetheless, for over 15 years this 

technology has provided substantial 

VOC emission reductions in ozone 

nonattainment areas, which needed 

those reductions to attain the ozone 

NAAQS as well as reductions in air 

toxic emissions such as benzene. 

C. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery 

(ORVR) Systems 

In addition to Stage II controls, the 

1990 CAA Amendments required 

another method of controlling these 

emissions. Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA 

requires an onboard system of capturing 

vehicle refueling emissions, commonly 

referred to as an ORVR system.8 ORVR 

consists of an activated carbon canister 

installed in the vehicle into which 

vapors being expelled from the vehicle 

fuel tank are forced to flow. There the 

vapors are captured by the activated 

carbon in the canister. When the engine 

is started, the vapors are drawn off of 

the activated carbon and into the engine 

where they are burned as fuel. The EPA 

promulgated ORVR standards on 

April 6, 1994, 59 FR 16262. 

Section 202(a) (6) of the CAA required 

that the EPA’s ORVR standards apply to 

light-duty vehicles manufactured 

beginning in the fourth model year after 

the model year in which the standards 

were promulgated, and that ORVR 

systems provide a minimum evaporative 

emission capture efficiency of 95 

percent. Section 202(a)(6) also provided 

that upon promulgation of the ORVR 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41735 

9See EPA Memorandum ‘‘Onboard Refueling 

Vapor Recovery Widespread Use Assessment.’’ A 

copy of this memorandum is located in the docket 

for this action, EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–1076. 10See Federal Register at 58 FR 9468 published 

February 19, 1993, and subsequent amendments 

and the latest OBD regulations at 40 CFR part 

86.1806–05 for program requirements in various 

years. 11The OBD system monitors virtually every 

component that can affect the emission 

performance of the vehicle to ensure that the 

vehicle remains as clean as possible over its entire 

life. If a problem is detected, the OBD system 

illuminates a warning lamp on the vehicle 

instrument panel to alert the driver. This warning 

lamp typically contains the phrase ‘‘Check Engine’’ 

or ‘‘Service Engine Soon.’’ The system will also 

store important information about the detected 

malfunction so that a repair technician can 

accurately find and fix the problem. Also, OBD 

system codes are interrogated and evaluated in over 

30 state operated vehicle emission inspection/ 

maintenance programs. 

12 ‘‘Effectiveness of OBD II Evaporative Emission 

Monitors—30 Vehicle Study,’’ EPA 420–R–00–018, 

October 2000. 

rules, Moderate ozone nonattainment 

areas are no longer subject to the section 

182(b)(3) Stage II requirement. However, 

the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement continues to apply for 

‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ and ‘‘Extreme’’ 

ozone nonattainment areas, unless and 

until under section 202(a)(6) the EPA 

finds that ORVR is in widespread use in 

the motor vehicle fleet and issues a rule 

waiving the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement. 

Automobile manufacturers began 

installing ORVR on new passenger cars 

in 1998 when 40 percent of new cars 

were required to have ORVR. The 

percentage of new cars with ORVR 

increased to 80 percent in 1999 and 100 

percent in 2000. ORVR for light duty 

trucks and vans (<6000 lbs GVWR began 

to phase in during 2001 with 40 percent 

of such new vehicles required to have 

ORVR in 2001, 80 percent in 2002 and 

100 percent in 2003. New heavier 

vehicles (6001–8500 lbs GVWR) were 

required to have 40 percent with ORVR 

by 2004, 80 percent by 2005 and 100 

percent by 2006. New trucks up to 

10,000 lbs GVWR manufactured as a 

complete chassis were all required to 

have ORVR by 2006. So, after 2006, 

most new gasoline-powered vehicles 

less than 10,000 lbs GVWR are required 

to have ORVR. 

ORVR does not apply to all vehicles, 

but those not covered by the ORVR 

requirement comprise a small 

percentage of the gasoline-powered 

highway vehicle fleet (approximately 

1.5 percent). The EPA estimates that 60 

to 65 percent of vehicles currently on 

the road have ORVR.9 This percentage 

will increase over time as older cars are 

replaced by new cars. However, under 

the current regulatory construct, it is 

likely that there will always be a small 

percentage of non-ORVR vehicles (lightduty or otherwise) on the roads, and 

therefore there will likely always be 

some very small percentage of gasoline 

refueling emissions that could not be 

captured by ORVR controls. 

Even prior to the EPA’s adoption of 

ORVR requirements, in 1993 the EPA 

adopted Onboard Diagnostic (OBD) 

System requirements for passenger cars 

and light trucks, and eventually did so 

for heavy-duty gasoline vehicles up to 

14,000 lbs GVWR.10 These systems are 

designed to monitor the in-use 

performance of various vehicle emission 

control systems and components 

including evaporative emission 

controls.11 ORVR systems are basically 

a subset of evaporative emission 

systems because they share the same 

vapor lines, purge valves, purge lines, 

and activated carbon canister. OBD II 

systems were phased in for these 

vehicle classes over the period from 

1994–1996 for lighter vehicles and 

2005–2007 for heavy-duty gasoline 

vehicles, so during the same time frame 

that manufacturers were implementing 

ORVR into their vehicles, they already 

had implemented or were implementing 

OBD II systems. 

In 2000, the EPA published a report 

addressing the effectiveness of OBD II 

control systems.12 This study concluded 

that enhanced evaporative and ORVR 

emission control systems are durable 

and low emitting relative to the FTP 

(Federal Test Procedure) enhanced 

evaporative emission standards and that 

OBD II evaporative emissions checks are 

a suitable replacement for functional 

evaporative emission tests in state 

inspection/maintenance programs. 

D. Incompatibility Between Some Vapor 

Recovery Systems 

When an ORVR vehicle is fueled at a 

service station equipped with a vacuum 

assist Stage II vapor recovery system, a 

lack of compatibility between the two 

controls may actually cause the 

emission reduction of the two systems 

together to be less than the emission 

reduction achieved by either system 

alone. The problem arises when the 

ORVR canister captures the gasoline 

emissions from the motor vehicle fuel 

tank. Instead of drawing vapor-laden air 

from the vehicle fuel tank into the 

underground storage tank, the vacuum 

pump of the Stage II system draws fresh 

air into the underground storage tank. 

The fresh air causes gasoline in the 

underground tank to evaporate inside 

the underground tank and thus creates 

an increase in pressure in the 

underground storage tank. As a result, 

gasoline vapors may be forced out of the 

underground storage tank vent pipe into 

the ambient air. This incompatibility 

can result in a 1 to 10 percent decrease 

in control efficiency over what would be 

achieved by either Stage II or ORVR 

alone. The decrease in efficiency varies 

depending on the vacuum assist 

technology design (including the ratio of 

volume of air drawn into the 

underground tank compared to the 

volume of gasoline dispensed), the 

gasoline Reid vapor pressure, the air 

and gasoline temperatures, and the 

fraction of throughput dispensed to 

ORVR vehicles. There are various 

technologies that address this 

incompatibility, such as nozzles that 

sense when fresh air is being drawn into 

the underground storage tank and stop 

the air flow. Another solution is the 

addition of processors on the 

underground storage tank vent pipe that 

capture or destroy the gasoline vapor 

emissions from the vent pipe. Installing 

these technologies adds to the expense 

of the control systems and is in some 

cases a reason to remove Stage II 

systems. 

E. Analytical Approach to Determining 

Whether ORVR Is in Widespread Use 

The EPA has considered several 

possible analytical approaches to 

determining when and whether ORVR is 

in widespread use in the motor vehicle 

fleet. The approach the EPA proposes to 

use here is to focus on the volume of 

gasoline that is dispensed into vehicles 

equipped with ORVR, and to compare 

the emissions reductions achieved by 

ORVR alone to the reductions that can 

be achieved by Stage II controls alone. 

Table 1 shows information related to 

the penetration of ORVR in the national 

motor vehicle fleet projected to 2020. 

The overall efficiency of ORVR at 

reducing refueling emissions increases 

as older vehicles are replaced by newer 

ORVR-equipped vehicles. Overall ORVR 

efficiency is shown in column 5 of 

Table 1 and is determined by 

multiplying the fraction of gasoline 

dispensed into ORVR-equipped vehicles 

by ORVR’s 98 percent control efficiency. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
41736 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

13Based on tests of over 1000 in-use ORVRequipped vehicles, the average in-use efficiency of 

ORVR is 98 percent. The legal requirement for 

ORVR is 95 percent efficiency. Thus, the actual 

reported control achieved in practice is greater than 

the statutorily required level of control. 

14See section 4.4.3 (especially Figure 4–14 and 

Table 4–4) in ‘‘Technical Guidance—Stage II Vapor 

Recovery Systems for Control of Vehicle Refueling 

Emissions at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, 

Volume I: Chapters,’’ EPA–450/3–91–022a, 

November 1991. A copy of this document is located 

in the docket for this action EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

1076. This is based on annual enforcement 

inspections and on allowable exemptions of 10,000/ 

50,000 gallons per month as described in section 

324a of the CAA. EPA recognizes that these two 

values vary by state and that in some cases actual 

in-use efficiencies, prescribed exemption levels, or 

both may be either higher or lower. 

TABLE 1—PROJECTED PENETRATION OF ORVR IN THE NATIONAL VEHICLE FLEET BY YEAR

1 2 3 4 5 

Calendar year 

Vehicle 

population 

percentage 

VMT percentage 

Gasoline 

dispensed 

percentage 

ORVR efficiency 

percentage 

2006 ................................................................................................. 39.5 48.7 46.2 45.3 

2007 ................................................................................................. 45.3 54.9 52.5 51.5 

2008 ................................................................................................. 50.1 60.0 57.6 56.4 

2009 ................................................................................................. 54.3 64.5 62.1 60.9 

2010 ................................................................................................. 59.0 69.3 66.9 65.6 

2011 ................................................................................................. 63.6 73.9 71.5 70.1 

2012 ................................................................................................. 67.9 78.0 75.6 74.1 

2013 ................................................................................................. 71.7 81.6 79.3 77.7 

2014 ................................................................................................. 75.2 84.6 82.6 80.9 

2015 ................................................................................................. 78.4 87.2 85.3 83.6 

2016 ................................................................................................. 81.2 89.4 87.7 85.9 

2017 ................................................................................................. 83.6 91.2 89.7 87.9 

2018 ................................................................................................. 85.6 92.7 91.3 89.5 

2019 ................................................................................................. 87.5 93.9 92.7 90.8 

2020 ................................................................................................. 89.0 94.9 93.9 92.0 

See the EPA Memorandum ‘‘Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery Widespread Use Assessment’’ in the docket (number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

1076) addressing details on issues related to values in this table. 

Note: In this table, the columns have the following meaning. 

1. Calendar year that corresponds to the percentages in the row associated with the year. 

2. Percentage of the gasoline-powered highway vehicle fleet that have ORVR. 

3. Percentage of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by vehicles equipped with ORVR. 

4. Amount of gasoline dispensed into ORVR-equipped vehicles as a percentage of all gasoline dispensed to highway motor vehicles. 

5. Percentage from the same row in column 4 multiplied by 0.98.13

The EPA estimates that the amount of 

control that ORVR alone would need to 

achieve to be equivalent to the amount 

of control Stage II alone would achieve 

is 77.4 percent. This estimate is based 

on the expected in-use control 

efficiency for a typical Stage II program 

in nonattainment areas under the 

hypothetical scenario that ORVR does 

not exist. The EPA estimates that 

nationally in areas where basic Stage II 

systems are used the control efficiency 

of Stage II gasoline vapor control 

systems is 86 percent. The use of this 

value depends on the assumption that 

annual inspections and appropriate 

maintenance are conducted in a correct 

and timely manner. This control 

efficiency is achieved only at refueling 

stations where a Stage II system is 

required to be installed, so not all of the 

gasoline dispensed in a nonattainment 

area is controlled by a Stage II system. 

The EPA estimates that the percentage 

of gasoline dispensed in an area that is 

covered by Stage II controls is 90 

percent.14 Multiplying the estimated 

efficiency of Stage II systems (86 

percent) by the estimated fraction of 

gasoline dispensed in nonattainment 

areas from Stage II-equipped gasoline 

pumps yields an estimate of the areawide control efficiency of Stage II 

programs of 77.4 percent (0.90 × 0.86 = 

0.774 or 77.4 percent). Table 1 indicates 

this level of control efficiency is 

expected to be achieved between the 

end of calendar year 2012 and the end 

of 2013. The EPA expects ORVR alone 

to achieve emissions reductions equal to 

Stage II alone during calendar year 

2013; therefore, the EPA is proposing to 

determine that ORVR will be in 

widespread use by June 30, 2013, or the 

midpoint of calendar year 2013. 

We also observe from Table 1 that by 

the end of calendar year 2012 more than 

75 percent of gasoline will be dispensed 

into ORVR-equipped vehicles. The EPA 

believes that this percentage of ORVR 

coverage (>75 percent) is substantial 

enough to inherently be viewed as 

‘‘widespread’’ under any ordinary 

understanding of that term. The 

dictionary defines ‘‘widespread’’ as 

meaning ‘‘widely diffused or prevalent.’’ 

Webster’s Ninth Collegiate Dictionary, 

1348 (1986). Seventy-five percent serves 

as a reasonable benchmark for this 

threshold, as it is substantially more 

than a majority value, and as it is not 

necessary for something to reach or 

approach a threshold of 100 percent for 

it to become ‘‘prevalent,’’ which is in 

turn defined as ‘‘generally or widely 

accepted, practiced or favored.’’ Id., at 

933. In Table 1, the percentage of VMT 

by ORVR-equipped vehicles (column 3) 

and the amount of gasoline dispensed 

into ORVR-equipped vehicles (column 

4) reach or exceed 75 percent between 

the end of year 2011 and end of 2012. 

The EPA believes this provides further 

support for establishing a widespread 

use date after the end of calendar year 

2012. 

III. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to determine 

that ORVR widespread use will occur at 

the mid-point in the 2013 calendar year, 

June 30, 2013. The EPA is proposing 

June 30, 2013, as the effective date for 

both the determination of ORVR 

widespread use and a waiver of the 

CAA section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement for ‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe’’ 

and ‘‘Extreme’’ ozone nonattainment 

areas. 

This ORVR widespread use 

determination and section 182(b)(3) 

waiver would apply to the entire 

country, including areas that are not 

now classified as ‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ 

or ‘‘Extreme’’ for ozone nonattainment 

but that may in the future be classified 

as ‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ or ‘‘Extreme’’ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41737 

15 ‘‘Removal of Stage II Vapor Recovery in 

Situations where Widespread Use of Onboard 

Refueling Vapor Recovery is Demonstrated,’’ from 

Stephen D. Page and Margo Tsirigotis Oge, EPA, 

December 12, 2006. 

(e.g., a current ozone nonattainment 

area that may be reclassified to 

‘‘Serious,’’ ‘‘Severe,’’ or ‘‘Extreme’’ as a 

result of a state’s request or as a 

consequence for failing to attain the 

ozone standard by the specified 

attainment date). 

If promulgated, the ORVR widespread 

use determination and section 182(b)(3) 

waiver determination would not 

obligate states to remove any existing 

Stage II vapor recovery requirements. 

For states that choose to remove the 

program, they will need to ensure that 

removal of the program does not 

interfere with attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS per CAA 

section 110(1). Using the effective date 

of an ORVR widespread use 

determination and waiver of the section 

182(b)(3) Stage II requirement, states 

that wish to act upon the Stage II waiver 

and remove existing EPA-approved 

Stage II requirements from their SIPs 

would need to submit a SIP revision 

requesting the EPA to approve such 

action that is effective after the June 30, 

2013, date. States would not need to 

wait until June 30, 2013, to submit such 

SIP revision subject to the provisions of 

CAA section 110(1). 

In their SIP analysis, states may elect 

to conduct area-specific analyses, 

specifying parameters that are reflective 

of the types and ranges of equipment 

and operating patterns in use in the 

relevant area. Such an individualized 

analysis performed by a state may 

demonstrate that there are benefits to 

retaining the program beyond the 

widespread use date established by the 

EPA through national analysis. States 

may choose to continue to require or 

enhance Stage II controls in a particular 

area if they continue to achieve air 

quality benefits. Jurisdictions that 

choose to continue using Stage II 

systems after the widespread use date 

should consider taking appropriate 

actions to correct any excess emission 

incompatibility between ORVR and 

vacuum assist Stage II systems. 

Section 110(l) precludes the 

Administrator from approving a SIP 

revision if it would interfere with 

applicable CAA requirements 

(including, but not limited to, 

attainment and maintenance of the 

ozone NAAQS and achieving reasonable 

further progress). Some states may find 

that by removing Stage II requirements 

they are reducing the overall level of 

reductions for which they have 

previously obtained credit. Such states 

would need to show that foregoing any 

additional VOC emissions reductions 

resulting from Stage II would not 

interfere with attaining and maintaining 

the ozone NAAQS in violation of 

section 110(l). In such circumstances it 

is possible that additional emissions 

reductions may be needed to offset the 

removal of Stage II. It should also be 

noted that removing Stage II may affect 

mobile source emissions budgets, so we 

urge states to consult with the state and 

local transportation agencies. States 

could choose to keep Stage II for an 

additional period of time to allow 

further ORVR penetration in the motor 

vehicle fleet or to obtain equivalent 

emissions reductions from other 

sources. 

In previous memoranda, the EPA 

provided guidance to states on removing 

Stage II at refueling facilities dedicated 

to certain segments of the motor vehicle 

fleet (e.g., new automobile assembly 

plants, rental car facilities, E85 

dispensing pumps, and corporate fleet 

facilities). In these specific cases where 

all or nearly all of the vehicles being 

refueled are ORVR-equipped, the EPA 

could conservatively conclude that 

widespread use of ORVR had occurred 

in these fleets. We indicated that we 

could approve a SIP revision removing 

Stage II requirements from these 

facilities with a demonstration that 95 

percent of the fleet being refueled is 

equipped with ORVR.15 This guidance 

was based on the EPA’s assessment that 

removing Stage II controls at facilities 

meeting this criterion would not result 

in a significant increase in VOC 

emissions in the nonattainment area and 

thus would likely satisfy the conditions 

of CAA section 110(l). The EPA 

continues to believe this is sound 

guidance in areas where Stage II is 

currently being implemented, and is 

unaffected by the national widespread 

use determination proposed in this 

notice. 

The EPA is also proposing that states 

may demonstrate that ORVR widespread 

use has occurred in specific areas 

sooner than the general, national date of 

June 30, 2013. States would do so by 

applying the same rationale the EPA is 

proposing to apply to the national fleet 

characteristics to area-specific motor 

vehicle fleet information. A state that 

provides such a demonstration may 

request that the Administrator establish 

a different effective date for waiver of 

the section 182(b)(3) requirement in a 

specific area. If the Administrator grants 

such a waiver for an area currently 

implementing a Stage II program, the 

state may request removal of the 

program from the SIP subject to the 

constraints of other applicable 

provisions of law. 

States in the Ozone Transport Region 

(OTR) are also subject to a separate 

Stage II-related requirement. Under 

section 184(b)(2) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 

7511c(b)(2)), all areas in the OTR, both 

attainment and nonattainment areas, 

must implement either Stage II or 

measures that achieve comparable 

emissions reductions. This independent 

requirement is not affected by any 

widespread use determination or waiver 

of the section 182(b)(3) Stage II 

requirement granted under section 

202(a)(6). The section 184(b)(2) Stage IIrelated requirement for the OTR will 

continue to remain in place even after 

the ORVR widespread use 

determination and section 182(b)(3) 

waiver effective date. This is because 

the section 184(b)(2) requirement does 

not impose Stage II per se, but rather is 

a requirement that OTR states achieve 

an amount of emissions reductions that 

corresponds to the amount that Stage II 

would achieve. Moreover, section 

202(a)(6), in allowing for a waiver of the 

section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirement 

for nonattainment areas, does not refer 

to the independent section 184(b)(2) 

requirement. Thus, all areas in the OTR 

that are implementing Stage II controls 

under the requirements of both section 

182(b)(3) and section 184(b)(2), or under 

section 184(b)(2) alone, would need to 

have adopted measures that achieve 

emissions reductions that are at least 

equivalent to those achievable by Stage 

II, incremental to ORVR, before the EPA 

could approve a SIP revision removing 

Stage II controls. The EPA intends to 

provide additional guidance for OTR 

states on how they can conduct updated 

comparability analyses based on the 

‘‘Stage II Comparability Study for the 

Northeast Ozone Transport Region,’’ 

(EPA–452/R–94–011; January 1995) for 

purposes of removing Stage II under 

section 184(b)(2). 

Before deciding to remove Stage II, 

state and local agencies should also 

consider any transportation conformity 

impacts related to removing Stage II if 

emissions reductions from Stage II are 

included in a SIP-approved on-road 

motor vehicle emissions budget. States 

may need to adjust conformity budgets 

or the components of the budget if 

removing Stage II requirements after the 

widespread use date would alter 

expected air quality benefits. 

We request comment on all aspects of 

our treatment of the ORVR widespread 

use and section 182(b)(3) waiver issue, 

including any additional information 

that would assist the EPA in 

determining when ORVR widespread 

use will occur. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
41738 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

IV. Estimated Cost Savings 

The EPA has conducted an initial 

assessment of the costs and savings to 

gasoline dispensing facility owners 

related to this proposed action. A report 

titled, ‘‘Draft Regulatory Support 

Document, Decommissioning Stage II 

Vapor Recovery, Financial Benefits and 

Costs,’’ is available in the public docket 

for this action. The report examines the 

initial costs and savings to facility 

owners incurred in the 

decommissioning of Stage II vapor 

recovery systems, as well as changes in 

recurring costs associated with above 

ground hardware maintenance, 

operations, and administrative tasks. 

The EPA estimates cost savings of about 

$3,277 per year for a typical gasoline 

dispensing facility, and an annual 

nationwide savings of $88 million if 

Stage II is phased out of the 

approximately 27,000 dispensing 

facilities outside of California that are 

required to have Stage II vapor recovery 

systems under section 182(b)(3) of the 

CAA. The EPA is also taking comment 

on this analysis and the implications to 

the Stage II waiver. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 

action is a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ because it raises novel legal or 

policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates. Accordingly, the EPA 

submitted this action to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review under Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 

2011) and any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). It does not 

contain any recordkeeping or reporting 

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 these proposed regulations on small 

entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A 

small business as defined in 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-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of these proposed regulations 

on small entities, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This proposed 

rule will not impose any requirements 

on small entities. Rather, it provides 

criteria for reducing existing regulatory 

requirements on entities. 

We continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of these proposed 

regulations on small entities and 

welcome comments on issues related to 

such impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for state, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any state, local or tribal governments, or 

the private sector. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

proposed action addresses the removal 

of a requirement regarding gasoline 

vapor recovery equipment, but does not 

impose any obligations to remove these 

programs. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action 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 action does 

not impose any new mandates on state 

or local governments. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, 

and consistent with the EPA policy to 

promote communications between the 

EPA and state and local governments, 

the EPA specifically solicits comments 

on this proposed rule from state and 

local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). 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. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

The EPA specifically solicits 

additional comment on this proposed 

rule from tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only 

to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

EO 13045 because it does not establish 

an environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ as defined in Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. It 

does not impose additional costs on 

gasoline distribution, but rather 

promises to lower cost for gasoline 

vapor control by facilitating removal of 

redundant controls. 

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, 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 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41739 

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 rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, the EPA 

is not considering 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 

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 

proposed 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 level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. This action proposes 

to waive the requirement for states to 

adopt Stage II programs, based on a 

determination of widespread use of 

ORVR. The EPA believes that by the 

date specified in the proposed rule, the 

amount of control that ORVR alone will 

achieve will be equivalent to the 

amount of control Stage II alone would 

achieve. 

K. Determination Under Section 307(d) 

Pursuant to sections 307(d)(1)(K) and 

307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA, the 

Administrator determines that this 

action is subject to the provisions of 

section 307(d). Section 307(d)(1)(V) 

provides that the provisions of section 

307(d) apply to ‘‘such other actions as 

the Administrator may determine.’’ 

VI. Statutory Authority 

The statutory authority for this action 

is provided by sections 182(b)(3) and 

202(a)(6) of the CAA, as amended (42 

U.S.C. 7511a(b)(3) and 42 

U.S.C.7521(a)(6)). This notice is also 

subject to section 307(d) of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7407(d)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: July 8, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

part 51 of chapter I of title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR 

PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND 

SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION 

PLANS 

1. The authority citation for part 51 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401– 

7671q. 

Subpart G—[Amended] 

2. Section 51.126 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 51.126 Determination of widespread use 

of ORVR and waiver of CAA section 

182(b)(3) Stage II gasoline vapor recovery 

requirements. 

(a) Pursuant to section 202(a)(6) of the 

Clean Air Act, the Administrator has 

determined that, effective June 30, 2013, 

onboard refueling vapor recovery 

(ORVR) systems are in widespread use 

in the motor vehicle fleet within the 

United States. 

(b) Effective June 30, 2013, the 

Administrator waives the requirement 

of Clean Air Act section 182(b)(3) for 

Stage II vapor recovery systems in ozone 

nonattainment areas regardless of 

classification. States must submit and 

receive the EPA approval of a revision 

to their State Implementation Plans 

before removing Stage II requirements 

that are contained therein. 

(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) 

and (b) of this section, States may 

submit to the EPA demonstrations that 

ORVR systems are in widespread use for 

areas within their borders as of a date 

earlier than June 30, 2013, and may 

request an earlier date for revision or 

waiver of the Clean Air Act section 

182(b)(3) Stage II requirement based on 

such a demonstration. The 

Administrator may act on such requests 

by rule under Clean Air Act section 

202(a)(6). 

[FR Doc. 2011–17888 Filed 7–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0454; FRL–9439–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Determination of Attainment 

and Determination of Clean Data for 

the Annual 1997 Fine Particle Standard 

for the Charleston Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make two 

determinations regarding the 

Charleston, West Virginia fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment 

area (hereafter referred to as ‘‘Charleston 

Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’). First, EPA is 

proposing to determine that the Area 

has attained the 1997 annual average 

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS). This proposed 

determination of attainment is based 

upon complete, quality-assured, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

the 2007–2009 period showing that the 

Charleston Area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS and data available 

to date for 2010 in EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) database that show the 

area continues to attain. If EPA finalizes 

this proposed determination of 

attainment, the requirements for the 

Charleston Area to submit attainment 

demonstrations and associated 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), a reasonable further progress 

(RFP) plan, contingency measures, and 

other planning State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revisions related to 

attainment of the standard shall be 

suspended for so long as the Area 

continues to attain the annual PM2.5

NAAQS. Second, EPA is also proposing 

to determine based on quality-assured 

and certified monitoring data for the 

2007–2009 monitoring period that the 

area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, by its applicable attainment 

date of April 5, 2010. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 15, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

regarding the Charleston Area, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2011–0454, by one of the 

following methods: 

A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: 

fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0454, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS