RECORD OF CONFERENCE CALL

DATE: May 2 8 , 2011 EPA PARTICIPANTS: Scott Mathias, Rich Damberg, Lynn Dail, OAQPS; Glenn Passavant, OTAQ; Mike Thrift, OGC; Ariel Garcia, EPA Region 1; Kirk Wieber and Paul Truchan, Region 2; Brian Rehn, Region 3; Lynorae Benjamin and Dianna Smith, Region 4; Francisco Acevedo, Region 5; Carrie Paige, Region 6; Nicole Law and Jeffrey Buss, Region 9 OUTSIDE EPA PARTICIPANTS: Yasoob Zia and Vivian Aucoin, Louisiana; Guy Hoffman, Donna Huff, Walker Williamson, Santos Olivare z, Lisa Shuvalov, Texas; Chris Demeroukas, Illinois; Bob Lopez, Wisconsin; Gil Grodzinsky, Chuck Mueller, Jim Kelley, Georgia; Husain Waheed, Maryland; Chris Trostle and Arlene Schulman, Pennsylvania; Michael Sheehan, New York; Judy Rand, New Jersey; Bob G irard, Connecticut; Eileen Hiney, Massachusetts SUBJECT: Conference call regarding development of technical guidance on removing Stage II g asoline v apor r ecovery p rograms from State Implementation Plans and on a ssessing c omparable control m easures
AGENDA **Guidance on Phasing Out Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery** EPA- State Discussion Group February 28, 2012 Agenda 1. Scope of Discussions 2. Schedule of Discussions & Reviews 3. Identifying the Issues Scope of Discussions  EPA’s goal is to develop and issue a guidance document to assist states in evaluating whether and how to phase out Stage II programs after EPA establishes that ORVR is in widespread use. Draft title “Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from SIPs and Assessing Comparable Mea sures”.  EPA is currently conducting rulemaking under CAA section 202(a)(6) on determining whether ORVR is in widespread use and on whether to revise or waive the section 182 Stage II requirement for Serious and above ozone nonattainment areas.  In this discussion group forum, EPA representatives will not discuss the issues proposed in that rulemaking and associated issues raised by significant public comments, and the approvability of future SIP revisions.  Issues within the scope of these EPA
- state discussions include: o Methods and calculations for evaluating the VOC emissions and/or ozone air quality impact of phasing out Stage II programso Assessments of what kinds of other control measures achieve emissions reductions

comparable to those from u sing Stage II o Decommissioning issues o General SIP revision planning Schedule of Discussions & Reviews  Suggest biweekly 1
- hour teleconferences  Suggest separate discussions for OTR and non
- OTR states Identifying the Issues EPA wants to know what states w ish to have covered in the guidance. Issues to address could include:

 Analyzing what control measures might be available for the section 184(b)(2) requirement for areas of the OTR to implement control measures capable of achieving emission reductions comparable to those achievable through Stage II controls  Estimating refueling displacement emissions  Estimating refueling spillage emissions  Estimating refueling fugitive emissions  Stage II and ORVR control efficiency estimates (refueling event and area
- wi de)  Estimating the emissions impact of incompatibility between ORVR and Stage II controls  Estimating the annual incremental emissions control benefit of Stage II over ORVR  Developing annual area
-wide VMT & gasoline consumption estimates for ORVR
- equipped v ehicles  Estimating cost and cost - effectiveness for maintaining Stage II programs  Evaluating air quality impact considerations  Additional guidance for centrally
-fueled fleets  Decommissioning issues  Possible Stage II phase
- out strategies  General 110( l) requi rement for SIP revisions DISCUSSION: Conference call held to initiate discussions on EPA’s intent to develop guidance for States seeking to dismantle their 182(b)(3) stage II vapor recovery programs and for states in the ozone transport region to assess c omparable measures in lieu of implementing stage II vapor recovery programs. The aforementioned agenda was followed . Comments from participants included: There is a need to understand the relationship of 184 requirements to anti
- backsliding requirements . Cost for decommissioning Stage II.Some states may not remove Stage II and if so, they may be upgrading to enhanced Stage II systems.

Use of vacuum assist and compatible nozzles. NOx versus VOC substitution issues Bi -weekly meetings suggested. SIP revis ions for establishing date other that what EPA proposed. Widespread use of ORVR is a separate action by EPA. Impact characterization of emission reductions. Emission impacts of phasing out Stage II programs.