Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 14729 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: February 27, 2007. 

Steve Rothblatt, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. E7–5654 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0976; FRL–8292–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Control of Gasoline Volatility 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of Ohio 

on February 14, 2006 and October 6, 

2006, establishing a lower Reid Vapor 

Pressure (RVP) fuel requirement for 

gasoline distributed in the Cincinnati 

and Dayton 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas. Ohio has developed these fuel 

requirements to reduce emissions of 

volatile organic compounds (VOC) in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is proposing 

to approve Ohio’s fuel requirements into 

the Ohio SIP because EPA has found 

that the requirements are necessary for 

the Cincinnati and Dayton areas to 

achieve the 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). 

This action is being taken under section 

110 of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 30, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2006–0976, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

• Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 a.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–

0976. 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 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means 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 EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

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, 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 EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, 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 instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document. 

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, e.g., 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 Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone 

Francisco J. Acevedo, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, at (312) 886–6061 

before visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Francisco J. Acevedo, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Criteria Pollutant 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061, 

acevedo.francisco@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My 

Comments for EPA? 

II. Description of the SIP Revision and EPA’s 

Action. 

A. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

B. What Is Reid Vapor Pressure? 

C. What Are the Relevant Clean Air Act 

Requirements? 

D. How Has the State Met the Test Under 

Section 211(c)(4)(C)? 

E. What Are the Relevant Energy Policy 

Act Requirements? 

F. How Has the State Met the Relevant 

Energy Policy Act Requirements? 

G. Why Is EPA Taking This Action? 

H. What Other Relevant Materials Has the 

State Submitted? 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through http:// 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14730 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 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 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. 

B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—The EPA may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Description of the SIP Revision and 

EPA’s Action 

A. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

On April 15, 2004, the EPA 

designated 5 counties in Cincinnati, 

Ohio (Hamilton, Butler, Clinton, Warren 

and Clermont counties—CincinnatiHamilton, OH-KY-IN) and 4 counties in 

Dayton, Ohio (Clark, Greene, Miami, 

and Montgomery counties—DaytonSpringfield, OH) as nonattainment for 

the 8-hour ozone standard. Both areas 

have been designated Basic 

nonattainment with respect to the 8- 

hour ozone standard and they are 

required to attain the standard as 

expeditiously as practicable, but no later 

than June 2009. 

As part of the State of Ohio’s (Ohio) 

efforts to bring these areas into 

attainment, the State is adopting and 

implementing a broad range of ozone 

control measures including control of 

emissions from auto refinishing 

operations, the reduction of VOC 

emission from portable fuel containers, 

the adoption of industrial solvent 

degreasing rules, and the 

implementation of a 7.8 pound per 

square inch (psi) RVP fuel program. 

Ohio originally proposed to replace 

the State’s vehicle inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) program in 

Cincinnati and Dayton, which was 

discontinued by the State on December 

31, 2005, with the requirement to 

supply 7.8 psi RVP gasoline to these 

areas starting in 2006. However, the 

State has since modified its original 

request and has asked that EPA act on 

the state’s fuel waiver request to allow 

the use of 7.8 psi RVP gasoline in both 

areas. On February 14, 2006, Ohio 

submitted the fuel waiver request as a 

SIP revision and the submittal included 

adopted amended rules under Ohio 

Administrative Code Chapter 3745–72 

‘‘Low Reid Vapor Pressure Fuel 

Requirements’’ to require the use of 7.8 

psi RVP gasoline in the Cincinnati and 

Dayton areas beginning on June 1, 2006. 

Soon after the State’s February 14, 

2006 submittal, the American Petroleum 

Institute (API) appealed the State’s 7.8 

psi RVP rule on the basis that there was 

insufficient time to implement the rule 

and that EPA had not yet issued a 

waiver under section 211(c)(4)(C) of the 

CAA, as amended. EPA conducted an 

informal survey of gasoline suppliers 

and determined that there was not 

enough 7.8 psi RVP gasoline to supply 

the Cincinnati and Dayton 

nonattainment areas during the 2006 

ozone season. As part of the State’s 

settlement with API on its appeal, Ohio 

agreed to revise the rule to delay the 

effectiveness of the rule until twelve 

months following the approval of a fuel 

waiver by EPA in order to ensure that 

there is sufficient time for the regulated 

community to prepare for the change. 

On July 10, 2006, the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(OEPA) adopted amended rules under 

the Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 

3745–72 ‘‘Low Reid Vapor Pressure Fuel 

Requirements’’ to modify the 

implementation date for the required 

use of 7.8 psi RVP gasoline in the 

Cincinnati and Dayton areas to be one 

year after the approval of a fuel waiver 

under CAA amendments section 

211(c)(4)(C). Public hearings on the 

amended rules were held on June 2, 

2006, in Columbus, Ohio and the rules 

became effective on July 17, 2006. 

The OEPA submitted these amended 

low-RVP rules to EPA as a revision to 

the SIP on October 6, 2006. As part of 

the October 6, 2006 submittal, OEPA 

included additional technical support 

for the SIP revision, including 

documentation supporting the State’s 

request to waive the CAA preemption of 

State fuel controls pursuant to section 

211(c)(4) of the CAA. The 

documentation demonstrates that a lowRVP fuel is critical to the Cincinnati and 

Dayton ozone nonattainment areas 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

B. What Is Reid Vapor Pressure? 

Reid Vapor Pressure, or RVP, is a 

measure of a gasoline’s volatility at a 

certain temperature and is a 

measurement of the rate at which 

gasoline evaporates and emits VOCs; the 

lower the RVP, the lower the rate of 

evaporation. The RVP of gasoline can be 

lowered by reducing the amount of its 

more volatile components, such as 

butane. Lowering RVP in the summer 

months can offset the effect of high 

summer temperatures upon the 

volatility of gasoline, which, in turn, 

lowers emissions of VOC. Because VOC 

is a necessary component in the 

production of ground level ozone in hot 

summer months, reduction of RVP will 

help areas achieve the NAAQS for 

ozone and thereby produce benefits for 

human health and the environment. 

The primary emission reduction 

benefit from low-RVP gasoline used in 

motor vehicles comes from reductions 

in VOC evaporative emissions; exhaust 

emission reductions are much smaller. 

Because oxides of nitrogen (NOX) are a 

product of combustion from motor 

vehicles, they will not be found in 

evaporative emissions, and low-RVP 

gasoline will have little or no effect on 

NOX. 

C. What Are the Relevant Clean Air Act 

Requirements? 

In determining the approvability of a 

SIP revision, EPA must evaluate the 

proposed revision for consistency with 

the requirements of the CAA and EPA 

regulations, as found in section 110 and 

part D of the CAA and 40 CFR part 51 

(Requirements for Preparation, 

Adoption, and Submittal of 

Implementation Plans). 

For SIP revisions approving certain 

state fuel measures, an additional 

statutory requirement applies. CAA 

section 211(c)(4)(A) prohibits state 

regulations respecting a fuel 

characteristic or component for which 

EPA has adopted a control or 

prohibition under section 211(c)(1), 

unless the state control is identical to 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 14731 

the federal control. Section 211(c)(4)(C) 

provides an exception to this 

preemption if EPA approves the state 

requirements in a SIP. Section 

211(c)(4)(C) states that the 

Administrator may approve an 

otherwise preempted state fuel standard 

in a SIP: 

Only if he finds that the State control or 

prohibition is necessary to achieve the 

national primary or secondary ambient air 

quality standard which the plan implements. 

The Administrator may find that a State 

control or prohibition is necessary to achieve 

that standard if no other measures that would 

bring about timely attainment exist, or if 

other measures exist and are technically 

possible to implement, but are unreasonable 

or impracticable. 

EPA’s August, 1997 ‘‘Guidance on 

Use of Opt-in to RFG and Low RVP 

Requirements in Ozone SIPs’’ gives 

further guidance on what EPA is likely 

to consider in making a finding of 

necessity. Specifically, the guidance 

recommends breaking down the 

necessity demonstration into four steps: 

(1) Identifying the quantity of 

reductions needed to reach attainment; 

(2) identifying other possible control 

measures and the quantity of reductions 

each measure would achieve; (3) 

explaining in detail which of those 

identified control measures are 

considered unreasonable or 

impracticable; and, (4) showing that, 

even with the implementation of all 

reasonable and practicable measures, 

the state would need additional 

emission reductions for timely 

attainment, and that the state fuel 

measure would supply some or all of 

such additional reductions. 

EPA has evaluated the submitted SIP 

revision and has determined that it is 

consistent with the requirements of the 

CAA, EPA regulations, and conforms to 

EPA’s completeness criteria in 40 CFR 

part 51, Appendix V. Further, EPA has 

looked at Ohio’s demonstration that the 

low-RVP fuel control is necessary in 

accordance with Section 211(c)(4)(C) of 

the CAA and agrees with the State’s 

conclusion that a fuel measure is 

needed to achieve the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

The SIP submittal contains: (1) 7.8 

low vapor pressure gasoline waiver 

request for Cincinnati and Dayton; (2) 

Amendments to Ohio Administrative 

Code, Chapter 3745–72 ‘‘Low Reid 

Vapor Pressure Fuel Requirements’’, 

effective January 16, 2006 and July 17, 

2006; (3) Additional support for 7.8 

Reid Vapor Pressure fuel waiver dated 

October 6, 2006; and, (4) the public 

hearing records dated December 7, 2005 

and June 2, 2006. 

D. How Has the State Met the Test 

Under Section 211(c)(4)(C)? 

CAA section 211(c)(4)(A) preempts 

certain state fuel regulations by 

prohibiting a State from prescribing or 

attempting to enforce any control or 

prohibition respecting any characteristic 

or component of a fuel or fuel additive 

for the purposes of motor vehicle 

emission control if the Administrator 

has prescribed under section 211(c)(1) a 

control or prohibition applicable to such 

characteristic or component of the fuel 

or fuel additive, unless the state 

prohibition is identical to the 

prohibition or control prescribed by the 

Administrator. 

EPA has adopted federal RVP controls 

under CAA sections 211(c) and 211(h). 

See 56 FR 64704 (December 12, 1991). 

These regulations are found in 40 CFR 

80.27. The State of Ohio is currently 

required under the federal rule to meet 

a 9.0 psi RVP standard. See 40 CFR 

80.27(a)(2). 

As stated previously, a State may 

prescribe and enforce an otherwise 

preempted low-RVP requirement only if 

the EPA approves the control into the 

State’s SIP. In order to approve a 

preempted state fuel control into a SIP, 

EPA must find that the state control is 

necessary to achieve a NAAQS because 

no other measures that would bring 

about timely attainment exist or that 

such measures exist but are either not 

reasonable or practicable. Thus, to 

determine whether Ohio’s low-RVP rule 

is necessary to meet the ozone NAAQS, 

EPA must consider whether there are 

other reasonable and practicable 

measures available to produce the 

emission reductions needed to achieve 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

To estimate the emission reductions 

needed in the Cincinnati and Dayton 

areas to achieve attainment of the ozone 

NAAQS, EPA used modeling 

information developed by the Lake 

Michigan Air Directors Consortium 

(LADCO). This analysis used the CAMx 

(Comprehensive Air Quality Model with 

Extensions) photochemical dispersion 

model to simulate expected 

concentrations throughout much of the 

Eastern United States. Using procedures 

recommended by EPA, LADCO used 

modeling results for 2002 and 2009 to 

estimate the reduction in ozone 

concentrations expected to occur by 

2009. These results project that the 

emission reductions expected to occur 

by 2009 in the Cincinnati and Dayton 

areas will bring the areas into 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

standard. This modeling reflects 

emission reductions as if the vehicle 

inspection and maintenance program 

were still operating but with no 

reductions from low RVP gasoline. 

LADCO also modeled conditions for 

2008 and then projected concentrations 

to continue to exceed the standard. 

Therefore, EPA finds the level of 

emission reductions achieved by 2009 

to represent the reductions necessary to 

attain the standard. 

Interpretation of the quantity of 

emission reductions needed to attain the 

ozone standard is complicated by the 

fact that ozone results from chemical 

reactions involving both VOC and NOX. 

A given air quality improvement (e.g., 

attaining the standard) can result from 

a variety of combinations of reductions 

of the emissions of these two precursors. 

That is, the quantity of VOC emission 

reduction needed to attain the standard 

is in part a function of the quantity of 

NOX emission reduction expected to 

occur. 

While other combinations of VOC and 

NOX emission reduction would also be 

expected to provide for attainment, EPA 

is using the combination of VOC and 

NOX emissions modeled by LADCO to 

define the emission reductions needed 

to attain the standard in the Cincinnati 

and Dayton areas. By this means, EPA 

determined that the necessary emission 

reductions for VOC in the Cincinnati 

area is 47 tons per day and in the 

Dayton area is 21 tons per day, for a 

total of 68 tons per day. EPA considers 

these amounts as the necessary VOC 

emissions reductions based on an 

expectation that NOX emissions will 

simultaneously be reduced by 202 tons 

per day in the Cincinnati area and by 39 

tons per day in the Dayton area, for a 

total of 241 tons per day. 

Some of these emission reductions 

will be achieved by programs that have 

already been adopted, most notably 

including the Federal Motor Vehicle 

Control Program. In order to assess the 

need for low RVP fuel, EPA sought to 

estimate the quantity of emission 

reduction needed for attainment by 

2008 beyond the reductions provided by 

these programs. Because the modeling 

suggests attainment by 2009, one year 

after the date by which attainment must 

begin, the one year’s emission reduction 

(from 2008 to 2009) is an approximation 

of the additional emission reduction 

needed for the area to begin attaining by 

2008. EPA estimated this one year’s 

emission reduction as 1⁄7 of the emission 

reduction expected between 2002 and 

2009. Thus, EPA estimated that the 

additional emission reduction needed 

will be approximately 7 tons per day in 

the Cincinnati area and approximately 3 

tons per day in the Dayton area, for a 

total of approximately 10 tons per day 

in the Cincinnati/Dayton area. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14732 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Some features of these estimates 

warrant note. First, the deadline for 

Cincinnati and Dayton to meet the air 

quality standard is 2009, which means 

that any VOC reductions contributing to 

attainment would need to occur during 

the 2008 ozone season. Thus, the 

emission inventory and modeling 

information from LADCO do not 

directly assess whether the set of 

measures assumed in the analysis will 

suffice to assure timely attainment. 

Second, the emission inventory 

includes emission reductions that 

would be expected were Ohio to restart 

a vehicle inspection and maintenance 

program and does not include the 

emission reductions that are expected 

from use of low RVP gasoline. Third, 

while EPA believes that the modeling is 

adequate for purposes here, EPA 

recognizes that Ohio and other states are 

continuing to refine their emission 

inventories and modeling analyses, and 

EPA is not attempting to evaluate here 

whether the analysis would constitute 

an adequate attainment demonstration 

as required under CAA section 

172(c)(1). Moreover, under CAA section 

211(c)(4)(C)(i), EPA is allowed to make 

a finding of necessity even if the plan 

for an area does not contain an 

approved demonstration of timely 

attainment. Fourth, EPA recognizes the 

uncertainties inherent in modeling. For 

this reason, EPA guidance recommends 

that states supplement the modeling 

with additional analyses to be used as 

weight of evidence in assessing whether 

the modeling overstates or understates 

the air quality improvement that is 

expected. The above estimates of 

reductions needed to attain the standard 

in the Cincinnati and Dayton areas are 

taken directly from LADCO modeling 

results without considering any 

additional analyses that Ohio may 

submit along with its attainment 

demonstrations. 

The State evaluated an extensive list 

of non-fuel alternative controls to 

determine if reasonable and practicable 

controls could be adopted and used to 

attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the 

required deadline. 

The State evaluated a wide range of 

control measures, considering the 

following factors: VOC emission 

reduction potential; ability to 

implement the control measure 

expeditiously; cost; and, ease of 

implementation. Ohio summarized the 

results of this evaluation in a document 

entitled ‘‘RVP Rule Waiver Request 

Addendum.’’

After evaluating a wide range of other 

controls for their reasonableness and 

practicability, four measures did rise to 

the top: the reduction of VOC emission 

from auto refinishing operations, the 

reduction of VOC emissions from 

portable fuel containers, the adoption of 

rules for industrial solvent degreasing, 

and, the lowering of gasoline vapor 

pressure to 7.8 psi during the summer 

months. Ohio determined that the rest 

of the control measures would not 

achieve emission reductions early 

enough to bring about timely 

attainment, were technically impossible 

to implement, and, were either 

unreasonable or impracticable. 

In the case of auto refinishing 

operations, the State has adopted rules 

that require high volume, low pressure 

spray equipment and additional work 

practice requirements. The State’s 

analysis indicates that the application of 

such controls could yield emission 

reductions comparable to those from 

other source categories in the range of 

approximately 0.7 tons per day 

(including 0.4 tons per day in the 

Cincinnati area and 0.3 tons per day in 

the Dayton area), in a time period 

compatible with the State’s commitment 

to attain the 8-hour NAAQS as 

expeditiously as possible. Ohio’s 

evaluation also showed that VOC 

reductions in the range of 4.3 tons per 

day (including 2.6 tons per day from the 

Cincinnati area and 1.7 tons per day in 

the Dayton area) could be achieved 

through the adoption of industrial 

solvent cleaning (degreasing) 

regulations. In addition, the 

implementation of statewide rules 

requiring the use of newly designed 

spill proof portable fuel containers 

would achieve a modest reduction of 

about 0.4 tons per day across the 

Cincinnati/Dayton area by 2008. 

The State’s analysis identified that 

adoption of all measures determined to 

be reasonable and practicable would at 

most result in approximately 5.2 tons 

per day of emission reductions by 2008. 

Thus, even with implementation of all 

reasonable and practicable non-fuel 

control measures, additional VOC 

reductions are necessary. 

Ohio’s 7.8 psi RVP fuel requirement, 

which includes a 1 psi exemption for 

ethanol blended fuels, is calculated to 

achieve approximately 4.6 tpd of VOC 

reductions in Cincinnati and 4.2 tpd of 

VOC reductions in Dayton beginning the 

summer of 2008. EPA believes these 

emission reductions are necessary to 

achieve the ozone NAAQS in both areas. 

EPA is basing today’s action on the 

information available to us at this time, 

which indicates that adequate 

reasonable and practicable non-fuel 

measures that would achieve these 

needed emission reductions, and protect 

Ohio’s air quality in a timely manner are 

not available to the State. Hence, EPA 

finds that the 7.8 psi RVP fuel program 

is necessary for attainment of the 

applicable ozone NAAQS, and is 

proposing to approve it as a revision to 

the Ohio SIP. 

E. What Are the Relevant Energy Policy 

Act Requirements? 

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(EPAct) amends the CAA by requiring 

EPA, in consultation with the 

Department of Energy (DOE), to 

determine the total number of fuels 

approved into all SIPs under section 

211(c)(4)(C), as of September 1, 2004, 

and to publish a list that identifies these 

fuels, the States and Petroleum 

Administration for Defense Districts 

(PADD) in which they are used. CAA 

section 211(c)(4)(C)(v)(II). It also places 

three additional restrictions on EPA’s 

authority to waive preemption by 

approving a State fuel program into the 

SIP. 

These restrictions are as follows: 

• First, EPA may not approve a State 

fuel program into the SIP if it would 

cause an increase in the total number of 

fuel types approved into SIPs as of 

September 1, 2004. 

• Second, in cases where EPA 

approval of a fuel would increase the 

total number of fuel types on the list but 

not above the number approved as of 

September 1, 2004, because the total 

number of fuel types in SIPs is below 

the number of fuel types as of 

September 1, 2004, we are required to 

make a finding after consultation with 

DOE, that the new fuel will not cause 

supply or distribution interruptions or 

have a significant adverse impact on 

fuel producibility in the affected or 

contiguous areas. 

• Third, with the exception of 7.0 psi 

RVP, EPA may not approve a state fuel 

into a SIP unless that fuel type is 

already approved in at least one SIP in 

the applicable PADD. CAA Section 

211(c)(4)(C)(v)(I), (IV) and (V). 

On December 28, 2006, EPA 

published the final notice containing 

the final interpretation, which was a 

fuel type interpretation, of the EPAct 

provisions (See 71 FR 78192). We also 

determined and published a list of the 

total number of fuels approved into all 

SIPs, under section 211(c)(4)(C) as of 

September 1, 2004. 

F. How Has the State Met the Relevant 

Energy Policy Act Requirements? 

Any approval of a 7.8 psi RVP 

program would be subject to the EPAct 

restrictions, described earlier above. 

More specifically, any approval of a 7.8 

psi RVP program must not cause an 

increase in the total number of fuel 

types approved into all SIPs as of 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 14733 

September 1, 2004. Under our final 

interpretation, Ohio’s 7.8 psi RVP 

requirement for the Cincinnati and 

Dayton areas is not a ‘‘new fuel type.’’

EPA’s approval of Ohio’s 7.8 psi RVP 

will not increase the total number of 

fuels approved into all SIPs, as of 

September 1, 2004, because 7.8 psi RVP 

is on the list of fuels types. Further, 

because the total number of fuels 

approved into all SIPs at this time is not 

below the number of fuels on the final 

list of fuels, which we published on 

December 28, 2006 (71 FR 78192), we 

do not believe that we need to make a 

finding on the effect of a 7.8 psi RVP 

fuel requirement in Cincinnati and 

Dayton on fuel supply and distribution 

in either Cincinnati/Dayton or the 

contiguous areas. We note, however, 

that Ohio has delayed the effectiveness 

of the 7.8 psi RVP fuel requirements 

until twelve months following the EPA 

approval of its request for a fuel waiver 

in order to ensure that there is sufficient 

compliance time for the regulated 

community. Finally, because the 7.8 psi 

RVP fuel type is already approved in at 

least one SIP (Indiana (61 FR 4895, 

(February 9, 1996)) in the PADD where 

Ohio is located, EPA has determined 

that the Agency is not restricted from 

approving the 7.8 psi fuel program into 

the Ohio SIP. 

In today’s action, we are proposing 

approval of Ohio’s 7.8 psi RVP program 

as consistent with the provisions of 

EPAct. 

G. Why Is EPA Taking This Action? 

EPA is proposing to approve a SIP 

revision at the request of the OEPA. To 

ensure that it secures the needed 

approval under section 211(c)(4)(C) of 

the CAA, Ohio submitted this action for 

EPA approval to make it part of the SIP. 

H. What Other Relevant Materials Has 

the State Submitted? 

On May 9, 2006, OEPA submitted 

several VOC rules for approval into the 

SIP and EPA published a proposed 

approval of these rules on December 6, 

2006 (71 FR 70699). The rules include 

a provision requiring the use of lower 

emitting solvents in cold cleaner 

degreasers, the use of more efficient 

auto refinishing painting application 

techniques and a rule requiring the use 

of lower emitting portable fuel 

containers all which are discussed in 

this notice. In addition, EPA recently 

received a redesignation request from 

OEPA for the Dayton 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. EPA is currently 

reviewing the submittal and the 

implication of any of these additional 

materials on the approval of the fuel 

waiver request. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve a SIP 

revision submitted by the State of Ohio 

on February 14, 2006 and October 6, 

2006, establishing a 7.8 psi RVP fuel 

requirement for gasoline distributed in 

the Cincinnati and Dayton 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas which include 

Montgomery, Miami, Greene, Clark, 

Hamilton, Butler, Warren and Clermont 

counties. EPA is proposing to approve 

Ohio’s fuel requirements into the SIP 

because EPA has found that the 

requirements are necessary for the 

Cincinnati and Dayton areas to achieve 

the NAAQS for ozone. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, September 30, 1993), this action 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

and therefore is not subject to review by 

the Office of Management and Budget. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed action merely proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule proposes to approve 

pre-existing requirements under state 

law and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by state law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

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 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, 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 by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This proposed rule also is not subject 

to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it proposes 

approval of a state rule implementing a 

Federal Standard. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action,’’ this action is also not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, 

requires Federal agencies to use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus to 

carry out policy objectives, so long as 

such standards are not inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Absent a prior 

existing requirement for the state to use 

voluntary consensus standards, EPA has 

no authority to disapprove a SIP 

submission for failure to use such 

standards, and it would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in place of a program 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14734 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

submission that otherwise satisfies the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act. 

Therefore, the requirements of section 

12(d) of the NTTA do not apply. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: March 22, 2007. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. E7–5809 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0859; FRL–8293–4] 

RIN 2060–AN85 

Risk and Technology Review, Phase II, 

Group 2 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPRM). 

SUMMARY: This ANPRM asks for public 

comment on hazardous air pollutant 

emissions and other model input data 

that EPA intends to use to assess 

residual risk from selected industrial 

major source categories, as required by 

the Clean Air Act. Specifically, the data 

are comprised of hazardous air pollutant 

emission estimates and emission release 

parameters for 22 industrial source 

categories subject to 12 national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants for hazardous air pollutants 

with compliance dates of 2002 and 

earlier. The source of this information is 

the February 2006 version of the 2002 

National Emissions Inventory, updated 

with some facility-specific data 

collected by EPA. We are seeking 

comment on the emissions and source 

data found at the Risk and Technology 

Review Web site and we are providing 

the opportunity for the public to submit 

technical corrections and updates. 

Following review of comments received, 

we will update the data, as appropriate, 

and assess risk for these source 

categories. We will use these risk 

estimates and our evaluation of the 

availability, cost, and feasibility of 

emissions reduction options to 

determine the ample margin of safety for 

residual risk and to fulfill our 

obligations to conduct a technology 

review. We currently anticipate using 

the results of these risk estimates along 

with review of control technology as the 

basis for our decisions on whether to 

propose additional standards to address 

residual risk for each source category. 

There will be opportunity for oral and 

written comment on any additional 

standards when we publish our Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). We 

anticipate proposing the results of this 

risk and technology review for these 22 

source categories by fall 2007. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 29, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OAR–2006–0859 by one of the following 

methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

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

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send 

comments to: Air and Radiation Docket 

(6102T), Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–

2006–0859, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

Please include a total of two copies. 

• Hand Delivery: In person or by 

Courier, deliver comments to: Air and 

Radiation Docket (6102T), EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such 

deliveries are accepted only 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–2006–

0859. 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 www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means 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 EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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, 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 EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, 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 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, EPA 

West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, 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, and 

the telephone number for the Air and 

Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered 

damage due to flooding during the last week 

of June 2006. The Docket Center is 

continuing to operate. However, during the 

cleanup, there will be temporary changes to 

Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, 

and hours of operation for people who wish 

to make hand deliveries or visit the Public 

Reading Room to view documents. Consult 

EPA’s Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147 

(July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at 

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

for current information on docket operations, 

locations, and telephone numbers. The 

Docket Center’s mailing address for U.S. mail 

and the procedure for submitting comments 

to http://www.regulations.gov are not affected 

by the flooding and will remain the same. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general information about this ANPRM, 

contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Office and Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, Sector 

Policies and Programs Division, 

Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143–

01), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 

Carolina 27711; telephone number: 

(919) 541–2618; fax number: (919) 541–

0246; and e-mail address: 

hirtz.paula@epa.gov. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS