59998 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

and, is therefore not subject to review by

the Office of Management and Budget.

In addition, this correction action does

not impose any enforceable duty or

contain any unfunded mandate as

described in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), or

require prior consultation with state

officials as specified by Executive Order

12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993),

or involve special consideration of

environmental justice related issues as

required by Executive Order 12898 (59

FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

However, conditional approvals of

SIP submittals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not

create any new requirements but simply

approve requirements that a state is

already imposing. Therefore, because

the federal SIP approval does not

impose any new requirements, I certify

that it does not have a significant impact

on any small entities affected. Moreover,

due to the nature of the Federal-State

relationship under the CAA, preparation

of a flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA,

427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

If the conditional approval is

converted to a disapproval under

section 110(k), based on the State’s

failure to meet the commitment, it will

not affect any existing state

requirements applicable to small

entities. Federal disapproval of the state

submittal does not affect its stateenforceability. Moreover, EPA’s

disapproval of the submittal does not

impose a new Federal requirement.

Therefore, EPA certifies that this

disapproval action does not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities because it does

not remove existing requirements nor

does it substitute a new Federal

requirement.

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

and other required information to the

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of this rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this correction action must be filed in

the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by January 5,

1998. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This action may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: October 29, 1997.

William T. Wisnieski,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

Part 52, Chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart NN—Pennsylvania

2. Section 52.2026 is amended by

revising paragraphs (a) introductory text

and (a)(1) to read as follows:

§ 52.2026 Conditional Approval.

* * * * *

(a) If the Commonwealth fails to start

its program according to the schedule it

provided (i.e., by no later than

November 15, 1997 for the five-county

Philadelphia area and no later than

November 15, 1999 for the remaining

sixteen counties), this conditional

approval will convert to a disapproval

after EPA sends a letter to the state. If

the Commonwealth fails to satisfy the

following conditions per the deadlines

listed within each condition, this

conditional approval will automatically

convert to a disapproval as explained

under section 110(k) of the Clean Air

Act. The conditions for approvability

are as follows:

(1) By no later than September 15,

1997, a notice must be published in the

Pennsylvania Bulletin by the Secretary

of the Pennsylvania Department of

Transportation which certifies that the

enhanced I/M program is required in

order to comply with Federal law and

also certifies the geographic areas which

are subject to the enhanced I/M program

(the geographic coverage must be

identical to that listed in Appendix

A–1 of the March 22, 1996 SIP

submittal), and certifies the

commencement date of the enhanced I/

M program.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–29388 Filed 11–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL–5917–9]

Removal of Requirement in Gasoline

Deposit Control Additives Rule

Regarding the Identification of the

Oxygenate Content of Transferred

Gasoline

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is amending the gasoline

deposit control additives program, (the

‘‘detergent rule’’) to remove the

requirement that certain information on

the oxygenate content of transferred

gasoline must be included in the

gasoline’s product transfer document.

EPA is taking this action to avoid

unnecessary disruption to the gasoline

distribution system and because the

Agency believes that it will result in no

negative environmental impact.

In the proposed rules section of

today’s Federal Register, EPA is

proposing the same action covered by

this direct final rule (i.e., to amend the

detergent rule to remove the

requirement that certain information on

the oxygenate content of transferred

gasoline must be included in the

gasoline’s product transfer document),

as well as several other actions

impacting the detergent rule. If adverse

comment or a request for a public

hearing is received on this direct final

rule, EPA will withdraw the direct final

rule and address the comments received

in a subsequent final rule on the related

proposed rule. No additional
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 59999

1Letter to Judith Lubow, Office of Enforcement

and Compliance Assurance (OECA), EPA, from C.J.

Krambuhl, Director, Manufacturing, Distribution,

and Marketing, American Petroleum Institute (API),

August 14, 1996, Docket item VI–-D–01.

2Letter to C.J. Krambuhl, API, from Steven A.

Herman, Assistant Administrator, OECA, EPA,

August 28, 1996, Docket item VII–C–01.

opportunity for public comment on this

removal of certain detergent rule

product transfer document oxygenate

information will be provided.

DATES: This action will become effective

on January 5, 1998, unless notice is

received by December 8, 1997 from

someone who wishes to submit adverse

comment or requests an opportunity for

a public hearing. If such notice is

received, EPA will withdraw this direct

final rule, and a timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register to

indicate the withdrawal.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may

submit written comments (in duplicate

if possible) to Public Docket No. A–91–

77, at the following address: Air Docket

Section (LE–131), room M–1500, 401 M

Street SW, Washington, DC 20460;

phone (202) 260–7548; fax (202) 260–

4000. The Agency also requests that a

separate copy be sent to the contact

person listed below. The docket is open

for public inspection from 8:00 a.m.

until 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,

except on government holidays. As

provided in 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable

fee may be charged for copying docket

materials.

This direct final rule is also available

electronically on the day of publication

from the Office of the Federal Register

internet Web site listed below. A

prepublication electronic copy of this

notice is also available from the EPA

Office of Mobile Sources Web site listed

below. This service is free of charge,

except for any cost that you already

incur for internet connectivity.

Federal Register Web Site:

http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/

EPA–AIR/ (Either select desired

date or use Search feature.)

Office of Mobile Sources Web Site:

http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/

(Look in ‘‘What’s New’’ or under

the specific rulemaking topic.)

Please note that due to differences

between the software used to develop

the document and the software into

which the document may be

downloaded, changes in format, page

length, etc. may occur.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Judith Lubow, U.S. EPA, Office of

Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance, Western Field Office, 12345

West Alameda Parkway, Suite 214,

Lakewood, CO 80228; Telephone: (303)

969–6483, FAX (303) 969–6490.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Regulated Entities

II. Introduction

III. Removal of Identification Requirement of

Specific Oxygenate Content on Gasoline

Product Transfer Documents (PTDs)

A. Background

B. Rule Amendment

IV. Environmental Impact

V. Economic Impact and Impact on Small

Entities

VI. Public Participation and Effective Date

VII. Executive Order 12866

VIII. Unfunded Mandates

IX. Paperwork Reduction Act

X. Submission to Congress and General

Accounting Office

XI. Statutory Authority

I. Regulated Entities

Entities potentially regulated by this

action are those involved with the

production, distribution, and sale of

gasoline and gasoline detergent

additives. Regulated categories and

entities include:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Industry ........ Gasoline refiners and importers, Gasoline terminals, Detergent blenders, Gasoline

truckers, Gasoline retailers

and wholesale purchaserconsumers, and Detergent

manufacturers.

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. This table lists

types of entities that EPA is now aware

could potentially be regulated by this

action. Other types of entities not listed

in the table could also be regulated. To

determine whether your organization is

regulated by this action, you should

carefully examine the applicability

requirements in § 80.161(a), the

detergent certification requirements in

§ 80.161(b), the program controls and

prohibitions in § 80.168, and other

related program requirements in

Subpart G, title 40, of the Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR). If you have

any questions regarding the

applicability of this action to a

particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section.

II. Introduction

Section 211(l) of the Clean Air Act

(‘‘CAA’’) requires that, by January 1,

1995, all gasoline must contain

detergent additives to prevent the

accumulation of deposits in motor

vehicle engines and fuel supply

systems. This CAA section also requires

EPA to promulgate specifications for the

detergent additives. Detergent additives

prevent the accumulation of engine and

fuel supply system deposits that have

adverse effects on vehicle emissions as

well as on fuel economy and

driveability. In response to section 211(l)’s

requirements, EPA published a Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’) on

December 6, 1993 (59 FR 64213)

proposing a detergent additives

regulatory program. The detergent

program was finalized in two parts.

Final regulations for the interim

detergent program, requiring the use of

detergent additives in gasoline but not

mandating specific detergent efficiency

testing, were published on October 14,

1994 (59 FR 54678). Final regulations

for the detergent certification program,

mandating the use of certified

detergents with specified detergent

efficiency testing, were published on

July 5, 1996 (61 FR 35310).

One important implementation issue

that has arisen since the publication of

the detergent certification rule concerns

the requirement that the product

transfer documents (PTDs) for gasoline

transfers must identify all oxygenates

found in the gasoline. 40 CFR

80.158(a)(5) and 80.171(a)(5). Members

of the gasoline refining and distribution

industry informed EPA that this

requirement would, as an unintended

consequence, significantly disrupt

gasoline distribution. 1

For the reasons described below, EPA

exercised its enforcement discretion and

announced by letter to the American

Petroleum Institute (‘‘API’’) that it

would temporarily not enforce the PTD

oxygenate identification requirement

pending resolution of the issue through

a rulemaking or until September 3,

1997, whichever occurrence came first. 2

The Agency reserved the right to rescind

the exercise of this enforcement

discretion if it determined that

restricted-use detergents were actually

being certified or that the PTD

oxygenate identification requirements

otherwise became appropriate. The

Agency further advised that if violations

involving the improper use of

oxygenate-restricted detergents

occurred, parties wishing to

successfully assert an affirmative

defense to liability for such violations

might need to provide information

establishing the appropriate oxygenate

content of the gasoline in question.

Subsequently, EPA extended this

exercise of enforcement discretion until

implementation of this Direct Final Rule

which removes the specified PTD
60000 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

3Letter to C.J. Krambuhl, API, from Steven A.

Herman, Assistant Administrator, OECA, EPA,

September 4, 1997, Docket item VII–C–02.

oxygenate requirement, or until

December 31, 1997, whichever comes

first. 3

III. Removal of Identification

Requirement of Specific Oxygenate

Content on Gasoline Product Transfer

Documents (PTDs)

A. Background

The gasoline detergent additive

program requires all regulated parties

transferring products controlled under

the program to provide to the transferee

PTDs giving pertinent information about

the products transferred. (40 CFR 80.158

and 80.171) The products subject to the

detergent program PTD requirements are

gasoline, detergent additives, and

additized components, such as ethanol,

which are blended into gasoline after

the refinery process (additized postrefinery components, or ‘‘PRC’’). For

transfers of these regulated products, the

PTDs must identify the parties to the

transfer, the product being transferred,

and other information about the

product’s regulatory status.

One such requirement is that PTDs for

transferred gasoline must identify all

oxygenates and PRCs contained in the

gasoline. Further, if the gasoline is

comprised of commingled fuels, all

oxygenates and PRCs in the fuels

comprising the commingled product

must be identified. (40 CFR 80.158(a)(5)

and 80.171(a)(5)) The purpose of this

identification requirement is to alert the

parties receiving the gasoline about the

oxygenates and PRCs in the received

product. This information would be

useful to the recipient because, under

the detergent certification program,

parties may choose to additize gasoline

with a detergent whose certification is

restricted for use only with a specific

oxygenate or with no oxygenate, or, in

the case of fuel-specific certified

detergents, for use in gasoline without

PRCs. Thus, parties choosing to use

such restricted-use detergents must

know the oxygenate or PRC

(‘‘oxygenate’’) content of the gasoline

they intend to additize with these

detergents. The PTD oxygenate

identification requirement was intended

to provide such information for the

transferred gasoline.

In creating this identification

requirement, the Agency was not aware

that many parties did not know the

specific oxygenate content of the

gasoline they were transferring. EPA has

since learned that, under typical

industry practice prior to this

requirement, parties commingled

gasolines without knowledge of what (if

any) specific ethers (a type of oxygenate)

were present. Under the interim

detergent rule’s PTD requirements, no

information about the oxygenate content

of base gasoline was required. Parties

were thus typically unaware of the

specific ether content (in type and

concentration) of commingled gasoline

they received or possessed themselves.

To comply with this new oxygenate

identification requirement and to

become knowledgeable about the ether

status of their gasoline, parties would

have to ascertain the ether content of

received gasoline, stop commingling

gasolines with different ether contents,

or start testing all batches to determine

such content. In any of these scenarios,

gasoline distribution as presently

practiced would be significantly

disrupted.

It was never EPA’s intention to

disrupt gasoline distribution practices

through the imposition of this PTD

oxygenate identification requirement.

Consequently, on August 28, l996, the

Agency issued its first enforcement

discretion letter temporarily suspending

enforcement of this PTD requirement.

B. Rule Amendment

EPA does not believe that the benefits

from the PTD requirement of providing

oxygenate information to those parties

who might choose to use oxygenaterestricted certified detergents warrants

the resulting disruption to the gasoline

distribution system. Therefore, the

Agency is now amending the detergent

program through this direct final rule to

eliminate the requirement that PTDs for

gasoline must identify the oxygenates

found in the transferred product. At the

same time, an NPRM is being published

to address this issue with full notice and

comment. Under the proposal, a new

requirement would take the place of the

deleted PTD identification requirement.

The proposed requirement would

mandate that those detergent-blending

parties wishing to use oxygenaterestricted detergents must maintain

documentation fully identifying the

oxygenate content of the fuel into which

the detergent was blended, as evidence

that the fuel complied with the

detergent’s oxygenate use restriction.

This direct final rule, however, is

merely deleting the PTD oxygenate

identification requirement. The Agency

believes this is appropriate because no

oxygenate-restricted detergents have

been certified to date, so there is

presently no potential for

misadditization based on inappropriate

use of oxygenate-restricted detergents

through the deletion of this PTD

requirement. Further, the deletion of

this requirement until the issue is

resolved through the NPRM process

does not in any way affect the detergent

rule’s requirement of proper

additization of gasoline in full

compliance with all certification

restrictions of the detergent being used.

IV. Environmental Impact

This rule is expected to have no

negative environmental impact.

Controls on proper gasoline additization

are not affected by this rule. Further, no

oxygenate-restricted detergents have

been certified yet, so the absence of the

specific PTD oxygenate information on

transferred gasoline will have no impact

on the proper additization of such

gasoline.

V. Economic Impact and Impact on

Small Entities

EPA has determined that this final

rule will not have a significant impact

on a substantial number of small entities

because it removes a regulatory

requirement with which parties would

otherwise have to comply. This rule is

not expected to result in any additional

compliance cost to regulated parties and

may be expected to reduce compliance

cost. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility

analysis has not been prepared.

VI. Public Participation and Effective

Date

The Agency is publishing this action

as a direct final rule because it views it

as non-controversial and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in a

separate Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM) in today’s Federal Register, the

Agency is proposing, among other

things, to eliminate the PTD

requirement should adverse or critical

comments be filed. Thus, today’s direct

final action will be effective January 5,

1998 unless the Agency receives notice

by December 8, 1997 that adverse or

critical comments will be submitted or

that a party requests the opportunity to

submit such oral comments pursuant to

section 307(d)(5) of the Clean Air Act,

as amended.

If the Agency receives such

comments, EPA will withdraw this

action before the effective date by

publishing a subsequent document. All

public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on the NPRM published

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register.

The Agency will not institute a second

comment period on this action. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. If no

such comments are received, the public

is advised that this action will be

effective January 5, 1998.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 60001

4 58 FR 51736 (October 4, 1993).

5 Id. at section 3(f)(1)–(4).

VII. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866,4 the

Agency must determine whether a

regulation is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to OMB review and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order defines ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ as one that is likely

to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more, or

adversely affect in a material way the

economy, a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety, or

State, local or tribal governments of

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof, or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in this Executive Order. 5

It has been determined that this rule

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order

12866 and is therefore not subject to

OMB review.

VIII. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘UMRA’’), Public Law 104–4, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact

statement to accompany any general

notice of proposed rulemaking or final

rule that includes a federal mandate

which may result in estimated costs to

State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, for any rule subject to Section 202

EPA generally must select the least

costly, most cost-effective, or least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements.

Under Section 203, before establishing

any regulatory requirements that may

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, EPA must take steps to

inform and advise small governments of

the requirements and enable them to

provide input.

EPA has determined that the final rule

promulgated today does not include a

federal mandate as defined in UMRA.

The rule does not include a federal

mandate that may result in estimated

annual costs to State, local or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector, of $100 million or more,

and it does not establish regulatory

requirements that may significantly or

uniquely affect small governments.

IX. Paperwork Reduction Act

The action in today’s notice does not

impose any new information collection

burden. Implementation of this action

would eliminate the existing

requirement that product transfer

documents (PTDs) for gasoline must

identify the oxygenates present. No new

information collection requirements

would result from the implementation

of the regulatory amendment which is

the subject of this action. To the

contrary, its implementation would

eliminate a compliance burden from the

majority of regulated parties.

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has previously approved the

information collection requirements of

the Regulation of Deposit Control

Additives contained in 40 CFR Part 80

under the provisions of the Paperwork

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

and has assigned OMB control number

2060–0275 (EPA ICR Numbers 1655–01,

1655–02, and 1655–03).

Burden means the total time, effort, or

financial resources expended by persons

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose

or provide information to or for a

Federal agency. This includes the time

needed to review instructions; develop,

acquire, install, and utilize technology

and systems for the purposes of

collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Copies of the ICR documents may be

obtained from Sandy Farmer,

Information Policy Branch; EPA; 401 M

St., SW. (mail code 2136); Washington,

DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260–2740.

Include the ICR and/or OMB number in

any correspondence.

X. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

and other required information to the

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

XI. Statutory Authority

The statutory authority for the

proposed action in this rule is granted

to EPA by sections 114, 211(a), (b), (c),

and (l), and 301 of the Clean Air Act as

amended: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545(a), (b),

(c) and (l), and 7601.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

Environmental protection, Fuel

additives, Gasoline detergent additives,

Gasoline, Motor vehicle pollution,

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: October 30, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, part 80 of title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 80—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 80

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sections 114, 211 and 301(a) of

the Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C.

7414, 7545, and 7601(a)).

§ 80.158 [Amended]

2. Section 80.158(a) is amended as

follows:

a. Paragraph (a)(5) is removed.

b. Paragraphs (a)(6) through (a)(10) are

redesignated as paragraphs (a)(5)

through (a)(9).

§ 80.171 [Amended]

3. Section 80.171(a) is amended as

follows:

a. Paragraph (a)(5) is removed.

b. Paragraphs (a)(6) through (12) are

redesignated as paragraphs (a)(5)

through (a)(11).

[FR Doc. 97–29391 Filed 11–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[AZ–001–BU; FRL–5917–4]

Clean Air Act Reclassification;

Arizona-Phoenix Nonattainment Area;

Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is finding that the

Phoenix nonattainment area (Maricopa