60132 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1 62 FR 12586 (March 17, 1997).

2 In oxygenated fuels program areas implemented

by states as required by section 211(m) of the Act,

the minimum oxygen content during the winter

control period is 2.7 weight % oxygen. This

minimum for oxygenated fuels control periods is

unaffected by today’s rule and remains in force.

Nothing in today’s rule changes the applicable

oxygen standards under the Federal RFG or state

oxygenated fuels programs.

3 It should be noted that, since these estimates

were made in 1994, some areas have opted out of

the RFG program and Sacramento, California joined

the program as a required covered area, and

comparative volume totals will have changed

somewhat as a result. These estimates are not based

upon the comparative volume of OPRG to RFG.

Rather, they are ‘‘straight’’ estimates of a program

area’s share of the total RFG ‘‘pool’’ and are not

broken down into compliance categories. The

reader should be aware that OPRG gasoline likely

represents a smaller, subset of the total volume

represented for each area. The untitled document

from which the volume estimates were taken has

been placed in the public docket, docket # A–97–

01, Category II(B). The docket is located at the Air

Docket Section, 401 M Street, SW, Room M–1500

Washington, DC and is open Monday through

Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

4 62 FR 12596, 12588.

5 ‘‘Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives:

Extension of the Reformulated Gasoline Program to

the Phoenix, Arizona Moderate Ozone

Nonattainment Area,’’ 62 FR 30260 (June 3, 1997).

The Arizona opt-in became effective on July 3, 1997

for all persons other than retailers and wholesale

purchaser-consumers and August 4, 1997 for

retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL–5917–7]

RIN 2060–AH43

Fuels and Fuel Additives; Elimination

of Oxygenated Fuels Program

Reformulated Gasoline (OPRG)

Category From the Reformulated

Gasoline Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: In this action, the

reformulated gasoline (RFG) regulations

are amended to eliminate the separate

treatment for a category of gasoline used

in oxygen averaging. This category,

oxygenated fuels program reformulated

gasoline (OPRG), includes reformulated

gasoline intended for use in a state

oxygenated fuels program during the

winter time. Under the current RFG

regulations, a refiner must meet the

oxygen content standards on average for

the entire pool of gasoline they produce,

and for the pool of gasoline they

produce that is non-OPRG. EPA is

taking this action because it no longer

believes a distinction between OPRG

and RFG that is not intended for

oxygenated fuels program areas (i.e.,

non-OPRG) is necessary and because

removal of the OPRG category would

add flexibility and reduce compliance

costs for regulated parties, without

producing a negative environmental

impact. Today’s rule also removes a

prohibition on adding oxygen to

finished RFG, which will provide

parties in RFG/oxygenated fuels

program overlap areas with added

flexibility in meeting both programs’

standards.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anne-Marie C. Pastorkovich at (202)

233–9013.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Regulatory Entities

Regulatory categories and entities

potentially affected by this action

include:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Industry ...................... Refiners, importers,

oxygenate blenders

of reformulated

gasoline.

This table is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. This table lists

the types of entities that EPA is now

aware could be potentially regulated by

this action. Other types of entities not

listed in the table could also be

regulated. To determine whether your

entity is regulated by this action, you

should carefully examine the existing

provisions at 40 CFR 80.2, 80.65, 80.67,

80.69, 80.75, 80.77, 80.78, and 80.128,

dealing specifically with OPRG. If you

have questions regarding the

applicability of this action to a

particular entity, consult the person

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section.

II. Background

On March 17, 1997, EPA proposed

amendments to the reformulated

gasoline (RFG) regulations that would

eliminate the oxygenate program

reformulated gasoline (OPRG) category.1

As explained in that notice, EPA issued

the proposed rule for several reasons.

First, between 1993, when the final RFG

rule was issued, and 1995, when the

RFG program was implemented, the

number of overlapping oxygenated fuels

program and RFG areas significantly

decreased. Although EPA is concerned

that the statutory mandate for 2.0 weight

percent oxygen for RFG is met,2 the

Agency feels that the specific risk of

uneven RFG quality due to overlapping

oxygenated fuels/RFG program areas is

significantly less than was expected

when the RFG regulations were

promulgated. There is still some risk

that an area might receive relatively low

oxygen RFG because of averaging, but

the risk is no longer as likely to be

specifically caused by program overlap

as in 1993 and 1994.

Second, based upon EPA estimates

made prior to the beginning of the first

year of the RFG program, approximately

one-third (33%) of all gasoline

nationwide was predicted to be RFG.

Oxygenated fuels program overlap areas

outside of California accounted for

approximately one-third (33%) of the

total RFG pool, with approximately 19%

going to the New York CMSA.3 EPA

believes that any risk that an area might

receive low oxygen RFG is significantly

less than it appeared in 1993 and 1994.

As discussed in great detail in the

proposed rule,4 in 1994, roughly onethird of RFG was expected to be

destined for several oxygenated fuels

overlap cities outside of California.

Today, the New York City CMSA is the

only remaining overlap area outside

California, although the Phoenix,

Arizona moderate ozone nonattainment

area opted into the RFG program 5 and

is also an oxygenated fuels area. EPA

continues to believe that the risk that an

area might receive low oxygen RFG can

be adequately addressed through

another existing compliance

mechanism—the RFG surveys required

by 40 CFR 80.68.

III. Response to Comments

Effective Date: Three commenters

wanted the rule to go into effect by the

November 1, 1997, the start date for the

1997–1998 winter oxygenated fuels

program. A fourth commenter wanted

the rule to go into effect ‘‘as

expeditiously as due process

considerations allow.’’ The rationale for

the earliest effective date is to allow

regulated parties to take advantage of

maximum flexibility.

However, another commenter urged

EPA to implement the change effective

January 1, 1998, in order to alleviate

financial burdens on certain regulated

parties. Specifically, companies may

have entered into contracts under which

they have already paid for credits

needed this year. An implementation

date earlier than January 1, 1998 would,

according to the commenter, devalue

those purchased credits without the

possibility of a refund to the purchaser.

EPA believes that the rule should go

into effect by November 1, 1997,

concurrent with the start of the

oxygenated fuels program, in order to
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 60133

6The commenter also urged EPA to ratchet the

minimum oxygen standard from 1.5 weight % to 1.6

weight % for areas that failed the oxygen survey

series in 1996. On July 31, 1997, EPA published a

notice in the Federal Register announcing a ratchet

for several covered areas. Please refer to ‘‘Change

in Minimum Oxygen Content for Reformulated

Gasoline—Notice,’’ 62 FR 41047 (July 31, 1997) for

further information.

allow regulated parties maximum

flexibility. A January 1, 1998 start date

falling in the middle of the state

oxygenated fuels programs, would likely

add unnecessary confusion. Delaying

the start date until after the 1997–1998

oxygenated fuels season, e.g. until

March 1, 1998 or later, would impose an

unnecessary burden on the majority of

parties. Today’s rule removes burdens

associated with the maintenance of

separate recordkeeping, reporting, and

product transfer documentation for

OPRG and non-OPRG categories,

resulting in a general reduction in

compliance costs. A greater cost benefit

would be realized by the vast majority

of parties if the rule is effective on

November 1, 1997, the start date of the

oxygenated fuels program. Today’s rule

eliminates the prohibition on adding

oxygen to finished RFG, which provides

regulated parties in overlap areas with

added flexibility in meeting both RFG

and oxygenated fuels program

standards.

Although there may be an adverse

effect on a few parties, the vast majority

will benefit from the earliest

implementation of today’s rule.

EPA has provided guidance on

submitting 1997 RFG reports elsewhere

in this notice.

Effects on Compliance Burdens and

Recordkeeping

Five commenters agreed that the rule

to do away with the distinction between

OPRG/non-OPRG will help add

flexibility and reduce compliance

burdens. Three of these five also agreed

that this will also reduce compliance

costs. EPA concurs with these

statements. A sixth commenter was

concerned that this rule will increase

refiner’s compliance burdens, but did

not elaborate on how these burdens will

increase. EPA believes that the

reduction of the recordkeeping and

reporting burdens associated with the

OPRG category results in a positive

impact in terms of cost, burden, and

time for the vast majority of regulated

parties.

Reporting

Some commenters who were

supportive of the proposal also noted

that they might not have sufficient lead

time to redesign their accounting

methods and reporting software. These

commenters asked for flexibility in

reporting. One commenter asked that

reporting parties should be given the

option of reporting the OPRG/nonOPRG categories for reports covering

calendar year 1997.

EPA understands that this change

may require alterations to some parties’

accounting methods and software. For

annual reports covering calendar year

1997 and for batch reports after

November 1, 1997, a reporting party

may choose to report using the OPRG/

non-OPRG categories (i.e., to report ‘‘as

usual’’) or to report all OPRG in the

appropriate non-OPRG categories.

For 1997 and subsequent years, EPA

will look to the refiner’s entire RFG

production in order to determine

compliance with the annual average for

oxygen and will no longer recognize any

distinction between OPRG and nonOPRG. The same approach will apply

for compliance with the oxygen average

for VOC-controlled RFG under the

simple model.

EPA plans to amend its reporting

forms as soon as practicable in order to

reflect the elimination of the OPRG/nonOPRG distinction.

The RFG reports affected by this rule

are: ‘‘Reformulated Gasoline Program

Oxygen Content Averaging Report’’

(Simple Model & Complex Model),

‘‘Reformulated Gasoline Program Credit

Transfer Summary Report,’’ and the

‘‘Reformulated Gasoline and AntiDumping Batch Reports.’’

Product Transfer Documentation

Some commenters have asked

whether they must eliminate the OPRG/

non-OPRG distinction on their product

transfer documentation. Redesigned

documentation and forms may not be

ready by the effective date.

Today’s action removes all OPRG/

non-OPRG distinctions in the

regulations as of the November 1, 1997

effective date. Although parties may

continue to use product transfer

documentation differentiating OPRG

from non-OPRG, such distinction is not

required by EPA because it no longer

holds any importance. However,

regulated parties may wish to phase-out

their use of OPRG category reporting, in

order to reduce confusion.

Effects on Oxygenate Use/Toxic

Increase

One commenter stated that removal of

the OPRG category will cause refiners to

use less oxygenate and more aromatics

in their gasoline. The addition of

aromatics would substitute for lost

octane. This effect was not quantified by

the commenter, who stated that today’s

rule will cause the gasoline to emit more

toxics.

It is important to remember that EPA

has not altered the standards applicable

to refiners for oxygen content and toxics

under either the reformulated gasoline

or oxygenated fuels programs.

Furthermore, the gasoline quality survey

program for oxygenates and toxics, and

other enforcement mechanisms still

exist to ensure that the full

environmental benefits of the oxygenate

content and toxics standards are

realized.

It is possible that elimination of the

OPRG/non-OPRG distinction may result

in some decrease in the use of

oxygenates, since credits generated in

RFG areas that are also oxygenated fuels

program areas (i.e. areas requiring a

relatively high oxygen content of least

2.7 weight % oxygen during the winter

months) may be used in RFG areas that

are not oxygenated fuels program areas

(i.e. areas requiring at least 2.0 weight

% oxygen all year round). If oxygenate

use decreases in some RFG/nonoxygenated fuels program areas, it is

possible that toxics may increase in

those areas. Nevertheless, EPA believes

that the survey mechanism (discussed

in greater detail for the following

comment) is adequately designed to

ensure the gasoline quality in each

covered area will meet the standards on

average for toxics.

Effects on Oxygenate Use/Survey

Failures

EPA received comments pertaining to

the oxygenate use and survey failures.

The commenters all agreed that EPA’s

enforcement mechanisms, including

gasoline quality surveys, provide a

means to ensure compliance with RFG

program requirements. Two commenters

thought that there may be a marginal

increase in risk, but this would be

discovered through the surveys and

corrected.

One commenter was concerned that

blenders will take advantage of the

elimination of the OPRG/non-OPRG

distinction to minimize oxygenate use

and this will cause areas to fail the

surveys. A commenter felt that survey

failures result from ‘‘refiners [who] are

learning to use the [credit trading]

program.’’ 6

EPA agrees that the risk of survey

failures may increase in the absence of

the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction,

because more credits from RFG areas

with wintertime oxygenated fuels

program may be used by refiners to

show compliance with the annual

oxygen average applicable to the refiner,

with less reliance on use of oxygen in

RFG destined for RFG areas that are not
60134 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

wintertime oxygenated fuels program

areas. (See the preceding comment.)

The existence of the credit trading

program was required by section

211(k)(7) of the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 7545.

Compliance with the RFG oxygen

standards is shown over the course of a

calendar year averaging period. Credits

may be traded within and between all

covered areas. A general risk always

exists, even in the absence of the OPRG/

non-OPRG distinction, that one area

may receive RFG with a slightly higher

oxygen content than another area. The

compliance survey provisions, with

ratchets upon survey failures, were

adopted by the Agency to address this

risk. In 1993 and 1994, the specific risk

of uneven RFG quality due to

overlapping RFG and oxygenated fuels

program areas was significantly greater

than it is today. Since 1993 and 1994,

many areas have redesignated to

attainment for carbon monoxide (CO)

and were able to drop the oxygenated

fuels program. The specific risk that an

area might receive relatively low oxygen

RFG because of program overlap has

lessened, and EPA believes that the

existing survey and enforcement

mechanisms are adequate to address any

additional risks there might be from

eliminating the OPRG/non-OPRG

category.

Phoenix, AZ

Phoenix, AZ recently opted in to the

Federal RFG program. One commenter

stated that this should not affect the

decision to remove the OPRG reporting

category. EPA agrees with this

comment. Overall, the number of nonCalifornia RFG/oxygenated fuels

program overlap areas has decreased

significantly since the RFG program

regulations were finalized in 1993. EPA

does not believe that the addition of

Phoenix to the program warrants the

burden and expense associated with

retention of the OPRG category.

Economic Impact

EPA received one comment from a

party who claimed that today’s rule

might have an unspecified negative

economic impact on one sector of the

oxygenate industry (i.e., the sector that

deals with oxygen credit contracts).

Another commenter stated that the

effort of eliminating the OPRG/nonOPRG distinction may be a great one

compared to the benefit received. All

other commenters endorsed the

proposed changes as economically

beneficial.

EPA believes that the vast majority of

regulated entities, including small

businesses, are reasonably expected to

experience significant cost savings as a

result of today’s regulation. EPA does

not believe that today’s action will, in

and of itself, have any significant impact

on oxygenate markets.

EPA disagrees with the

characterization that the elimination of

removing the OPRG/non-OPRG

distinction would require great effort.

The Agency has designed the regulatory

changes to permit great flexibility for all

affected parties. For example, EPA has

permitted flexibility in reporting for all

RFG and anti-dumping reports covering

calendar year 1997 and due to be

submitted on or after November 1, 1997.

III. Today’s Rule

EPA is amending the Federal RFG

regulations to remove the use of a

separate OPRG category and to

eliminate the distinction between OPRG

and non-OPRG. The following sections

would be affected by today’s proposal.

In most cases, the changes are minor

and would remove references to, and

distinctions between, the eliminated

OPRG category and RFG which is nonOPRG.

40 CFR Part 80, Section Description of change

Section 80.2—Definitions. 80.2(nn) .......................................................... Definition of ‘‘Oxygenated fuels program reformulated gasoline,’’ or

‘‘OPRG’’ is deleted.

Section 80.65—General requirements for refiners, importers, and oxygenate blenders. 80.65(d)(2)(iii) (A) and (B).Requirements for designation of gasoline as OPRG or non-OPRG are

deleted.

Section 80.67—Compliance on average. 80.67(f)(2)(ii), 80.67(h)(1)(v)

(A) and (B).

Deletes requirements to meet oxygen average separately and to segregate credits for non-OPRG, since the OPRG versus non-OPRG

distinction is eliminated.

Section 80.69—Requirements for downstream oxygen blending.

80.69(f) (1) and (2).

These sections are deleted, to reflect that there would no longer be a

category known as ‘‘OPRG.’’ 7

Section 80.75—Reporting requirements. 80.75(f)(2)(ii)(A) (1) through

(4) and (B) (1) and (2); 80.75(f)(2)(iii)(B); 80.75(h)(2) (i) and (ii)

80.75(p).

For 80.75(f)(2)(ii)(A) (1) through (4), the OPRG and non-OPRG distinction is eliminated. Thus, the only categories remaining are VOC-controlled (divided into subcategories 1 and 2) and non-VOC-controlled

RFG. Section 80.75(f)(2)(ii)(B) (1) and (2) is deleted in order to eliminate to OPRG and non-OPRG distinction. Section 80.75(f)(2)(iii)(B),

which refers to gasoline designated as non-OPRG, is deleted.

Section 80.77—Product transfer documentation. 80.77(g)(1)(ii) .............. Requirement to identify gasoline as OPRG or non-OPRG is deleted.

Section 80.78—Controls and prohibitions on reformulated gasoline.

80.78(a)(6).

Before today’s rule, this section prohibits addition of oxygen to finished

RFG, unless such RFG is designated as OPRG used in an

oxygenated fuels control area during the oxygenated fuels control

period. This OPRG ‘‘exception’’ is amended to allow for elimination

of the OPRG/non-OPRG categories. Specifically, the amended section allows for addition of oxygenate to RFG intended for and used

in an oxygenate gasoline program area.

Sections 80.128 and 80.129—Agreed upon procedures for refiners and

importers and Agreed upon procedures for oxygenate blenders.

80.128(d)(2) and 80.129(d)(3)(iv).

Requirement to compare PTD designation consistency for OPRG versus non-OPRG is removed. Similar requirement for downstream oxygenate blenders is removed.

7 Note the change to section 80.78(a)(6).

IV. Statutory Authority

Sections 114, 211, and 301(a) of the

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

7414, 7545, and 7601(a)).

V. Environmental Impact

This rule is expected to have no

environmental impact. The original

reason for the OPRG category was

concern that RFG quality might suffer in

areas that were not both oxygenated

fuels program and RFG areas. There

were several such areas when the RFG

rules were promulgated. However, there

are now only two areas, the New York/

New Jersey/Connecticut CMSA and
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 60135

8 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). 9 Id. at section 3(f)(1)–(4).

Phoenix, Arizona, which currently have

overlapping programs during the winter

months. EPA is aware of no data

indicating that today’s regulation will

encourage the use of lower oxygen

content RFG. The oxygenated fuels

program and RFG program oxygen

standards remain in place. The RFG

standards are Federally enforced

through a variety of enforcement

mechanisms, including the oxygen

survey program, which is specifically

designed to ensure that oxygen

standards are met on average in all RFG

cities.

VI. 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. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions. Today’s regulation would

have a positive economic impact on the

great majority of entities regulated by

the RFG regulation, including small

businesses. The elimination of the

OPRG/non-OPRG distinction would

result in increased flexibility for

regulated parties, including refiners,

importers, and blenders. Specifically,

elimination of this distinction from the

RFG regulations alleviates the burden

and cost associated with maintenance of

separate recordkeeping, reporting, and

product transfer documentation

category for OPRG and non-OPRG

gasoline. Elimination of the OPRG/nonOPRG distinction should also result in

a general reduction of compliance costs

associated with the need to meet the

oxygen average separately for two

classes of RFG. A regulatory flexibility

analysis has therefore not been

prepared.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

Per the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and implementing

regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, this action

does not involve the addition of any

collection of information as defined

therein.

VIII. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866,8 the

Agency must determine whether a

regulation is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to interagency review under 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.9

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

interagency review under the Order.

IX. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘UMRA’’), Pub. L. 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 costeffective, 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 this rule

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.

X. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act as added by

the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Gasoline,

Reformulated gasoline, Motor vehicle

pollution.

Dated: October 31, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

40 CFR part 80 is amended as follows:

PART 80—REGULATION OF FUELS

AND FUEL ADDITIVES

1. The authority citation for part 80

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 114, 211, and 301(a) of the

Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7414,

7545, and 7601(a)).

§ 80.2 [Amended]

2. Section 80.2 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph (nn).

§ 80.65 [Amended]

3. Section 80.65 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph

(d)(2)(iii).

4. Section 80.67 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph

(f)(2)(ii) and by revising paragraphs

(h)(1)(v)(A)(1) and (h)(1)(v)(A)(2) and by

removing and reserving paragraph

(h)(1)(v)(B) and by removing paragraphs

(h)(1)(v)(A)(3) and (h)(1)(v)(A)(4) to read

as follows:

§ 80.67 Compliance on average.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(1) * * *

(v) * * *

(A) * * *

(1) VOC controlled; and

(2) Non-VOC controlled.

(B) [Reserved]

* * * * *

§ 80.69 [Amended]

5. Section 80.69 is amended by

removing paragraph (f).

6. Section 80.75 is amended by

revising paragraphs (f)(2)(ii)(A)(1),

(f)(2)(ii)(A)(2), (h)(2)(i)(A) and

(h)(2)(i)(B) and by removing paragraphs

(f)(2)(ii)(A)(3), (f)(2)(ii)(A)(4), (h)(2)(i)(C),

(h)(2)(i)(D) and by removing and

reserving (h)(2)(ii) to read as follows:

§ 80.75 Reporting requirements.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) * * *
60136 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(A) * * *

(1) Gasoline designated as VOCcontrolled; and

(2) Gasoline designated as non-VOCcontrolled.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) VOC-controlled; and

(B) Non-VOC-controlled.

* * * * *

7. Section 80.77 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph

(g)(1)(ii).

8. Section 80.78 is amended by

revising paragraph (a)(6) to read as

follows:

§ 80.78 Controls and prohibitions on

reformulated gasoline.

(a) * * *

(6) No person may add any oxygenate

to reformulated gasoline, except that

such oxygenate may be added to

reformulated gasoline provided that

such gasoline is used in an oxygenated

fuels program control area during an

oxygenated fuels control period.

* * * * *

9. Section 80.128 is amended by

revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as

follows:

§ 80.128 Agreed upon procedures for

refiners and importers.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(2) Compare the product transfer

documents designation for consistency

with the time and place, and

compliance model designations for the

tender (VOC-controlled or non-VOCcontrolled, VOC region for VOCcontrolled, summer or winter gasoline,

and simple or complex model certified);

and

* * * * *

10. Section 80.129 is amended by

revising paragraph (d)(3)(v) to read as

follows:

§ 80.129 Agreed upon procedures for

downstream oxygenate blenders.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) * * *

(v) Review the time and place

designations in the product transfer

documents prepared for the batch by the

blender, for consistency with the time

and place designations in the product

transfer documents for the RBOB (e.g.

VOC-controlled or non-VOC-controlled,

VOC region for VOC-controlled, and

simple or complex model).

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–29385 Filed 11–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P