51288 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 80 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0283; FRL 9915–08– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS19 

Regulation of Fuels and Fuel 

Additives: Extension of the 

Reformulated Gasoline Program to 

Maine’s Southern Counties 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to extend the 

Clean Air Act’s (CAA) prohibition 

against the sale of conventional gasoline 

in reformulated gasoline (RFG) areas to 

the southern Maine counties of York, 

Cumberland, Sagadahoc, Androscoggin, 

Kennebec, Knox, and Lincoln. This 

proposal is based on a request from the 

Governor of the State of Maine for areas 

within the ozone transport region 

established under the CAA. The CAA 

does not give the EPA discretion to deny 

a Governor’s request on this matter. The 

scope of the EPA’s discretion is limited 

to establishing the date that the 

prohibition commences. Consistent with 

the Governor’s request, the EPA 

proposes that this prohibition 

commence on May 1, 2015 for all 

refiners, importers, and distributors in 

the Maine counties referenced in the 

Governor’s request, and on June 1, 2015 

for all retailers and wholesale 

purchaser-consumers in those counties. 

The EPA is also adding in its RFG optout rules a provision to reflect that there 

is a four-year minimum opt-in period 

for areas that opt into the RFG program 

on the basis of their location within the 

ozone transport region. This 

clarification will align the federal 

regulation for RFG opt-out requirements 

with the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 29, 2014 unless a 

public hearing is requested by 

September 12, 2014. If the EPA receives 

such a request, we will publish 

information related to the timing and 

location of the hearing and a new 

deadline for public comment. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2014–0283, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. 

• Mail: Air Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 

0283. Please include a total of two 

copies. 

• Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation 

Docket, EPA Docket Center, WJC West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. 

Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2014–0283. Please include two 

copies. 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–2014– 

0283. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

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 email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means that EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

information about the EPA’s public 

docket visit the EPA Docket Center 

homepage at http://www.epa.gov/

epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the 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 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patty Klavon, Office of Transportation 

and Air Quality, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood 

Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105; 

telephone number: (734) 214–4476; fax 

number: (734) 214–4052; email address: 

klavon.patty@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

contents of this preamble are listed in 

the following outline: 

I. General Information 

II. Public Participation 

III. Background and Proposal 

IV. Environmental Impact 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially affected by this 

rule are fuel producers and distributors 

who do business in Maine. 

Examples of potentially regulated entities NAICS1 codes 

Petroleum refineries ............................................................................................................................................................................. 324110 

Gasoline Marketers and Distributors ................................................................................................................................................... 424710 

424720 

Gasoline Retail Stations ...................................................................................................................................................................... 447110 

Gasoline Transporters ......................................................................................................................................................................... 484220 

484230 

1 North American Industry Classification System. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 51289 

2See the U.S. Energy Information Administration 

statistics on consumption and sales of petroleum 

and other liquids at: http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/ 

reports.cfm?t=164. 

3For a map showing current RFG areas, please 

visit the EPA’s Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/

otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/rfg/areas.htm. 

4Applying these criteria, the EPA has determined 

the nine covered areas to be the metropolitan areas 

including Los Angeles, Houston, New York City, 

Baltimore, Chicago, San Diego, Philadelphia, 

Hartford, and Milwaukee. 

The above table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

regulated by this action. The table lists 

the types of entities of which the EPA 

is aware that potentially could be 

affected by this rule. Other types of 

entities not listed on the table could also 

be affected by this rule. To determine 

whether your organization could be 

affected by this rule, you should 

carefully examine the regulations in 40 

CFR 80.70. If you have questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, call the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this preamble. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments? 

1. Submitting CBI 

Do not submit CBI to the EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to the EPA, mark the outside 

of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The Agency 

may ask you to respond to specific 

questions or organize comments by 

referencing a Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part or section 

number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree, 

suggest alternatives, and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

3. Docket Copying Costs 

You may be required to pay a 

reasonable fee for copying docket 

materials. 

II. Public Participation 

A. Public Comments 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 

211(k)(6)(B) states that, ‘‘[o]n 

application of the Governor of a State in 

the ozone transport region established 

by [section 184(a) of the CAA], the 

Administrator . . . shall apply the 

prohibition’’ against the sale of 

conventional gasoline to any area of the 

State other than an area classified as a 

marginal, moderate, serious, or severe 

ozone nonattainment area. CAA section 

211(k)(6)(B) provides the EPA limited 

discretion to establish the date that this 

prohibition commences based on 

consideration of whether there is 

sufficient capacity to supply RFG to the 

area. However, the CAA does not give 

the EPA discretion to deny a Governor’s 

request for an RFG opt-in for a 

qualifying area. 

The EPA is acting on a request made 

by the Governor of the State of Maine 

to extend the CAA prohibition against 

the sale of conventional gasoline in RFG 

areas to the southern Maine counties of 

York, Cumberland, Sagadahoc, 

Androscoggin, Kennebec, Knox, and 

Lincoln (the ‘‘Southern Maine 

Counties’’) which are part of the ozone 

transport region established by CAA 

Section 184(a). The State of Maine 

requested that the prohibition 

commence on June 1, 2015. Therefore, 

the scope of today’s action is limited to 

proposing the date on which the 

prohibition commences for the Southern 

Maine Counties’ opt-in to the federal 

RFG program, and not whether those 

counties should opt in to the federal 

RFG program. Thus, the EPA is not 

soliciting comments that support or 

oppose participation by the Southern 

Maine Counties in the federal RFG 

program. The EPA is, however, 

requesting comment regarding whether 

there will be a sufficient capacity to 

supply RFG to these seven counties 

beginning May 1, 2015 for refiners, 

importers, and distributors, and on June 

1, 2015 for retailers and purchaserconsumers. 

Additionally, the EPA is adding in its 

opt-out regulations at 40 CFR 80.72 a 

provision to reflect that there is a fouryear minimum opt-in period for areas 

that opt into the RFG program on the 

basis of their location within the ozone 

transport region. This clarification will 

align the federal regulation for RFG optout requirements with CAA section 

211(k)(6)(B)(ii)(II). 

B. Public Hearing 

The EPA will not hold a public 

hearing on this matter unless a request 

is received by the person identified in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section of this preamble by September 

12, 2014. If the EPA receives such a 

request, we will publish information 

related to the timing and location of the 

hearing and a new deadline for public 

comment. 

III. Background and Proposal 

A. Background on the Federal 

Reformulated Gasoline Program 

The purpose of the federal RFG 

program is to improve air quality in 

certain areas through the use of gasoline 

that is reformulated to reduce motor 

vehicle emissions of tropospheric 

ozone-forming compounds, as set forth 

in CAA section 211(k)(1). The EPA first 

published regulations for the federal 

RFG program on February 16, 1994. (59 

FR 7716). RFG makes up over 30 

percent of the volume of motor vehicle 

gasoline consumed in the United 

States 2 and is used in 17 states and the 

District of Columbia.3

CAA section 211(k)(5) prohibits the 

sale of conventional gasoline (i.e., 

gasoline that the EPA has not certified 

as reformulated) in certain ozone 

nonattainment areas beginning January 

1, 1995. CAA section 211(k)(10)(D) 

defines the areas initially covered by the 

federal RFG program as ozone 

nonattainment areas having a 1980 

population in excess of 250,000 and 

having the highest ozone design values 

during the period 1987 through 1989.4

In addition, under CAA section 

211(k)(10)(D), any area reclassified as a 

severe ozone nonattainment area under 

CAA section 181(b) is also included in 

the federal RFG program. Finally, CAA 

sections 211(k)(6)(A) and (B) allow areas 

classified as Marginal, Moderate, 

Serious, or Severe ozone nonattainment 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
51290 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

5The EPA has determined that the original 

petition from the Governor of Maine, together with 

the revised Maine legislation and the 

Commissioner’s letter, serve as a petition from the 

Governor under CAA section 211(k)(6)(B) seeking 

commencement of the prohibition in CAA 211(k)(5) 

in the Southern Maine Counties on June 1, 2015. 

areas, or areas within the ozone 

transport region established under CAA 

section 184, to opt into the RFG program 

at the request of the Governor of the 

State in which the area is located. 

Maine is in the ozone transport region 

established under CAA section 184, and 

its request to opt into the RFG program 

was made pursuant to CAA section 

211(k)(6)(B). That provision specifies 

that upon petition of the Governor of a 

State in the ozone transport region in 

which the area is located, the EPA is to 

apply the prohibition against selling or 

dispensing of conventional gas in RFG 

covered areas in any area in the State 

other than an area classified as 

marginal, moderate, serious, or severe 

ozone nonattainment area under subpart 

2 of part D of subchapter 1 of the Clean 

Air Act. This prohibition is to 

‘‘commence as soon as practicable but 

not later than 2 years after the date of 

approval by the Administrator of the 

application of the Governor of the 

State.’’ CAA section 211(k)(6)(B)(ii)(I). 

However, if the EPA determines that 

there is insufficient capacity to supply 

RFG, the EPA may extend the 

commencement date by no more than a 

year, and may renew that extension for 

two additional one-year periods. CAA 

section 211(k)(6)(B)(iii). The area may 

not opt out of the federal RFG program 

earlier than 4 years after the RFG 

commencement date. CAA section 

211(k)(6)(B)(ii)(II). 

B. Request From the State of Maine 

In 2013, the State of Maine enacted 

Public Law 2013 c.221 calling for the 

use of RFG in York, Cumberland, 

Sagadahoc, Androscoggin, Kennebec, 

Knox, and Lincoln counties beginning 

May 1, 2014. On July 23, 2013, the 

Governor of Maine formally requested, 

pursuant to CAA section 211(k)(6)(B), 

that the EPA extend the requirement for 

the sale of RFG to these counties 

beginning on May 1, 2014. 

The Maine legislature subsequently 

enacted an emergency law, Public Law 

2013 c.453, effective March 6, 2014, to 

postpone the requirement for the sale of 

RFG in these counties until June 1, 

2015. Pursuant to that legislation, the 

Commissioner for the State of Maine’s 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(DEP) submitted a request to the EPA 

dated March 10, 2014, modifying 

Maine’s request for the implementation 

date for the sale of RFG in the Southern 

Maine Counties to coincide with June 1, 

2015.5

Copies of the Commissioner’s letter, 

the letter from the Governor of the State 

of Maine dated July 23, 2013, and the 

Maine legislation establishing the use of 

RFG in the Southern Maine Counties are 

available in the docket at EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2014–0283. 

C. Proposed Date for the 

Commencement of a Prohibition on the 

Sale of Conventional Gasoline in the 

Southern Maine Counties 

Based on our evaluation of the 

appropriate lead time and start dates, 

and pursuant to Maine’s request for a 

June 1, 2015 implementation date and 

the provisions of CAA section 211(k)(6), 

the EPA is proposing to extend the CAA 

section 211(k)(5) prohibition against the 

sale of conventional (i.e., nonreformulated) gasoline in RFG covered 

areas to the Southern Maine Counties. 

The Southern Maine Counties are part 

of the ozone transport region as defined 

in CAA section 184. They are not 

currently classified under subpart 2 of 

Part D of CAA subchapter I as Marginal, 

Moderate, Serious, or Severe ozone 

nonattainment areas. Based on Maine’s 

request for a June 1, 2015 

implementation date, the EPA is 

proposing that a prohibition on the sale 

of conventional gasoline in the Southern 

Maine Counties commence as of May 1, 

2015 for all regulated entities in these 

counties other than retailers and 

wholesale purchaser-consumers (i.e., 

refiners, importers, and distributors), 

and as of June 1, 2015 for retailers and 

wholesale purchaser-consumers. Thus, 

if this action is finalized as proposed, 

conventional gasoline could not be sold 

to consumers in the Southern Maine 

Counties as of June 1, 2015. Only RFG 

could be sold to consumers in these 

counties as of June 1, 2015. 

Further, under CAA section 

211(k)(6)(B)(ii)(II) the State of Maine 

would be prohibited from opting out of 

the federal RFG program for the 

Southern Maine Counties for four years 

after the commencement of the area’s 

opt-in. Thus, if this action is finalized as 

proposed, the State of Maine may not 

opt out of the federal RFG program for 

the Southern Maine Counties before 

May 1, 2019 for all regulated entities 

other than retailers and purchaserconsumers, and not before June 1, 2019 

for retailers and purchaser-consumers, 

respectively. The EPA is also adding in 

its RFG opt-out regulation at 40 CFR 

80.72 a provision to reflect that there is 

a four-year minimum opt-in period for 

areas that opt into the RFG program on 

the basis of their location within the 

ozone transport region. This 

clarification will align the federal 

regulation for RFG opt-out requirements 

with CAA section 211(k)(6)(B)(ii)(II). 

The EPA believes the dates proposed 

in today’s action would provide a 

reasonable balance by achieving air 

quality benefits in southern Maine by 

the start of the 2015 peak ozone season 

and providing adequate lead time for 

industry to prepare for program 

implementation. The proposed dates are 

consistent with the State’s request that 

the EPA require RFG to be sold in the 

Southern Maine Counties to coincide 

with the beginning of the high ozone 

season, which begins June 1 of each 

year. Thus, the dates would provide 

environmental benefits by allowing 

southern Maine to achieve volatile 

organic compound (VOC) reduction 

benefits for the 2015 VOC control 

season. The proposed dates are also 

consistent with the statutory 

requirement that the EPA set the date 

for commencement of the prohibition 

within two years of the EPA’s approval 

of the application by the Governor. The 

EPA’s approval of the Governor’s 

request will occur in the final rule 

establishing an implementation date. 

The EPA is seeking comment on 

whether the refining and distribution 

industry has the capacity to supply 

exclusively federal RFG to the Southern 

Maine Counties as of May 1, 2015 as 

proposed in this notice. The EPA also 

seeks comment on whether the dates for 

commencement of the prohibition 

proposed today would provide adequate 

lead time for industry to ensure supply 

of RFG to retail outlets, and for retail 

outlets to plan for, and accomplish, a 

transition from the sale of conventional 

gasoline to RFG. The EPA requests that, 

to the extent possible, commenters 

provide documentation supporting their 

comments. Comments supported by 

documentation will be most valuable to 

the EPA in making a final decision on 

the commencement date for the 

prohibition on the sale of conventional 

gasoline in the Southern Maine 

Counties. 

As noted above in Section II.A. of 

today’s action, CAA section 211(k)(6)(B) 

directs the EPA to apply RFG 

requirements in areas subject to a 

Governor’s petition ‘‘as soon as 

practical’’ within a two-year period 

following the EPA’s approval of a 

Governor’s petition, and may further 

extend the date RFG requirements 

commence based on a determination 

that there is insufficient capacity to 

supply RFG. However, the EPA does not 

have discretion to deny a Governor’s 

request for an opt-in for qualifying 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 51291 

6RFG primarily reduces emissions of VOCs. The 

RFG regulations at 40 CFR 80.41 establish a 

performance standard that must be met in order for 

gasoline to meet RFG requirements. Generally, 

based on survey data, RFG sold in the northeastern 

states has an RVP of between 6.8 and 7.0 psi. The 

lower RVP will result in reduction in VOC 

emissions. The survey data is available at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/rfgsurvey.htm 

7The Governor of Maine submitted this analysis 

for calendar year 2014 projected emission 

reductions with his July 23, 2013 letter requesting 

a May 1, 2014 effective date. However, Maine is not 

claiming, and the EPA is not proposing to approve 

in today’s action, any specific amount of emission 

reductions for the RFG program at this time. 

areas. Therefore, the scope of this action 

is limited to setting a date for 

commencement of opt-in of the 

Southern Maine Counties to the federal 

RFG program; it is not to decide 

whether the Southern Maine Counties 

may opt into the federal RFG program. 

The EPA is requesting comment on the 

proposed commencement dates and 

whether there will be a sufficient 

capacity to supply RFG available to 

these seven counties as of May 1, 2015 

for regulated entities such as refiners, 

importers, and distributors, and as of 

June 1, 2015 for retailers and purchaserconsumers. 

This proposed action would have no 

effect on the approved Maine State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). We 

understand that if today’s action is 

finalized as proposed, the State of 

Maine intends to submit a proposed SIP 

revision requesting the removal of the 

existing 7.8 Reid Vapor Pressure fuel 

requirements for the Southern Maine 

Counties. The EPA will consider 

Maine’s request when it is received. 

IV. Environmental Impact 

The federal RFG program is designed 

to lead to reductions in ozone-forming 

emissions. Reductions in ozone 

precursors are environmentally 

significant because they lead to 

reductions in ozone formation, with the 

associated improvements in human 

health and welfare. Exposure to groundlevel ozone (or smog) can cause 

respiratory problems, chest pain, and 

coughing and may worsen bronchitis, 

emphysema, and asthma. Animal 

studies suggest that long-term exposure 

(months to years) to ozone can damage 

lung tissue and may lead to chronic 

respiratory illness. The Maine DEP 

analyzed the emissions benefits which 

could be achieved by switching from 7.8 

RVP fuel to RFG.6 The Maine DEP used 

the EPA’s motor vehicle emission factor 

model, MOVES2010, to estimate, for 

informational purposes, that motor 

vehicle VOC emissions could be 

reduced by 123 tons, or by 6 percent 

and NOx by 28 tons, or by 1 percent.7

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563. (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

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

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3. The OMB has 

approved the information collection 

requirements that apply to the RFG 

program (see 59 FR 7716, February 16, 

1994), and has assigned OMB control 

number 2060–0277 (EPA ICR No. 

1591.25). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of today’s proposed rule on small 

entities, small entity is defined as: (1) 

Defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations a 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s proposed rule on 

small entities, I certify that this action 

would not have a significant adverse 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. In promulgating the RFG 

regulations for conventional gasoline, 

the EPA analyzed the impact of the 

regulations on small entities. The EPA 

concluded that the regulations may 

possibly have some economic effect on 

a substantial number of small refiners, 

but that the regulations may not 

significantly affect other small entities, 

such as gasoline blenders, terminal 

operators, service stations and ethanol 

blenders. See 59 FR 7810–7811 

(February 16, 1994). As stated in the 

preamble to the final RFG rule, 

exempting small refiners from the RFG 

regulations would not meet CAA 

requirements. 59 FR 7810. However, 

since most small refiners are located in 

the mountain states or in California, 

which has its own RFG program, the 

vast majority of small refiners are 

unaffected by the federal RFG 

requirements (although all refiners of 

conventional gasoline are subject to the 

RFG requirements). Moreover, all 

businesses, large and small, maintain 

the option to produce conventional 

gasoline to be sold in areas not obligated 

by the CAA to receive RFG or those 

areas which have not chosen to opt into 

the federal RFG program. A complete 

analysis of the effect of the RFG 

regulations on small businesses is 

contained in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis which was prepared for the 

RFG rulemaking, and can be found in 

the docket for that rulemaking. The 

docket number is: EPA Air Docket A– 

92–12. 

Today’s proposed rule would affect 

only those refiners, importers or 

blenders of gasoline that choose to 

produce or import RFG for sale in the 

Southern Maine Counties, and gasoline 

distributors and retail stations in those 

areas. As discussed above, the EPA 

determined that, because of their 

location, the vast majority of small 

refiners would be unaffected by the RFG 

requirements. For the same reason, most 

small refiners would be unaffected by 

today’s action. Other small entities, 

such as gasoline distributors and retail 

stations located in the Southern Maine 

Counties, which would become a 

covered area if today’s proposed rule is 

finalized as proposed, would be subject 

to the same requirements as those small 

entities which are located in current 

RFG covered areas. The EPA did not 

find the previous RFG regulations to 

significantly affect these entities. 

We welcome comments on the 

potential impacts of the proposed rule 

on small entities. Since the EPA’s 

discretion in this rulemaking is limited 

to establishment of the date for the 

application of RFG in the Southern 

Maine Counties, any comments related 

to impacts on small entities should be 

focused on the impact of alternative, 

and legally permissible, compliance 

dates. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
51292 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 167 / Thursday, August 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This proposed rule does not contain 

a Federal mandate that may result in 

expenditures of $100 million or more 

for State, local, and tribal governments, 

in the aggregate, or the private sector in 

any one year. Thus, this proposed rule 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

Although the EPA does not believe that 

UMRA imposes requirements for this 

rulemaking, the EPA notes that the 

environmental and economic impacts of 

the federal RFG program were assessed 

in the EPA’s Regulatory Impact Analysis 

for the 1994 RFG regulations. 

This proposed rule is also not subject 

to the requirements of section 203 of 

UMRA because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It would 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. The proposed 

rule would impose requirements only 

on certain refiners and other entities in 

the gasoline distribution system, and 

not on States. The requirements of the 

proposed rule would be enforced by the 

federal government at the national level. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to this proposed rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). Today’s proposed rule would 

affect only those refiners, importers or 

blenders of gasoline that choose to 

produce or import RFG for sale in the 

Southern Maine Counties, and gasoline 

distributors and retail stations in those 

areas. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 

not apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997) because it is not economically 

significant as defined in Executive 

Order 12866, and because the Agency 

does not believe the environmental 

health or safety risks addressed by this 

action present a disproportionate risk to 

children. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This proposed rulemaking does not 

involve technical standards. Therefore, 

the EPA is not considering the use of 

any voluntary consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations of the United States. 

The EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule would not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it increases the level of 

environmental protection for all affected 

populations without having any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any population, including any 

minority or low-income population. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Fuel additives, 

Gasoline, Motor vehicle pollution. 

Dated: August 18, 2014. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 

80 as follows: 

PART 80—REGULATION OF FUELS 

AND FUEL ADDITIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 80 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7542, 

7545, and 7601(a). 

■ 2. Section 80.70 is amended by adding 

paragraph (n) to read as follows: 

§ 80.70 Covered areas. 

* * * * * 

(n) The areas included in paragraph 

(n) of this section are located within the 

ozone transport region established 

under Clean Air Act section 184(a), are 

not classified as a marginal, moderate, 

serious, or severe ozone nonattainment 

area, and have opted into the 

reformulated gasoline program. They are 

covered areas for the purposes of 

subparts D, E, and F of this part. 

(1) The southern Maine counties of 

York, Cumberland, Sagadahoc, 

Androscoggin, Kennebec, Knox, and 

Lincoln are a covered area beginning 

June 1, 2015. The prohibitions of Clean 

Air Act section 211(k)(5) apply to all 

persons other than retailers and 

wholesale purchaser-consumers in these 

counties beginning May 1, 2015. The 

prohibitions of section 211(k)(5) of the 

Clean Air Act apply to retailers and 

wholesale purchaser-consumers in these 

counties beginning on June 1, 2015. 

(2) [Reserved] 

■ 3. Section 80.72 is amended by adding 

paragraph (c)(8) to read as follows: 

§ 80.72 Procedures for opting out of the 

covered areas. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(8) Notwithstanding any other 

provision of paragraph (c) of this 

section, for an area that opted in 

pursuant to Clean Air Act section 

211(k)(6)(B), the Administrator shall not 

set the effective date for removal of the 

area earlier than four years after the 

commencement date of opt-in. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–20177 Filed 8–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS