Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33033

(7) An explanation of why the event

does not present a substantial threat to

the safety of human life on navigable

waters and what steps will be taken to

ensure that result.

(8) The expected effect, if any, of the

event on the following resources:

(i) A threatened or endangered

species.

(ii) A critical habitat or other

designated environmentally sensitive

area.

(iii) The coastal zone of a State with

a Federally-approved Coastal Zone

Management plan under 16 U.S.C. 1451

et seq.

(iv) An area of historic, cultural, or

archeological significance, including an

area of significance to Native

Americans.

(c) A sponsor of an event meeting the

criteria of paragraph (a) of this section

must submit notice to the Designated

Officer at least 135 days before the

event. However, a sponsor may submit

the notice no later than 60 days before

the event if—

(1) The sponsor submitted a notice of

the event in the year immediately

preceding;

(2) The nature, location, scheduling,

and other relevant information

contained in the prior notice is

essentially the same; and

(3) The Coast Guard required no

permit for the prior event.

(d) The Coast Guard will provide a

copy of the notice to the appropriate

Federal, State, and local authorities

having jurisdiction over the affected

waters and also to the appropriate

Federal, State, or local authorities

having jurisdiction over potentially

affected critical habitat of a threatened

or endangered species or other

designated environmentally sensitive

area or an area of historic, cultural, or

archeological significance, including an

area of significance to Native

Americans.

(e) If, after reviewing the notice, the

Designated Officer determines that the

event is likely to present a substantial

threat to the safety of human life on

navigable waters, the Designated Officer

will notify the sponsor that the event

may not be held unless the sponsor first

obtains a Coast Guard permit for the

event.

§ 100.18 Permits.

(a) When a permit is required under

§ 100.17(e), the sponsor of the event

shall submit the following additional

information to the Designated Officer

within 30 days after the date of notice

of the decision that a permit will be

required:

(1) A detailed plan of how the sponsor

plans to conduct the event so as to

minimize the risk to the safety of human

life on the navigable waters.

(2) A statement that the event will be

conducted in compliance with all

requirements under the Clean Air Act

(42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq.), the Clean Water

Act (33 U.S.C. 1321), and the Noise

Control Act (42 U.S.C. 4901 et seq.), the

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the Marine

Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16

U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and other

applicable Federal, State and local laws,

regulations, and ordinances.

(3) If the event is subject to a State’s

Federally approved coastal zone

management plan, a determination from

the event sponsor that the event is

consistent with the enforceable policies

of that plan, as well as evidence

showing when the State concurred, or

was asked to concur, in that

determination.

(4) The name of all Federal, State, or

local authorities contacted about the

event, the date of each contact, whether

any agency indicated that the event will

have an adverse impact on a resource,

any steps an agency recommended to

mitigate the impact, and the sponsor’s

plan to mitigate the impact.

(5) Any other information deemed

necessary by the Designated Officer,

such as information to assist the Coast

Guard in preparing required

environmental documents on the event,

including, when appropriate, an

agreement to implement any mitigation

measures suggested by any Federal,

State, or local authority.

(b) The Designated Officer will

forward the information to the District

Commander, who reviews the

information submitted and issues a

permit to the sponsor or notifies the

sponsor that a permit has been denied

and states the reasons for the denial.

The sponsor may, within 15 days of the

date of notice of the decision to deny a

permit, request reconsideration and

submit revised or additional

information to show that the event has

been modified. The District Commander

reviews the information submitted for

reconsideration and issues a permit or

notifies the sponsor that a permit is

denied.

§ 100.19 Appeals.

The sponsor of a marine event for

which the District Commander has

denied a permit may appeal that

decision in writing to Chief, Operations,

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100

Second Street SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001, within 7 days of the date

of the determination. After considering

all material presented, the Chief, Office

of Operations, notifies the petitioner of

the decision. The decision by the Chief,

Office of Operations, is final agency

action.

§§ 100.25 and 100.30 [Removed]

7. Sections 100.25 and 100.30 are

removed.

8. Section 100.35 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 100.35 Special local regulations.

(a) The District Commander may issue

regulations to promote safety of life on

the navigable waters immediately

before, during, and immediately after a

marine event.

(b) The regulations may establish an

area within which participating vessels,

or other vessels are excluded, their entry

is limited, or their movement is

restricted.

(c) The District Commander will

provide notice of the regulations to the

State and local authorities having

jurisdiction over the affected navigable

waters and may provide notice of the

regulations by means of local or

broadcast notices to mariners.

9. Section 100.50 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 100.50 Penalties.

Any person who violates a provision

of this part or a regulation issued under

this part shall be subject to a penalty

assessed under 33 U.S.C. 1236.

10. Before § 100.101, add a new

subpart B heading and § 100.100 to read

as follows:

Subpart B—Special Local Regulations

§ 100.100 Purpose of subpart.

(a) This subpart prescribes regulations

for particular recurring marine events.

(b) Geographical coordinates used in

this subpart are not intended for

plotting on maps and charts referenced

to the North American Datum of 1983

(NAD 83), unless the coordinates are

labeled NAD 83. Coordinates without an

NAD 83 reference may be plotted on

maps or charts with an NAD 83

reference only after application of the

appropriate corrections published on

the map or chart.

J.A. Creech,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director,

Operations Policy.

[FR Doc. 96–16319 Filed 6–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M
33034 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL–5522–3]

RIN 2060–AG43

Regulation of Fuels and Fuel

Additives: Controls Applicable to

Gasoline Retailers and Wholesale

Purchaser-Consumers; 10 Gallon Per

Minute Fuel Dispensing Limit

Requirement Implementation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On January 20, 1993 EPA

finalized a requirement limiting vehicle

service station fuel dispensing rates to

10 gallons per minute (gpm) maximum,

beginning January 1, 1996, for retailers

and wholesale purchaser-consumers

handling over 10,000 gallons of fuel per

month (55 FR 16002, March 24, 1993).

In 1995, various groups in the

petroleum industry requested that EPA

delay the January 1, 1996 deadline, due

mainly to the lack of available retrofit

parts needed for compliance with the

10gpm requirement. This direct final

rule delays the implementation date of

the 10gpm requirement from January 1,

1996 until July 1, 1996. In addition, this

direct final rule clarifies that the

hardware/software for controlling the

fuel dispensing rate may be located

anywhere in the pump/dispenser

system and that refueling facilities are

exempt from the 10gpm requirement if

used exclusively to refuel heavy-duty

vehicles, boats or airplanes.

Today’s action is beneficial to affected

parties which are not already in

compliance with the 10gpm

requirement. It provides additional time

for manufacturers of fuel dispensing

hardware to certify and produce the

necessary equipment; and provides

additional time for service station

owners and fleet managers handling

over 10,000 gallons of fuel per month to

install the equipment where it is

needed. It is not expected to result in

any significant economic impact to any

of the affected parties. Today’s action

has no impact on service station owners

and fleet managers handling less than

10,000 gallons of fuel per month

because they are not required to meet

the 10gpm requirement until January 1,

1998.

Today’s action does not result in any

significant environmental impacts. The

six-month delay will only increase fuel

spillage during refueling events (on a

fleet average basis) by approximately .03

grams per gallon (or less) of fuel

dispensed. For comparison purposes,

the onboard refueling vapor recovery

refueling (ORVR) emission standard is

.20 grams per gallon of fuel dispensed

for 1998 light-duty vehicles.

DATES: This rule will be effective August

26, 1996, unless adverse comments are

received by July 26, 1996. If such

adverse comments are received, EPA

will publish a timely notice in the

Federal Register withdrawing this rule.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to the

initial final rule, and today’s action are

available for inspection in Public

Dockets A–89–18 and A–95–53 at Air

Docket Section, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, First Floor,

Waterside Mall, Room M–1500, 401 M

Street SW, Washington, DC 20460

(telephone 202–260–7548, fax 202–260–

4400) between the hours of 8 a.m. and

5:30 p.m. A reasonable fee may be

charged by EPA for copying docket

material. Any such notice or comments

per the requirements of this action

should be submitted to this same

address, with a complimentary copy, if

possible, to Karl Simon or Dave Good at

the address listed below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl

Simon at the U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW

(mail code 6405J), Washington DC,

20460, telephone (202) 233–9299; or

Dave Good at the U. S. EPA, 2565

Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan,

48105, telephone (313) 668–4450.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

Entities potentially regulated by this

action are retailers and wholesale

purchaser-consumers of gasoline and

methanol which handle over 10,000

gallons of fuel per month, for the

purpose of refueling passenger cars and

light-duty trucks. Regulated entities

would include the following:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Industry ............................................................... Service station owners, service station managers, fleet managers who operate a refueling facility to refuel motor vehicles.

Federal Government ........................................... Federal facilities, including military bases, who operate a refueling facility to refuel motor vehicles.

State, Local and Tribal Governments ................. State, local and tribal governments who operate a refueling facilities to refuel motor vehicles.

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 potentially be regulated by

this action. Other types of entities not

listed in the table could also be

regulated. To determine whether your

facility is regulated by this action, you

should carefully examine the criteria

contained in § 80.22(j) of title 40 of the

Code of Federal Regulations, as

modified by today’s action. If you have

questions regarding the applicability of

this action to a particular entity, consult

one of the persons listed in the

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section.

Table of Contents

I. Need for Delayed Implementation

II. Public Participation and Effective Date

III. Administrative Requirements

IV. Unfunded Mandates Act

V. Judicial Review

I. Need for Delayed Implementation

A. Introduction and Background

On March 24, 1993 the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) published a

final rule establishing the requirement

to limit fuel pump dispensing rates to

10 gallons per minute (37.9 liters per

minute) beginning January 1, 1996 for

most facilities (58 FR 16002). This

requirement applies to retailers and

wholesale purchaser-consumers of

gasoline and methanol. For businesses

handling 10,000 gallons or less of fuel

per month, implementation of the limit

on dispensing rates was delayed until

January 1, 1998.

The 10gpm requirement was

originally proposed in the onboard

refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) see 52

FR 31162, August 19, 1987. The final

ORVR requirements for cars and light

trucks were published in 59 FR 16262,

April 6, 1994. However, to achieve

earlier spillage emission reductions, the

10 gpm requirement was finalized in the

enhanced evaporative emission final

rule along with a spitback emissions

test, and published on March 24, 1993.

The spitback test procedure was

designed to ensure that no spillage
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33035

1Letter from Michael A. McCord, Esq. on behalf

of the Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association; to

Ms. Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator,

Office of Air and Radiation, EPA; July 10, 1995;

Docket A–95–53, document no. II–D–06.

2Letter from C. J. Krambuhl, Director of

Manufacturing, Distribution and Marketing,

American Petroleum Institute; to Ms. Mary D.

Nichols, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and

Radiation, EPA; August 15, 1995; Docket A–95–53,

document no. II–D–10.

3Letter from Gene Mittermaier, President, Data

Action Company; on behalf of the Petroleum

Marketers Association of America; to Ms. Mary D.

Nichols, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and

Radiation, EPA; July 1, 1995; Docket A–95–53,

document no. II–D–12.

4Letter from S.D. Dermott, Manager of Marketing

Department, Legislative & Regulatory Affairs, Exxon

Company, U.S.A.; to Ms. Mary D. Nichols, Assistant

Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, EPA;

July 28, 1995; Docket A–95–53, document no. II–

D–03.

5Letter from C.J. Krambuhl, Director,

Manufacturing, Distribution and Marketing,

American Petroleum Institute; to Ms. Margo Oge,

Director of the Office of Mobile Sources, EPA;

November 8, 1995; Docket A–95–53, document no.

II–D–11, page 3 of Attachment.

6Letter from Gerald A. Esper, Director of Vehicle

Environment Department, American Automobile

Manufacturers Association, and Gregory J. Dana,

Vice President and Technical Director, Association

of International Automobile Manufacturers; to Alan

Stout, EPA, dated October 12, 1995; Docket A–95–

53, document no. II–D–05.

7Esper and Dana. See reference 6.

8Section 211(c)(4)(B) of the Clean Air Act, 42

U.S.C. 7545.

9Section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Clean Air Act, 42

U.S.C. 7545.

occurs when a vehicle is refueled at a

rate of up to 10gpm. Fuel spitback can

be a problem when the design of the

fuel filler neck is inadequate to

accommodate in-use fuel fill rates. The

result can be fuel spillage, which is both

an environmental and a safety hazard.

In the rulemaking process, it was

determined that the service station

pumping rates needed to be limited to

assure compatibility with the new

ORVR systems. Note that approximately

20 percent of 1996 model year vehicles

are already subject to spitback emission

standards. ORVR requirements are

scheduled to begin phase-in with the

1998 model year, with the earliest

models entering the marketplace as

early as January 2, 1997.

During the summer of 1995, various

groups in the petroleum industry

requested that EPA delay the January 1,

1996 deadline.1 2 3 4 Some of the reasons

cited for this request were the lack of

available parts for retrofitting gas pumps

to meet this requirement, and the need

for EPA enforcement guidance regarding

procedures for determining compliance

with the 10gpm limit. EPA has reviewed

the need for and the potential impacts

of delaying the January 1, 1996 deadline

and concluded that the date of

implementation should be delayed until

July 1, 1996. This direct final rule

extends the deadline from January 1,

1996 until July 1, 1996.

EPA concurs with the industry’s

belief that there was insufficient

product availability of retrofit devices to

ensure industry compliance with the

January 1, 1996 deadline for that

segment of the industry not already in

compliance before January 1, 1996.

While the Agency believes that a large

percentage of nozzles do not dispense

fuel in excess of 10 gallons per minute,

this shortfall of retrofit devices

prevented the affected companies from

procuring and installing the necessary

equipment in the required time limit.

Manufacturers of fuel dispensing

hardware, including nozzles,

dispensers, pumps and other items,

have developed several widely differing

designs to meet the dispensing limit.

However, most of these products were

not available in sufficient quantity until

after January 1, 1996 as product

development and certification reached a

conclusion. For example, the American

Petroleum Institute indicated in a

November 8, 1995 letter to EPA, that

‘‘industry has already begun to respond

with the introduction of devices, but

many companies are just now gearing

up for production.’’ 5 The attachment to

that letter contains a table showing the

types of 10gpm flow limiters which will

be marketed by seven manufacturers, for

both conventional and stage II nozzles.

As shown in the table, several of those

devices are scheduled to begin

production in November/December,

1995 and several devices were awaiting

approval by Underwriters Laboratory

and the California Air Resources Board.

Since manufacturers were just

beginning production of these devices

in the last quarter of 1996, the Agency

believes that a substantial number of

service stations were unable to comply

with the 10gpm dispensing limit before

the January 1, 1996 deadline. The

Agency believes that six months

additional lead time given to comply

with the 10gpm dispensing limit will

provide manufacturers of fuel

dispensing hardware sufficient time to

certify and produce any necessary

equipment; and will allow affected

facilities to determine if they are in

compliance with the 10gpm limit and if

necessary, select the most appropriate

control technology and safely install the

equipment where it is needed. The

Agency believes that delaying the

implementation of the 10gpm

requirement for more than six months is

unnecessary because flow limiting

devices are currently widely available,

and a longer delay would tend to

penalize the facilities which were in

compliance prior to January 1, 1996 or

shortly thereafter. As will be discussed

later, EPA believes that the

environmental impact of today’s action

will be minimal.

B. Impact on the Automobile Industry

Automobile manufacturers have

indicated that they would not be

opposed to a six month delay of the

10gpm requirement.6 They are primarily

concerned about the compatibility of inuse fuel dispensing rates with vehicle

ORVR systems (which are required on

some 1998 model year vehicles). These

systems are designed and developed on

the presumption of a 10gpm maximum

dispensing rate. Automobile

manufacturers also indicated that fuel

dispensing rates greater than 10gpm

‘‘may cause system problems that

manufacturers have had little or no time

to evaluate.’’ 7 EPA has determined that

a six month delay in the 10gpm

requirement would not be detrimental

to the automobile manufacturers’ design

and development of ORVR systems.

These systems could be introduced as

early as January 2, 1997. Therefore, a six

month delay in the 10gpm requirement

effective date will not be detrimental.

C. Impact on State and Local

Government Programs

This direct final rule is not expected

to adversely impact state and local

programs, with respect to State

Implementation Plans (SIPs) or with

respect to any fuel dispensing

requirements which are imposed

separately by state or local governments.

The Agency believes that this direct

final rule will have no effect (or a

minimal effect) on SIPs since the

environmental impact is very minimal.

The limitation on in-use dispensing

rates in section 80.22(j) of the

regulations was issued under section

211(c) of the Act. As such, non-identical

state fuel controls are generally

preempted under section 211(c)(4)(A) of

the Act. This does not apply to state

controls in California, as California is

not subject to this preemption

provision.8 In addition, non-identical

state controls in other states are not

preempted where they have been

submitted and approved as a revision to

the State Implementation Plan, based on

a showing that the state control is

necessary to achieve the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard that the

Plan implements.9

Today’s direct final rule is not

expected to have any impact on the fuel

dispensing requirements which are

already in place for the State of

California. Currently, the California Air
33036 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

10Letter from Milton Feldstein, Air Pollution

Control Officer, California Bay Area Air Quality

Management District; to Ms. Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and

Radiation, EPA; August 31, 1995; Docket A–95–53,

document no. II–D–04.

11C. J. Krambuhl; p. 3 of Attachment. See

reference 5.

12 ‘‘Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and

Summary and Analysis of Comments’’ February,

1993; for the enhanced evaporative final rule, 58 FR

16002, March 24, 1993; Docket No. A–89–18,

document no. V–B–1, p. 40, 41.

13 ‘‘Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and

Summary and Analysis of Comments;’’ p. 42. See

reference 10.

14Technical Report ‘‘Investigation of the Need for

In-Use Dispensing Rate Limits and Fuel Nozzle

Geometry Standardization;’’ May, 1987; Docket No.

A–89–18, document no. IV–A–2, p. 13.

15Technical Report, p. 6. See reference 12.

Resources Board requires certification of

stage II vapor recovery systems,

including a requirement that the

dispensing rate of the system not exceed

10gpm when only one nozzle associated

with the product supply pump is

operating. Today’s direct final rule does

not affect this requirement, either before

or after the federal 10gpm requirements

are implemented.

The California Bay Area Air Quality

Management District (BAAQMD)

expressed concern that the petroleum

industry’s request for a two-year delay

‘‘should not apply to any area mandated

to install Stage II vapor recovery

systems,’’ 10 based on their belief that a

two year delay would result in

increased fuel spillage emissions.

Although the BAAQMD letter supplied

supporting fuel spillage data on one

vehicle which was refueled at 12.8 gpm,

the Agency believes that the vast

majority of stage II nozzles are already

in compliance with the 10gpm

maximum flow rate requirement, and

that a separate phase-in schedule is not

justified for stage II nozzles. For the few

possible cases of noncompliance (only

two stage II systems have been certified

above 10gpm) the Agency believes that

the incremental regulatory and

enforcement complexity to set up a

separate compliance schedule for stage

II nozzles is not beneficial, especially

since the delay period is only six

months. For these reasons, and because

the State of California is not preempted

from regulating fuel dispensing rates,

the Agency believes that this direct final

rule will have no impact on California

programs.

D. Implementation Issues

A ‘‘Question and Answer’’ (Q&A)

document has been prepared by the EPA

Mobile Source Enforcement Branch of

the Office of Enforcement and

Compliance Assurance, Office of

Regulatory Enforcement, Air

Enforcement Division to provide

implementation guidance on the 10gpm

requirements. The most recent version

of this document (as of today’s

publication date) is available in Docket

A–95–53 and also on the EPA electronic

bulletin board (TTN BBS) and the

internet (http://www.epa.gov/

omswww).

This direct final rule revises the

regulations to incorporate certain

elements of this Agency guidance

document. The changes clarify that the

hardware/software for controlling the

fuel dispensing rate may be located

anywhere in the pump/dispenser

system and that refueling facilities are

exempt from the 10gpm requirement if

used exclusively to refuel heavy-duty

vehicles, boats or airplanes. [The

provisions of 40 CFR 80.22(j) previously

exempted facilities used exclusively to

refuel heavy-duty vehicles; this direct

final rule and the Q & A document

clarify that facilities used to refuel boats

and airplanes are also exempt.]

Additionally, the Q&A document

provides a description of the test

procedure that EPA intends to use to

determine compliance with 10gpm

requirements. This guidance makes

clear that the 10gpm requirement is a

maximum amount that must be met

under all circumstances, including

‘‘worst case’’ conditions such as having

no other nozzles in operation.

E. Outreach Efforts

The Agency and petroleum industry

personnel are committed to (and have

already begun) communication outreach

efforts to implement the 10gpm

requirements, including today’s action.

For example, the American Petroleum

Institute (API) states in a November 8,

1995 letter to EPA, that the ‘‘Gasoline

Pump Manufacturers Association, the

American Petroleum Institute and the

Petroleum Marketers Association are

committed to helping the EPA ensure

that all stakeholders are notified of the

pending requirements. This process has

already begun through communications

with our memberships, conferences

such as the Petroleum Equipment

Institute conference in Denver, Colorado

in October, 1995 and interviews with

the trade press.’’ 11

The API letter also describes how

information about the 10gpm

requirements will be disseminated to

large volume and small volume retailers

and wholesale purchaser-consumers

through various trade associations and

trade magazines. The EPA intends to

provide supporting information to these

trade associations and magazines.

F. Environmental Impact

The Agency believes that the

environmental impact of this direct final

rule will be minimal. The Agency

estimates that this direct final rule will

result in a slight increase in the spitback

emissions. Spitback emission reductions

were originally estimated to be ‘‘a fleet

average value of .15 grams per gallon

(0.04 g/liter)’’ 12 of dispensed fuel. Using

this estimate, spitback spillage was

originally estimated (in 1987) to be 3.7

million gallons of gasoline spilled in

1995. The Agency estimates the

environmental impact of this direct final

rule to be approximately 20 percent or

less of the .15 grams per gallon and the

3.7 million gallon estimates, for the

following reasons:

First, while EPA data ‘‘indicate that

higher flow rates are associated with a

more frequent occurrence of spitback,13

the Agency has no data quantifying only

the effect of limiting in-use dispensing

rates to 10 gpm. The previously quoted

spitback benefits assume that vehicles

are designed to meet applicable spitback

emission standards and the in-use

dispensing rates are less than the 10gpm

used in the spitback compliance testing.

Based on the types of vehicles and the

refueling rates in the field today, the

effect of limiting in-use dispensing rates

to 10 gpm (by itself) is expected to be

a small portion of the original estimates.

However, to be conservative and also

consistent with the original estimate 14,

today’s environmental impact estimate

assumed that a 10gpm dispensing rate

limit would have eliminated spitback

from approximately one-half of the

vehicles in the field during the delayed

time period.

Second, the Agency believes that the

majority of in-use facilities are now in

compliance with the 10gpm

requirement. EPA’s original 1987 data

indicate that ‘‘most in-use dispensing

rates fall in the range of 8 to 10 gpm

with evidence of a trend toward higher

rates in new stations using higher

horsepower pumps.’’ 15 Since 1987, the

trend in non-stage II areas seems to have

continued toward higher rates, however

the trend in stage II areas is toward

dispensing rates which are already in

compliance with the 10gpm dispensing

rate. All states subject to Stage II

mandates require Stage II systems which

have been certified by the California Air

Resources Board (CARB). Except for two

systems which were CARB certified at

12 and 13 gpm, all CARB-certified

systems are limited to 10gpm or less.

Today’s environmental impact estimate

assumed that there has been no

significant change from the original

estimate in the total number of nozzles
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33037

16C. J. Krambuhl, p. 2 of Attachment. See

reference 5.

17Telephone contact between Alan Stout, EPA

and Arthur Fink, Husky Corporation, May 29, 1992.

Docket No. A–89–18, document no. IV-E–27.

in the field which are already in

compliance with the 10gpm

requirements.

Third, data supplied by API 16

indicate that ‘‘since 1987 940,000 new

nozzle positions have been shipped and

installed that exceed the 10 gallon per

minute restriction under normal

conditions with clean fuel filters and no

other nozzles in use at the site.’’ Based

on the station count supplied in the

April, 1995 issue of ‘‘National

Petroleum News’’ (of approximately

195,455 total stations in the U.S. in

1995) and assuming a conservative

average of 10 nozzles per station, this

would equate to approximately 48

percent of the nozzles in the field today.

The actual figure would be less than 48

percent, because some of these nozzles

would replace non-complying nozzles.

Additionally, the Agency believes many

of these nozzles may actually be in

compliance during normal use, for the

following reasons:

* In-use filters tend to clog up with

residue which reduces the actual flow

rate.

* Nozzles located farthest from the

pump tend to have a reduced flow rate

than nozzles which are located near the

pump.

* Operating several nozzles at the

same time tends to reduce the flow rate.

While the Agency is not contesting

API’s data that up to 940,000 nozzles

may need retrofitting to assure

compliance, the Agency still believes

that the majority of nozzles in the field

today are operated at or below the

10gpm limit. This rationale supports the

assumption that there has been no

significant change from the original

estimate in the total number of nozzles

in the field which are already in

compliance with the 10gpm

requirements.

Fourth, since May, 1992, one nozzle

manufacturer representing

approximately one-third of the U.S.

market, has been marketing nozzles

which are meeting the 10gpm

requirement.17 The fact that this

manufacturer’s nozzles continue to be in

compliance also supports the

assumption that there has been no

significant change from the original

estimate in the total number of nozzles

in the field which are already in

compliance with the 10gpm

requirements.

Fifth, today’s action has no impact on

retailers and wholesale purchaserconsumers handling 10,000 gallons per

month or less, since they are not

required to meet the 10gpm requirement

until January 1, 1998. However, to be

conservative, today’s environmental

impact estimate assumed that the effect

of delaying 10gpm dispensing rate

requirements would apply to all nozzles

in the field.

Sixth, it seems unlikely that service

station owners will wait until July 1,

1996 to comply with the 10gpm

requirement. The Agency believes that

some service station owners will install

retrofit hardware several months prior

to the delayed implementation date of

this direct final rule, as more and more

hardware becomes available in late 1995

and early 1996. Today’s environmental

impact estimate assumed that on the

average, all nozzles will be in

compliance by May 15, 1995. For this

reason, the environmental impact of this

direct final rule is estimated to be a

factor of nine-twenty-fourths of the

estimate contained in the 1993

rulemaking; based on an assumed delay

in compliance of 41⁄2 months for today’s

action as compared to a one year basis

for the 1993 estimate.

Therefore, the total impact of this

direct final rule is estimated to be

approximately 20 percent (or less) of the

original estimate for spitback savings

contained in the March 24, 1993 final

rule, or approximately .03 grams per

gallon of fuel dispensed (or less) on a

fleet average basis. The 20 percent is the

product of the (1/2) factor and the (9/24)

factor previously discussed in the first

and sixth points of this section. The

total impact =.15 g/gal x 1/2 x 9/24=.03

g/gal or less.

G. Economic Impact

This direct final rule is expected to

have a slight economic impact on

consumers, due to fuel spillage. As

stated previously, this direct final rule

is expected to delay fuel spillage

benefits to consumers, estimated to be a

small percentage (approximately 20

percent or less) of approximately 3.7

million gallons of gasoline spilled per

year. Thus, the environmental impact of

this direct final rule could conceivably

increase consumer costs by the cost of

approximately 740,000 gallons of

gasoline, i.e. approximately $1 million

(or less) due to reduced fuel spillage

benefits.

H. Conclusion

The Agency believes that a six month

delay in the original January 1, 1996

effective date of the 10gpm requirement

is appropriate given the logistical limits

on the feasibility of achieving

compliance by January 1, 1996, and the

limited environmental impacts of the

delay. The Agency believes that a six

month delay (combined with increased

EPA and industry outreach efforts to

make service station owners aware of

the 10gpm requirement) will have very

little (if any) effect on the environment.

Therefore, for the reasons discussed

previously, the Agency intends to delay

the implementation of the 10gpm

requirements for six months. EPA

expects no negative impact for any of

the affected parties.

II. Public Participation and Effective

Date

The Agency is publishing this action

as a direct final rule because it views the

changes contained herein as noncontroversial and based on outreach

efforts with all affected parties, EPA

anticipates no adverse or critical

comments. Representatives of

automobile and petroleum industry

associations have indicated that their

constituents will not be adversely

affected by this direct final rule and

therefore the Agency expects no adverse

comments from the members of those

associations. Similarly, the Agency does

not expect adverse comments from the

environmental community or state and

local governments, since the

environmental impact is very minimal.

This action will become effective

August 26, 1996. If the Agency receives

adverse comments by July 26, 1996,

EPA will publish a subsequent Federal

Register document withdrawing this

rule. In the event that adverse or critical

comments are received, EPA is also

publishing a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) in a separate action

today, which proposes the same rule

changes contained in this direct final

rule. Any adverse comments received by

the date listed above will be addressed

in a subsequent final rule. That final

rule will be based on the relevant

portion of the rule revision that is

noticed as a proposed rule in the

Proposed Rule Section of this Federal

Register and that is identical to this

direct final rule. The EPA 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 August 26, 1996.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Administrative Designation

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the

Agency must determine whether a

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and

therefore subject to OMB review and the
33038 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

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 or

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 the Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive

Order 12866, the Agency has

determined that this direct final rule is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order

12866 and is therefore not subject to

OMB review. This direct final rule will

not have an adverse effect on either the

refueling facilities or the manufacturers

of fuel dispensing equipment.

B. Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements

This direct final rule does not change

the information collection requirements

submitted to and approved by OMB in

association with the Evaporative

Emissions Final Rule (58 FR 16002,

March 24, 1993) which was approved by

the Office of Management and Budget

on May 9, 1994.

C. Impact on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980

requires federal agencies to examine the

impact of federal regulations on small

entities. The Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

amended these requirements.

Today’s action to delay the

implementation of the 10gpm fuel

dispensing requirements until July 1,

1996 will not result in any additional

economic burden on any of the affected

parties, including small entities

involved in the oil industry, the

automobile industry and the automobile

service industry. EPA is not imposing

any new requirements on regulated

entities, but instead is revising a current

requirement to make it less restrictive.

Today’s action is applicable to, and

beneficial to retailers and wholesale

purchaser-consumers handling over

10,000 gallons of fuel per month. It

provides these affected parties with six

months additional lead time, allowing

affected parties to determine if they are

in compliance with the 10gpm limit and

if necessary, select the most appropriate

control technology and safely install the

equipment where needed. As previously

discussed in section I.F., EPA believes

that a substantial number of these

facilities are already in compliance and

thus are unaffected by today’s action.

Retailers and wholesale purchaserconsumers handling 10,000 gallons of

fuel per month or less are also

unaffected by today’s action, because

they are not required to meet the 10gpm

fuel dispensing requirements until

January 1, 1998.

Today’s action is also expected to

have a beneficial effect on gas pump

equipment manufacturers, who are the

main beneficiaries of the change in the

fuel dispensing limit’s effective date.

While these entities had, before the

original effective date of January 1,

1996, produced equipment that would

limit fuel dispensing rates, they had not

produced such equipment in sufficient

quantities that would allow all affected

fuel dispensing facilities time to

purchase and safely install it. Today’s

action provides these manufacturers

with six months additional lead time to

produce and certify equipment

necessary for compliance with the

10gpm dispensing limit. The

introduction of this equipment into the

marketplace has already begun and EPA

does not expect the gas pump

manufacturers to experience any

significant difficulty in meeting market

demand for their products. Today’s

action has given these entities sufficient

time to produce the necessary

equipment.

Therefore, pursuant to section 605 of

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.

605, the Administrator certifies that this

direct final rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of

1980, 544 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and

implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part

1320, do not apply to this direct final

rule as it does not involve the collection

of information as defined therein.

E. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) of the

Administrative Procedures Act (APA),

as amended 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 section

804(2) of the APA as amended.

F. Electronic Copies of Rulemaking

Documents

A copy of this document is also

available electronically from the EPA

internet site and via dial-up modem on

the Technology Transfer Network

(TTN), which is an electronic bulletin

board system (BBS) operated by EPA’s

Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards. Both services are free of

charge, except for your existing cost of

internet connectivity or the cost of the

phone call to TTN. Users are able to

access and download files on their first

call using a personal computer per the

following information. Any one of the

following Internet addresses may be

used:

World Wide Web:

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

Gopher:

gopher://gopher.epa.gov/ Follow

menus for: Offices/Air/OMS

FTP:

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/ Change Directory to

pub/gopher/OMS

The steps required to access

information on this rulemaking on the

TTN bulletin board system are listed

below.

TTN BBS: 919–541–5742 (1,200–14,400

bps, no parity, eight data bits, one

stop bit)

Voice help: 919–541–5384

Internet address: TELNET

ttnbbs.rtpnc.epa.gov

Off-line: Mondays from 8:00–12:00

Noon ET

1. Technology Transfer Network Top

Menu: <T> GATEWAY TO TTN

TECHNICAL AREAS (Bulletin

Boards) (Command: T)

2. TTN TECHNICAL INFORMATION

AREAS: <M> OMS—Mobile Sources

Information (Command: M)

3. OMS BBS === MAIN MENU FILE

TRANSFERS: <O> Other OMS

Documents (Command: O)

At this stage, the system will list all

available files in this area. To download

a file, select a transfer protocol that will

match the terminal software on your

computer, then set your own software to

receive the file using that same protocol.

If unfamiliar with handling compressed

(that is, ZIP’d) files, go to the TTN top

menu, System Utilities (Command: 1)

for information and the necessary

program to download in order to unZIP

the files of interest after downloading to

your computer. After getting the files

you want onto your computer, you can
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33039

quit TTN BBS with the <G>oodbye

command.

IV. Unfunded Mandates Act

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact

statement to accompany any proposed

or final rule that includes a federal

mandate with estimated costs to the

private sector of $100 million or more,

or to state, local, or tribal governments

of $100 million or more in the aggregate.

Under section 205, EPA must select the

most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements.

Section 203 requires EPA to establish a

plan for informing and advising any

small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by

the rule.

EPA has determined that this direct

final rule imposes no new federal

requirements and does not include any

federal mandate with costs to the

private sector or to state, local, or tribal

governments. Therefore, the

Administrator certifies that this direct

final rule does not require a budgetary

impact statement.

V. Judicial Review

Under section 307(b) of the Clean Air

Act, EPA hereby finds that these

regulations are of national applicability.

Accordingly, judicial review of this

action is available only by filing a

petition for review in the United States

Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit within 60 days of

publication. Under section 307(b)(2) of

the Act, the requirements that are the

subject of this document may not be

challenged later in judicial proceedings

brought by EPA to enforce these

requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedures,

Air pollution control, Gasoline, Motor

vehicle pollution.

Dated: June 12, 1996.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 80 of

the Code of Federal Regulations, is

amended as set forth below.

PART 80—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 80

continues to read as follows:

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

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

7545, and 7601(a)).

2. Section 80.22 is amended by

revising paragraph (j) to read as follows:

§ 80.22 Controls and prohibitions.

* * * * *

(j) After July 1, 1996 every retailer and

wholesale purchaser-consumer handling

over 10,000 gallons (37,854 liters) of

fuel per month shall limit each nozzle

from which gasoline or methanol is

introduced into motor vehicles to a

maximum fuel flow rate not to exceed

10 gallons per minute (37.9 liters per

minute). The flow rate may be

controlled through any means in the

pump/dispenser system, provided the

nozzle flow rate does not exceed 10

gallons per minute (37.9 liters per

minute). After January 1, 1998 this

requirement applies to every retailer

and wholesale purchaser-consumer.

Any dispensing pump that is dedicated

exclusively to heavy-duty vehicles,

boats, or airplanes is exempt from this

requirement.

[FR Doc. 96–16205 Filed 6–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 152

[OPP–300110; FRL–5372–8]

RIN 2070–AC98

Notification Procedures for Pesticide

Registration Modifications

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule amends EPA’s

notification and non-notification

procedures for certain registration

modifications. The rule no longer

specifies the types of modifications that

may be accomplished by notification or

without notification to EPA. The rule

provides that EPA will issue procedures

for notification and non-notification.

EPA will thereafter designate

modifications that may be accomplished

through the notification and nonnotification procedures by notice to

registrants. This revision will streamline

the regulations by eliminating listings of

very specific modifications, and provide

greater flexibility to expand the scope of

the notification/non-notification

process.

DATES: This action is effective on

August 26, 1996 unless adverse

comments are received by July 26, 1996.

If the final rule is withdrawn, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: The Agency invites any

interested person to submit written

comments to: By mail: Program

Resources Section, Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C),

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In

person, bring comments to: Rm. 1132,

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by the docket number

‘‘OPP–30110.’’ No Confidential Business

Information (CBI) should be submitted

through e-mail. Electronic comments on

this document may be filed online at

many Federal Depository Libraries.

Additional information on electronic

submissions can be found in Unit VI. of

this preamble.

Information submitted as a comment

concerning this document may be

claimed confidential by marking any

part or all of that information as CBI.

Information so marked will not be

disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

A copy of the comment that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be disclosed publicly by EPA

without prior notice. All written

comments will be available for public

inspection in Rm. 1132 at the Virginia

address given above from 8 a.m. to 4:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding

legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff

Kempter, Registration Division (7505C),

Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location, telephone number, and

e-mail address: Rm. 713, CM#2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA

22202, Telephone: 703–305-5448, email: kempter.carlton@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated entities. Entities potentially

regulated by this action are pesticide

producers who register pesticides.

This listing is not intended to be

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide

for readers regarding entities likely to be

regulated by this action. To determine

whether you are subject to regulation by

this action, you should carefully

examine 40 CFR 152.44.