Promulgation of Reid Vapor Pressure Standard; Michigan

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MI50-01-7257; FRL-5819-5]

Promulgation of Reid Vapor Pressure Standard; Michigan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this action, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is

approving a revision to the Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP)

establishing a summertime gasoline Reid vapor pressure (RVP) limit of

7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) for gasoline sold in Wayne, Oakland,

Macomb, Washtenaw, Livingston, St. Clair, and Monroe counties in

Michigan (Detroit--Ann Arbor consolidated metropolitan statistical area

(CMSA)). The marketing of less volatile gasoline

[[Page 24342]]

reduces excessive evaporation of fuel during the summer months.

Evaporated gasoline combines with other pollutants on hot summer days

to form ground-level ozone, commonly referred to as smog. Ozone

pollution is of particular concern because of its harmful effects on

lung tissue and breathing passages.

On August 30, 1996, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to approve the SIP revision. During the

comment period EPA received comments from one commentator, which were

adverse.

This document summarizes the comments received, EPA's responses and

finalizes the approval of Michigan's SIP revision to establish a RVP

limit of 7.8 psi for gasoline sold in the Detroit--Ann Arbor CMSA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective on May 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available at the below address for public inspection during normal

business hours.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and

Radiation Division, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brad J. Beeson at (312) 353-4779.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In April 1995, the Detroit-Ann Arbor CMSA was redesignated as an

attainment area for ozone. At the time the area was redesignated to

attainment, EPA approved, as a revision to the Michigan SIP,

contingency measures including a 7.8 psi RVP fuels program. During the

summer of 1995 monitors in the Detroit-Ann Arbor CMSA recorded several

violations of the ozone standard. Therefore, the State is required to

implement an ozone contingency measure.

On January 6, 1996, Michigan Governor John Engler sent a letter to

EPA advising EPA the State had selected the 7.8 psi (low-RVP) fuels

program as one of the contingency measures to be implemented in the

Detroit area. On May 16, 1996, the State submitted the low-RVP portion

of their fuels program to EPA for approval. The program would require

gasoline sold in the Detroit-Ann Arbor CMSA to a standard of 7.8 psi

from June 1 to September 15. See 61 FR 45926 (August 30, 1996) for

further details of the program. The EPA reviewed the SIP revision

submitted by the State to determine completeness in accordance with the

completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V (1991), as

amended by 57 FR 42216 (August 26, 1991). On May 24, 1996, EPA found

the State's SIP submittal complete.

State governments are preempted under Section 211(c)(4)(A) of the

Clean Air Act from mandating a gasoline volatility standard not

identical to any Federal standard promulgated under Section 211(c)(1)

that is applicable to the same characteristic. However, under Section

211(c)(4)(C) a State can require, through a SIP revision, a more

stringent RVP standard for a particular area if the EPA finds that the

more stringent standard is necessary to achieve the National Ambient

Air Quality Standard for ozone. The EPA can approve a preempted state

fuel requirement as necessary; only if no other measures would bring

about timely attainment, or if other measures exist but are

unreasonable or impracticable. In addition to demonstrating necessity

as part of the Section 211(c)(4)(C) waiver process, under Section 110

the State must also submit an adequate description of the low-RVP

program and associated enforcement procedures. If EPA finds that a

State has shown necessity and has provided an adequate description of

the program, EPA may approve the SIP revision requiring the lower State

RVP standard for the selected areas.

On August 30, 1996, EPA proposed approval of the State's SIP

revision to establish a low-RVP program in the Detroit-Ann Arbor CMSA.

As detailed in the proposed approval at 61 FR 45926, EPA found the

State's demonstration sufficient to satisfy the necessity requirement

of Section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act. Additionally, EPA found that the

State's description of the program and associated enforcement

procedures were sufficient for approval.

II. Public Comment and EPA Response

During the comment period comments were received from only one

commentator. The following summarizes each comment and provides EPA's

response.

Comment

The first comment questioned whether implementation of a low-RVP

program alone would be sufficient to reduce ozone and ozone precursor

emissions in the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. In support of this position,

the commentator cites recent air quality monitoring data showing

exceedances of the 120 parts per billion one-hour standard. The data

includes ozone monitoring values from monitors in Detroit as well as

Southern Ontario, Canada, which is directly downwind of Detroit.

EPA Response

The State is obligated under its maintenance plan to implement

further emission control measures if the low-RVP program is not

effective in reducing violations of the ozone standard. Implementation

of a low-RVP program was only one of several measures the State has in

its contingency plan. Therefore, there are other measures in the

State's contingency plan which could be and must be implemented if the

low-RVP program is not effective.

Comment

The last comment concerns whether consensus was reached by the

Michigan Contingency Measure Workgroup in selecting a low-RVP program

as a contingency measure. The commentator states that ``the workgroup

which was convened to consider and select contingency measures did not

result in consensus recommendations.''

EPA Response

Websters' Dictionary defines consensus as a general agreement, or a

judgment arrived at by most of those concerned. In the recommendation

section of the Workgroup's final report a low-RVP program is listed as

one of the recommended contingency measures. The report further states

that most of the participants concurred with recommended contingency

measures. While the recommendation for a low-RVP program was not

unanimous, the recommendation was clearly supported by a majority of

the Workgroup. The EPA concludes that the Workgroup reached consensus

on the recommendation of low-RVP as a contingency measure.

III. Action

The EPA is approving a revision to Michigan's SIP to establish a

summertime gasoline RVP limit of 7.8 psi for gasoline sold in Wayne,

Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Livingston, St. Clair, and Monroe counties.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing

or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any

SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in

light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

[[Page 24343]]

B. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted

this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604).

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

This approval does not create any new requirements, but simply

approves pre-existing requirements under state law. Therefore, I

certify that this action does not have a significant impact on any

small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-

State relationship under the Act, preparation of the regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. EPA, 427

U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).

D. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that 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, 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.

This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under state

or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or the private

sector, result from this action.

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review

of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by July 7, 1997. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect

the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review, nor does

it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be

filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.

This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its

requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

F. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report

containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in the

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 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: April 4, 1997.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart X--Michigan

2. Section 52.1170 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(108) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1170 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(108) On May 16, 1996, the State of Michigan submitted a revision

to the Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP). This revision is for

the purpose of establishing a gasoline Reid vapor pressure (RVP) limit

of 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) for gasoline sold in Wayne,

Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Livingston, St. Clair, and Monroe counties

in Michigan.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) House Bill No. 4898; signed and effective November 13, 1993.

(B) Michigan Complied Laws, Motor Fuels Quality Act, Chapter 290,

Sections 642, 643, 645, 646, 647, and 649; all effective November 13,

1993.

(C) Michigan Complied Laws, Weights and Measures Act of 1964,

Chapter 290, Sections 613, 615; all effective August 28, 1964.

(ii) Additional materials.

(A) Letter from Michigan Governor John Engler to Regional

Administrator Valdas Adamkus, dated January 5, 1996.

(B) Letter from Michigan Director of Environmental Quality Russell

Harding to Regional Administrator Valdas Adamkus, dated May 14, 1996.

(C) State report titled ``Evaluation of Air Quality Contingency

Measures for Implementation in Southeast Michigan,'' submitted to the

EPA on May 14, 1996.

[FR Doc. 97-11633 Filed 5-2-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P