

[Federal Register: February 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 30)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 8202-8209]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13fe08-12]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0002; FRL-8529-2]

 
Approval of Louisiana's Petition To Relax the Summer Gasoline 
Volatility Standard for the Grant Parish Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action approving the State of 
Louisiana's request to relax the federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) 
standard applicable to gasoline introduced into commerce in Grant 
Parish, Louisiana, (Grant Parish) during the summer ozone control 
season--June 1 to September 15 of each year. Grant Parish is a 
designated attainment area under the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (``NAAQS'') and is a redesignated attainment area 
under the

[[Page 8203]]

1-hour ozone NAAQS. This action amends our regulations to change the 
summertime RVP standard for Grant Parish from 7.8 pounds per square 
inch (psi) to 9.0 psi. EPA has determined that this change to our 
federal RVP regulations is consistent with the applicable provisions of 
the Clean Air Act. Louisiana's request is supported by evidence that 
Grant Parish can implement the 9.0 psi RVP standard and maintain the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and that relaxation of the applicable RVP standard to 
9.0 psi will provide economic benefits. This action is being taken 
without prior proposal because EPA believes that this final rulemaking 
is noncontroversial, for the reasons set forth in this preamble, and 
due to the limited scope of this action.

DATES: This rule is effective on April 14, 2008 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 14, 2008. If EPA receives 
adverse comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0002, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov
     Fax: Air and Radiation Docket--(202) 566-9744
     Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center 
(EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0002.
     Hand Delivery: Public Reading Room, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket Office's normal hours of 
operations, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0002. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail 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, 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 EPA cannot read 
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, 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.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Public Reading Room, 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 and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Hillson, Office of Transportation 
and Air Quality, Transportation and Regional Programs Division, 
Mailcode AASMCG, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood 
Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: (734) 214-4789; fax 
number: (734) 214-4052; e-mail address: Hillson.Sean@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we'', 
``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposal because we 
view this action as noncontroversial and anticipate no adverse comment. 
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register, 
we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal 
to relax the applicable volatility standard in Grant Parish if adverse 
comments are received on this direct final rule. We do not intend to 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further 
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of 
this document.
    If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this 
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public 
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.
    Regulated Entities: Entities potentially affected by this rule are 
fuel producers and distributors who do business in Grant Parish. 
Regulated entities include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  NAICS
          Examples of potentially regulated entities              codes
                                                                   \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum Refineries..........................................    324110
Gasoline Marketers and Distributors...........................    424710
                                                                  424720
Gasoline Retail Stations......................................    447110
Gasoline Transporters.........................................    484220
                                                                  484230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

    This table provides only a guide for readers regarding entities 
likely to be regulated by this action. You should carefully examine the 
amended regulations in 40 CFR 80.27 to determine whether your facility 
is impacted. If you have further questions, call the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

Outline

I. Introduction
II. What Is the History of Gasoline Volatility Regulation?
III. What Are the EPA Rulemaking Actions Addressing the Transition 
From the 1-Hour to 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS?
IV. What Is the EPA Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility 
Standards in Ozone Nonattainment Areas That Are Redesignated as 
Attainment Areas?
    A. What Is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy?
    B. How Is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy Applied to 
Grant Parish?
V. What Information Supports the Relaxation of Federal RVP 
Requirements in Grant Parish?
    A. History
    B. Louisiana's RVP Relaxation Request and Initial EPA Response
    C. EPA Approval of the Grant Parish 8-Hour Maintenance Plan
    D. What Are the Section 110(l) Requirements?
VI. Final Action and Rationale
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

[[Page 8204]]

I. Introduction

    This rulemaking describes our final action to approve Louisiana's 
request to relax the federal RVP standard from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi in 
Grant Parish during the summer ozone control season--June 1 to 
September 15. In 1995, EPA redesignated Grant Parish to a 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS attainment area. Currently, Grant Parish is a designated 
attainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS will also be called the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standards).
    This preamble is hereafter organized into five parts. Section II 
provides the history of federal gasoline volatility regulation. Section 
III describes EPA's rulemaking actions to transition from the 1-hour to 
the 8-hour ozone standard. Section IV provides the Agency's policy 
regarding relaxation of volatility standards in former ozone 
nonattainment areas that have been redesignated to attainment, and how 
this policy is applied to Grant Parish while taking into account the 
requirements under the 8-hour ozone standard. Section V reviews the 
available information to determine if relaxation of the RVP standard in 
Grant Parish is warranted: Louisiana's history of federal RVP 
requirements; EPA's redesignation and designation of Grant Parish as 
attainment of the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone NAAQS, respectively; 
Louisiana's relaxation request prompting this action; and the 8-hour 
maintenance plan approval to support the request. Finally, Section VI 
presents EPA's final action in response to the request and our 
rationale.

II. What is the History of Gasoline Volatility Regulation?

    In 1987, EPA determined that gasoline nationwide had become 
increasingly volatile, causing an increase in evaporative emissions 
from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.\1\ Evaporative emissions 
from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), are 
precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone and contribute to the 
nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to ground-level ozone can 
reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma or other respiratory 
conditions), increase susceptibility to respiratory infection, and may 
contribute to premature death in people with heart and lung disease.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 52 FR 31274 (Aug. 19, 1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in 
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is the Reid Vapor Pressure 
(RVP). Under section 211(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act''), 
we promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989, that set maximum limits 
for the RVP of gasoline sold during the summer ozone control season--
June 1 to September 15. These regulations were referred to as Phase I 
of a two-phase nationwide \2\ program, which was designed to reduce the 
volatility of commercial gasoline during the summer ozone control 
season.\3\ On June 11, 1990, EPA promulgated more stringent volatility 
controls under Phase II of the volatility control program.\4\ These 
requirements established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi 
(depending on the State, the month, and the area's initial ozone 
attainment designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard or ``NAAQS'') during the ozone control 
season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Hawaii, Alaska and U.S. territories were excepted.
    \3\ 54 FR 11868 (Mar. 22, 1989).
    \4\ 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to 
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate 
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense, 
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce 
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the ozone 
control season. It further requires EPA to establish more stringent RVP 
standards in nonattainment areas if we find such standards ``necessary 
to generally achieve comparable evaporative emissions (on a per vehicle 
basis) in nonattainment areas, taking into consideration the 
enforceability of such standards, the need of an area for emission 
control, and economic factors.'' Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from 
establishing a volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an 
attainment area, except that we may impose a lower (more stringent) 
standard in any former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to 
attainment.
    On December 12, 1991, EPA modified the Phase II volatility 
regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA.\5\ The 
modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP above 
9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning in 
1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations retained 
the original Phase II standards published in 1990.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
    \6\ See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility controls,\7\ 
and reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility standards 
published in 1991,\8\ we will rely on States to initiate changes to our 
volatility program that they believe will enhance local air quality 
and/or increase the economic efficiency of the program within the 
statutory limits.\9\ In those rulemakings, we explained that the 
Governor of a State may petition the Agency to set a volatility 
standard less stringent than 7.8 psi for some month or months in a 
nonattainment area. The petition must demonstrate such a change is 
appropriate because of a particular local economic impact and that 
sufficient alternative programs are available to achieve attainment and 
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 55 FR 23660 (June 11, 1990) for a discussion on 
procedures by which States could petition EPA for more or less 
stringent volatility standards.
    \8\ See 56 FR 24242 (May 29, 1991) and 56 FR 64706 (Dec. 12, 
1991).
    \9\ See CAA section 211(h)(1) (allowing EPA to set a volatility 
standard more stringent than 9.0 psi as necessary to achieve 
comparable emissions in nonattainment areas considering 
enforceability, the need of an area for emissions control and 
economic factors).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What are the EPA Rulemaking Actions Addressing the Transition from 
the 1-Hour to 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS?

    In July 1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone standard which would 
be measured over an 8-hour period, i.e., the 8-hour ozone NAAQS or 
standard.\10\ The 8-hour Ozone NAAQS rule was challenged by numerous 
litigants and in May 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. 
Circuit issued a decision remanding, but not vacating, the 8-hour ozone 
standard. In February 2001, the Supreme Court upheld our authority to 
set the ozone NAAQS and remanded the case to the D.C. Circuit Court for 
disposition of issues the Court did not address in its initial 
decision.\11\ The Court of Appeals addressed these remaining issues and 
upheld the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\12\ In April 2004, EPA designated and 
classified areas for the 8-hour ozone standard.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).
    \11\ Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass'ns, 531 U.S. 457 (2001).
    \12\ American Trucking Assoc. v. EPA, 195 F.3d 4 (D.C. Cir., 
1999).
    \13\ 69 FR 23857 (Apr. 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also in April 2004, we promulgated the Phase 1 Ozone Implementation 
rule that addressed the revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and 
identified the 1-hour requirements that would remain applicable after 
revocation (i.e., the ``anti-backsliding provisions'').\14\ These 
requirements varied based on areas'

[[Page 8205]]

designation for the 1-hour standard and such areas' designation for the 
8-hour NAAQS. As part of these anti-backsliding provisions, EPA 
required areas that had been redesignated from nonattainment to 
attainment for the 1-hour standard (i.e., 1-hour ozone ``maintenance'' 
areas) and that were designated attainment for the 8-hour standard to 
submit a new maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) that would 
provide for maintenance of the 8-hour standard.\15\ After such a plan 
was approved, anti-backsliding provisions provided relief for such 
areas from certain 1-hour maintenance plan requirements. Although the 
Phase 1 Ozone implementation rule was challenged in court and portions 
of the rule were vacated, the vacated portions of the rule are not 
relevant to today's Grant Parish volatility relaxation rulemaking.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 69 FR 23951 (Apr. 30, 2004).
    \15\ See 69 FR 23955 (Apr. 30, 2004), section IV.C.2.c.v and 
IV.C.2.d; see also 40 CFR 51.905(a)(4).
    \16\ S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. 
Cir. 2006 reh'g denied S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 2007 
U.S. App. Lexis 13751 (D.C. Cir. June 8, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In November 2005, EPA promulgated the Phase 2 Ozone Implementation 
rule that addressed various control and planning obligations that are 
applicable to areas designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS.\17\ This rule has been challenged and EPA is currently awaiting 
argument and a decision.\18\ No part of the Phase 2 Ozone 
implementation rule is relevant for today's Grant Parish volatility 
relaxation rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 70 FR 71612 (Nov. 29, 2005).
    \18\ NRDC v. EPA, No. 06-1045 (D.C. Cir.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is the EPA Policy Regarding Relaxation of Volatility Standards 
in Nonattainment Areas that are Redesignated as Attainment Areas?

A. What is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy?

    Under the amended Phase II volatility regulations, any change in 
the volatility standard for a nonattainment area that was subsequently 
redesignated as an attainment area must be accomplished through a 
separate rulemaking that revises the applicable standard for that 
area.\19\ Thus, for former 1-hour nonattainment areas where EPA 
mandated a Phase II volatility standard of 7.8 psi RVP in the December 
12, 1991 rulemaking, the 7.8 psi RVP standard will remain in effect, 
even after such an area is redesignated as being in attainment, until a 
separate rulemaking is completed that revises the RVP standard in that 
area from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 56 FR 64706 (Dec. 12, 1991).
    \20\ As stated in the preamble for the Agency's initial Phase II 
volatility standards (55 FR 23609), and in the preamble in the 
proposal to revise those standards (56 FR 24244), EPA may also 
promulgate a rule to revise the volatility standard in a particular 
nonattainment area in order to enhance local air quality and/or 
increase the economic efficiency of the program. The Governor of a 
state, or his designee, may petition EPA for a less stringent 
standard if such a standard is consistent with the requirements of 
the Act and if the state can document (1) particular local economic 
impact that makes the less stringent standard appropriate and (2) 
sufficient alternative programs to achieve attainment and 
maintenance of the NAAQS for ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the December 12, 1991 rulemaking, the Agency 
believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard is best 
accomplished in conjunction with the redesignation process. In order 
for an ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated as an attainment 
area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act requires the State to make a 
showing, pursuant to section 175A of the Act, that the area is capable 
of maintaining attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years. Depending 
on the area's circumstances, this maintenance plan will either 
demonstrate that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten 
years without the more stringent volatility standard or that the more 
stringent volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain 
its attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a 
request for redesignation, the Agency will not relax the volatility 
standard unless the State requests a relaxation and the maintenance 
plan demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the Agency, that the area 
will maintain attainment for ten years without the need for the more 
stringent volatility standard.

B. How Is the General Volatility Relaxation Policy Applied to Grant 
Parish?

    Under the Phase 1 Ozone implementation rule, 1-hour ozone 
maintenance areas that are designated 8-hour ozone attainment areas, 
such as Grant Parish, are required to develop and submit to EPA a 
maintenance plan under section 110(a)(1) of the Act.\21\ In today's 
rulemaking, we are determining that 1-hour ozone maintenance areas that 
are designated 8-hour ozone attainment areas may rely on the section 
110(a)(1) maintenance plan, rather than a section 175A maintenance plan 
as explained above, for purposes of requesting relaxation of the more 
stringent volatility standard. We come to the conclusion that a section 
110(a)(1) maintenance plan can be used to make a relaxation 
demonstration for the following reasons: (1) Section 110(a)(1) 
maintenance plans contain analogous information and meet similar 
criteria as section 175A maintenance plans, namely a demonstration of 
continued maintenance of the ozone standard for at least 10 years using 
the less stringent volatility standard and that the plan contains 
contingency measures; (2) Although the EPA general volatility 
relaxation policy calls for an approved 175A maintenance plan, the 
requirement to submit a section 175A maintenance plan for the 8-hour 
standard does not apply to areas initially designated attainment for 
that standard; and (3) Development of a section 110(a)(1) maintenance 
plan is consistent with the Phase 1 Ozone Implementation rule 
requirements, specifically 40 CFR 51.905(a)(4), which is applicable to 
Grant Parish, and thus use of an approved section 110(a)(1) maintenance 
plan for the purpose of relaxing the applicable RVP standard follows 
logically. Therefore, in today's rulemaking, EPA is allowing Grant 
Parish to rely on its section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan and the 
accompanying analysis set forth below in demonstrating the 
approvability of the State's relaxation request of the applicable RVP 
standard in Grant Parish.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See 69 FR 23955 (Apr. 30, 2004), section IV.C.2.c.v and 
IV.C.2.d; see also 40 CFR 51.905(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. What Information Supports the Relaxation of Federal RVP Requirements 
in Grant Parish?

A. History

    In the summer of 1989, the Phase I gasoline volatility control 
program was implemented throughout the country. At that time, based on 
designations issued on September 11, 1978, Grant Parish was a 
designated ozone nonattainment area.\22\ Under the Phase I volatility 
rule, gasoline volatility requirements throughout the entire State of 
Louisiana were uniform, although there was some variation by month.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 43 FR 40412 (Sept. 11, 1978).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 6, 1991, EPA issued ozone nonattainment designations 
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Pursuant to section 107(d)(1)(C)(i) of the 
CAA, the nonattainment designation for Grant Parish issued in 1978 
continued because Louisiana had not acquired the three years of ambient 
air quality data necessary to petition for redesignation to 
attainment.\23\ In 1992, under Phase II of the volatility control 
program, the Grant Parish ozone nonattainment area

[[Page 8206]]

(at the time) was required to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi. In 
1995, EPA approved a request from the State of Louisiana to redesignate 
Grant Parish to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard and approved a 
maintenance plan.\24\ At that time, the State of Louisiana did not make 
a request for relaxation of the gasoline volatility standard at that 
time; therefore, Grant Parish continued to use gasoline with an RVP of 
7.8 psi during the ozone control season through the summer of 2005. In 
2004, we designated Grant Parish as an 8-hour ozone attainment 
area.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991).
    \24\ 60 FR 43020 (Aug. 18, 1995).
    \25\ 69 FR 23857 (Apr. 30, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Louisiana's RVP Relaxation Request and Initial EPA Response

    In May of 2005, the State of Louisiana requested that the gasoline 
volatility standard for Grant Parish be relaxed and that enforcement 
discretion be granted in the interim between the request and the final 
rulemaking.\26\ This petition from the State cited the fact that Grant 
Parish is a designated 8-hour ozone attainment area and a redesignated 
1-hour ozone attainment area that has not measured a 1-hour exceedance 
in the 10 years since the 1995 maintenance plan became effective. 
Louisiana also stated the following justifications for the relaxation: 
First, Grant Parish is classified as rural, is not adjacent to any 
urban area, and has only seen about 7% population growth from 1990 to 
2000 (17,526 to 18,698). Second, a review of vehicle miles traveled 
(VMT) statistics for Grant Parish show a downward trend from 1990 to 
1999. There was a slight increase (2% per year) from 1999 through 2003, 
although Louisiana qualifies this by stating the increase could be a 
reflection of increases in population, but is more likely due to 
changes in VMT reporting in 2001. Third, air quality data shows a 
general decrease in emissions of ozone-forming pollutants, such as 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX). 
Finally, Louisiana provides evidence that relaxation of the RVP 
requirement will result in economic benefit to Grant Parish. Outside of 
the ozone control season, bulk plant operators are able to acquire 
conventional gasoline from nearby terminals. During the ozone control 
season, however, bulk plant operators must purchase gasoline meeting 
the 7.8 psi RVP standard from facilities in Baton Rouge or Lake 
Charles, Louisiana. Each of these cities is approximately 145 miles 
from Grant Parish, resulting in a 290-mile roundtrip to deliver 
compliant fuel. This distance increases the transportation costs and 
can increase the price of gasoline by an estimated 2 cents per gallon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Letter from Michael McDaniel, Secretary of the Louisiana 
Department of Environmental Quality, to Mayor Richard Greene, 
Administrator of U.S. EPA Region 6, titled ``Relaxation of the 
Summer Gasoline Volatility Standard for Grant Parish'' (May 24, 
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In May of 2006, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 
granted enforcement discretion to allow the use of gasoline having a 
volatility that is no higher than 9.0 psi during the ozone control 
seasons for Grant Parish from May 16, 2006, to September 16, 2007, or 
the effective date of the action set forth in this rulemaking, 
whichever is earlier.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Letter from Granta Nakayama, Assistant Administrator of the 
U.S. EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, to Michael 
McDaniel, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Environmental 
Quality, titled ``Enforcement Discretion Regarding the Gasoline 
Volatility Standard for Grant Parish, Louisiana'' (May 16, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. EPA Approval of the Grant Parish 8-Hour Maintenance Plan

    On August 23, 2006, the State of Louisiana submitted a maintenance 
plan for Grant Parish to EPA Region 6 that ensures continued attainment 
of the 8-hour ozone standard through 2014, which is 10 years following 
designation under the 8-hour standard as required by 40 CFR 
51.905(a)(4)(ii). EPA has determined that the maintenance plan also 
meets the other statutory and regulatory requirements and is consistent 
with EPA guidance; therefore, in November 2007, EPA published a direct 
final rule in the Federal Register that approved the 8-hour maintenance 
plan for Grant Parish.\28\ No adverse comments were received, and the 
rule became effective on January 7, 2008. The State's maintenance plan 
submission, EPA's Technical Support Document, and approval rulemaking 
action are incorporated by reference in today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 72 FR 62579 (November 6, 2007); Docket ID: EPA-R06-OAR-
2006-0271.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA determined that the Grant Parish maintenance plan adequately 
addresses the components of a maintenance plan: a 2002 base year 
attainment inventory; projected emission inventories for the future 
years of 2008, 2011, and 2014 with a maintenance demonstration; 
verification of continued attainment with the use of either 7.8 or 9.0 
psi gasoline; and contingency measures. Some of these components are 
presented in greater detail below.
    The following table \29\ provides VOC and NOX emissions 
data for the 2002 base attainment year inventory, as well as projected 
VOC and NOX emission inventory data for the major 
anthropogenic source categories developed using EPA-approved 
technologies and methodologies and keeping 7.8 psi RVP gasoline in 
place for the years 2008, 2011, and 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The ``Total VOCs'' values for 2008, 2011, and 2014 in this 
table differ from the values in the November 6, 2007, maintenance 
plan approval rulemaking. These differences were due to a 
typographical error by EPA in the ``Onroad VOCs'' row; those errors 
have been corrected here resulting in new ``Total VOCs'' values. The 
changes accurately reflect the data submitted by the state of 
Louisiana and yield lower ``Total VOCs'' values in all future years. 
Therefore the conclusion that Grant Parish has demonstrated 
maintenance of the 8-hour standard is still valid.

                             Grant Parish.--VOC and NOX Emission Inventory Baseline
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Emissions source                    2002  (tpd)     2008  (tpd)     2011  (tpd)     2014  (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source VOCs...............................            0.66            0.83            0.91            0.98
Point Source NOX................................            1.85            1.96            2.01            2.06
Non-Point (Area) Source VOCs....................            1.57            1.62            1.63            1.66
Non-point (Area) Source NOX.....................            0.61            0.64            0.65            0.67
Nonroad VOCs....................................            5.49            4.66            4.20            3.83
Nonroad NOX.....................................            1.56            1.41            1.33            1.23
Onroad VOCs.....................................            1.27            0.80            0.63            0.52
Onroad NOX......................................            1.71            1.12            0.83            0.62
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total VOCs..................................            8.99            7.91            7.37            6.99
    Total NOX...................................            5.73            5.13            4.82            4.58
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 8207]]

As shown in the table above, Louisiana has demonstrated that the future 
year 8-hour ozone emissions will be less than the 2002 base attainment 
year's emissions. Measures that will provide for additional 8-hour 
ozone emission reductions include: (1) Implementation of Federal VOC 
Emission Standards for Automobile Refinish Coatings, Consumer Products, 
and Architectural Coatings; (2) Federal Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission 
Standards, Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards, and gasoline and 
highway diesel fuel sulfur control requirements; (3) Federal control of 
emissions from non-road diesel engines and fuels; and (4) 
implementation of the Federal Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Grant Parish maintenance plan's attainment inventory, 
Louisiana provided an analysis of VOC emissions from on-road mobile 
sources comparing 7.8 and 9.0 psi RVP gasoline for three projection 
years: 2008, 2011, and 2014.

          Grant Parish.--RVP Comparison Effect on VOC Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            7.8 psi RVP     9.0 psi RVP
                  Year                      VOCs (tpd)      VOCs (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002....................................            1.27             N/A
2008....................................            0.80            0.90
2011....................................            0.63            0.70
2014....................................            0.52            0.57
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modeling results for this comparison show that the overall effect on 
VOC emissions from between 7.8 and 9.0 psi RVP gasoline was 0.1 tpd or 
less for each of the three projection years, and that each of the 
projected VOC emission inventories from 9.0 psi RVP gasoline is less 
than the VOC emission inventory from the 2002 attainment year 
inventory. Therefore, the Grant Parish 8-hour maintenance plan 
demonstrates that use of the less stringent 9.0 psi RVP gasoline will 
not interfere with 8-hour ozone maintenance. In its approval of the 
maintenance plan for Grant Parish, EPA concluded that ``the Grant 
Parish 8-hour maintenance plan demonstrates that the use of either 7.8 
or 9.0 psi RVP gasoline in the parish will allow the area to continue 
to meet the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.''

D. What are the Section 110(l) Requirements?

    Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere 
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable 
further progress (``RFP'') (as defined in section 171), or any other 
applicable requirement of the Act. The modeling in the maintenance plan 
showed a very small increase in VOC emissions with the relaxed RVP 
standard when comparing emissions from 7.8 and 9.0 psi RVP gasoline in 
future years, but the emissions projections for the future years using 
9.0 psi RVP gasoline in Grant Parish still reflect a decrease in 
emissions from the 2002 baseline year and a downward trend in VOC and 
NOX emissions through 2014. Therefore, and as discussed in 
more detail above, Louisiana has demonstrated that EPA's approval of 
the relaxed RVP standard in Grant Parish will not interfere with 
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in that Parish.

VI. Final Action and Rationale

    EPA is taking direct final action to approve Louisiana's request to 
relax the federal RVP standard applicable to summertime gasoline 
supplied to Grant Parish. This action changes the applicable RVP 
standard in Grant Parish from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi in 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2). 
This action will become effective on April 14, 2008, unless adverse 
comment is received by March 14, 2008.
    Relaxation of the applicable RVP standard for Grant Parish is based 
on the fact that Grant Parish is a redesignated 1-hour ozone attainment 
area and a designated 8-hour ozone attainment area that has an approved 
section 110(a)(1) 8-hr maintenance plan. This maintenance plan 
demonstrates that Grant Parish can maintain the 8-hour ozone standard 
for the duration of the plan while using 9.0 psi RVP gasoline. As also 
discussed earlier, this SIP revision meets the requirements of section 
110(l) of the Act. Finally, relaxation of the applicable standard will 
result in economic benefits as increased transportation costs 
associated with the delivery of 7.8 psi RVP gasoline will be 
eliminated.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and 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 OMB review.

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., and therefore is not subject to these requirements.

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 rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 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 rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In 
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the 
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify 
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant 
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule 
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect 
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    This action will relax the federal RVP standard for gasoline sold 
in Grant Parish, Louisiana, during the ozone control season (June 1 to 
September 15), from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi, and is therefore expected not 
to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The rule does not impose any requirements or create impacts 
on small entities beyond those, if any, already required by or 
resulting from the CAA Section 211(h) Volatility Control program.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

[[Page 8208]]

Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying affected small governments, enabling officials of 
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the 
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal 
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising 
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that this 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. Today's rule merely relaxes the Federal RVP 
standard for gasoline in the Grant Parish area, and thus avoids 
imposing the costs that the existing Federal regulations would 
otherwise impose. Today's rule, therefore, is not subject to the 
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. As discussed above, the rule relaxes an existing standard 
and affects only the gasoline industry.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255 August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will 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. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This rule does not have 
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule 
would relax the applicable RVP standard in Grant Parish, LA, during the 
ozone control season (June 1st to September 15th) from 7.8 psi to 9.0 
psi. It applies only to Grant Parish, LA. Thus, Executive Order 13175 
does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, Apr. 23, 1997) applies to 
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental 
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a 
disproportionate risk to children. As previously discussed, the Grant 
Parish area has continued to meet the 1-hour ozone standard since 1995 
and has met the 8-hour ozone standard since initial designations were 
issued in 2004. The maintenance plan approved on November 6, 2007 shows 
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the entire maintenance time 
period of 2002 through 2014 with the 9.0 psi RVP standard.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs 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. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider 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, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent

[[Page 8209]]

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 in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the applicable 8-hour ozone NAAQS which establish the level of 
protection provided to human health or the environment. This rule will 
relax the applicable volatility standard of gasoline during the summer 
possibly resulting in slightly higher mobile source emissions. However, 
the State of Louisiana has demonstrated in a maintenance plan that this 
action will not interfere with attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 
therefore disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations are not an 
anticipated result.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit 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 United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A ``major rule'' 
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register.
    This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(a). 
This rule will be effective April 14, 2008.

VIII. Legal Authority and Statutory Provisions

    Authority for this action is in sections 211(h) and 301(a) of the 
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7545(h) and 7601(a).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Fuel additives, Gasoline, Incorporation by 
reference, Motor vehicle and motor vehicle engines, Motor vehicle 
pollution, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 7, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
Title 40, chapter I, part 80 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 80--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545 and 7601(a).


0
2. In Sec.  80.27(a)(2)(ii), the table is amended by revising the entry 
for Louisiana and adding a new footnote 4 to read as follows:


Sec.  80.27  Controls and prohibitions on gasoline volatility.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *

                                Applicable Standards\1\ 1992 and Subsequent Years
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     State                           May          June         July        August     September
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *

Louisiana:
    Grant Parish \4\...........................          9.0          9.0          9.0          9.0          9.0
    All other volatility nonattainment areas...          9.0          7.8          7.8          7.8          7.8

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Standards are expressed in pounds per square inch (psi).
* * * * * * *
\4\ The standard for Grant Parish from June 1 until September 15 in 1992 through 2007 was 7.8 psi.
* * * * * * *

 [FR Doc. E8-2702 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
