82 FR 30809 - Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 126 (July 3, 2017)

Page Range		30809-30812
FR Document		2017-13858
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve changes to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky through its Energy and Environment Cabinet (EEC) on November 10, 2016, for the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (District). This SIP revision seeks to remove Stage II vapor control requirements for new and upgraded gasoline dispensing facilities and allow for the decommissioning of existing Stage II equipment in Jefferson County, Kentucky. EPA has preliminarily determined that Kentucky's November 10, 2016, SIP revision is approvable because it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30809-30812]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13858]



[[Page 30809]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0014; FRL-9964-33-Region 4]


Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor 
Recovery Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve changes to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky through its Energy and 
Environment Cabinet (EEC) on November 10, 2016, for the Louisville 
Metro Air Pollution Control District (District). This SIP revision 
seeks to remove Stage II vapor control requirements for new and 
upgraded gasoline dispensing facilities and allow for the 
decommissioning of existing Stage II equipment in Jefferson County, 
Kentucky. EPA has preliminarily determined that Kentucky's November 10, 
2016, SIP revision is approvable because it is consistent with the 
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2017-0014 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory 
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. Ms. Sheckler's phone number is (404) 562-9222. She can also 
be reached via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background for Federal Stage II Requirements

    Stage I vapor recovery is a type of emission control system that 
captures gasoline vapors that are released when gasoline is delivered 
to a storage tank. The vapors are returned to the tank truck as the 
storage tank is being filled with fuel, rather than released to the 
ambient air. Stage II and onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) are 
two types of emission control systems that capture fuel vapors from 
vehicle gas tanks during refueling. Stage II systems are specifically 
installed at gasoline dispensing facilities and capture the refueling 
fuel vapors at the gasoline pump nozzle. The system carries the vapors 
back to the underground storage tank at the gasoline dispensing 
facility to prevent the vapors from escaping to the atmosphere. ORVR 
systems are carbon canisters installed directly on automobiles to 
capture the fuel vapors evacuated from the gasoline tank before they 
reach the nozzle. The fuel vapors captured in the carbon canisters are 
then combusted in the engine when the automobile is in operation.
    Under section 182(b)(3) of the CAA, each state was required to 
submit a SIP revision to implement Stage II for all ozone nonattainment 
areas classified as moderate, serious, severe, or extreme, primarily 
for the control of volatile organic compounds (VOC)--a precursor to 
ozone formation.\1\ However, section 202(a)(6) of the CAA states that 
the section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirements for moderate ozone 
nonattainment areas shall not apply after the promulgation of ORVR 
standards.\2\ ORVR standards were promulgated by EPA on April 6, 1994. 
See 59 FR 16262 and 40 CFR parts 86, 88, and 600. As a result, the CAA 
no longer requires moderate areas to impose Stage II controls under 
section 182(b)(3), and such areas were able to submit SIP revisions, in 
compliance with section 110(l) of the CAA, to remove Stage II 
requirements from their SIPs. EPA's policy memoranda related to ORVR, 
dated March 9, 1993, and June 23, 1993, provide further guidance on 
removing Stage II requirements from certain areas. The policy 
memorandum dated March 9, 1993, states that ``[w]hen onboard rules are 
promulgated, a State may withdraw its Stage II rules for moderate areas 
from the SIP (or from consideration as a SIP revision) consistent with 
its obligations under sections 182(b)(3) and 202(a)(6), so long as 
withdrawal will not interfere with any other applicable requirement of 
the Act.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 182(b)(3) states that each State in which all or 
part of an ozone nonattainment area classified as moderate or above 
shall, with respect to that area, submit a SIP revision requiring 
owners or operators of gasoline dispensing systems to install and 
operate vapor recovery equipment at their facilities. Specifically, 
the CAA specifies that the Stage II requirements must apply to any 
facility that dispenses more than 10,000 gallons of gasoline per 
month or, in the case of an independent small business marketer 
(ISBM), as defined in section 324 of the CAA, any facility that 
dispenses more than 50,000 gallons of gasoline per month. 
Additionally, the CAA specifies the deadlines by which certain 
facilities must comply with the Stage II requirements. For 
facilities that are not owned or operated by an ISBM, these 
deadlines, calculated from the time of State adoption of the Stage 
II requirements, are: (1) 6 months for facilities for which 
construction began after November 15, 1990, (2) 1 year for 
facilities that dispense greater than 100,000 gallons of gasoline 
per month, and (3) by November 15, 1994, for all other facilities. 
For ISBMs, section 324(a) of the CAA provides the following three-
year phase-in period: (1) 33 percent of the facilities owned by an 
ISBM by the end of the first year after the regulations take effect; 
(2) 66 percent of such facilities by the end of the second year; and 
(3) 100 percent of such facilities after the third year.
    \2\ ORVR is a system employed on gasoline-powered highway motor 
vehicles to capture gasoline vapors displaced from a vehicle fuel 
tank during refueling events. These systems are required under 
section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, and implementation of these 
requirements began in the 1998 model year. Currently, they are used 
on all gasoline-powered passenger cars, light trucks and complete 
heavy trucks of less than 14,000 pounds GVWR. ORVR systems typically 
employ a liquid file neck seal to block vapor escape to the 
atmosphere and otherwise share many components with the vehicles' 
evaporative emission control system including the onboard diagnostic 
system sensors.
    \3\ Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, to EPA Regional Air Directors, 
Impact of the Recent Onboard Decision on Stage II Requirements in 
Moderate Areas (March 9, 1993), available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/aqmguide/collection/cp2/19930309_seitz_onboard_impact_stage2_.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 202(a)(6) also provides discretionary authority to the 
EPA Administrator to, by rule, revise or waive the section 182(b)(3) 
Stage II requirement for serious, severe, and extreme ozone 
nonattainment areas after the Administrator determines that ORVR is in 
widespread use throughout the motor vehicle fleet. On May 16, 2012, in 
a rulemaking entitled ``Air Quality: Widespread Use for Onboard 
Refueling Vapor Recovery and Stage II Waiver,'' EPA determined that 
ORVR technology is in widespread use throughout the motor vehicle fleet 
for

[[Page 30810]]

purposes of controlling motor vehicle refueling emissions. See 77 FR 
28772. By that action, EPA waived the requirement for states to 
implement Stage II gasoline vapor recovery systems at gasoline 
dispensing facilities in nonattainment areas classified as serious and 
above for the ozone NAAQS. Effective May 16, 2012, states implementing 
mandatory Stage II programs under section 182(b)(3) of the CAA were 
allowed to submit SIP revisions to remove this program. See 40 CFR 
51.126(b).\4\ On April 7, 2012, EPA released the guidance entitled 
``Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from 
State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable Measures'' for 
states to consider in preparing their SIP revisions to remove existing 
Stage II programs from state implementation plans.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As noted above, EPA found, pursuant to CAA section 
202(a)(6), that ORVR systems are in widespread use in the motor 
vehicle fleet and waived the CAA section 182(b)(3) Stage II vapor 
recovery requirement for serious and higher ozone nonattainment 
areas on May 16, 2012. Thus, in its implementation rule for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS, EPA removed the section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirement 
from the list of applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.1100(o). See 
80 FR 12264 for additional information.
    \5\ This guidance document is available at: http://www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/pdfs/20120807guidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Kentucky's Stage II Requirements for Jefferson County

    On November 6, 1991, EPA designated and classified Jefferson County 
and portions for Bullitt and Oldham Counties in Kentucky (hereinafter 
referred to as the ``Kentucky portion of the Louisville Area'' or 
``Area'') as part of the five-county area in and around the Louisville, 
KY-IN, area as a moderate nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS.\6\ See 56 FR 56694, 56765. As mentioned above, the ``moderate'' 
classification triggered various statutory requirements for this Area, 
including the requirement pursuant to section 182(b)(3) of the CAA for 
the Area to require all owners and operators of gasoline dispensing 
systems to install and operate a system for gasoline vapor recovery of 
emissions from the fueling of motor vehicles known as ``Stage II.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The other counties in this nonattainment area were Clark and 
Floyd Counties in Indiana. See 56 FR 56755.
    \7\ As discussed above, Stage II is a system designed to capture 
displaced vapors that emerge from inside a vehicle's fuel tank when 
gasoline is dispensed into the tank. There are two basic types of 
Stage II systems, the balance type and the vacuum assist type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 4, 1993, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, on behalf of 
Jefferson County, submitted a SIP revision to address the Stage II 
requirements for the Kentucky portion of the Louisville Area. EPA 
approved that SIP revision, containing Jefferson County Regulation 
6.40, Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles 
(Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems), in a notice published on 
March 6, 1996. See 61 FR 8873. Louisville's Stage II rule, as currently 
incorporated into the SIP, requires that Stage II systems be tested and 
certified to meet a 95 percent emission reduction efficiency by using a 
system approved by the California Air Resources Board. The rule 
requires sources to verify proper installation and function of Stage II 
equipment through use of a liquid blockage test and a leak test prior 
to system operation and every five years or upon major modification of 
a facility (i.e., 75 percent or more equipment change). Louisville also 
established an inspection program consistent with that described in 
EPA's Stage II guidance and has established procedures for enforcing 
violations of the Stage II requirements.
    On March 30, 2001, Kentucky submitted to EPA a request to 
redesignate the Kentucky portion of the Louisville Area to attainment 
for the 1-hour ozone standard and an associated maintenance plan. The 
maintenance plan, as required under section 175A of the CAA, showed 
that nitrogen oxides and VOC emissions in the Area would remain below 
the 1999 ``attainment year'' levels through the greater than ten-year 
period from 1999-2012. In making these projections, Kentucky factored 
in the emissions benefit of the Area's Stage II program, thereby 
maintaining this program as an active part of its 1-hour ozone SIP. The 
redesignation request and maintenance plan were approved by EPA, 
effective November 23, 2001. See 66 FR 53665.
    Subsequently, Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham counties in Kentucky 
(or portions thereof) were designated nonattainment as a part of a 
larger bi-state nonattainment area which included Kentucky and Indiana 
counties in and around the Louisville Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard.\8\ On July 5, 2007, the Area (i.e., the Kentucky portion of 
the bi-state Louisville Area) was redesignated to attainment of the 
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 72 FR 36601.\9\ The Lousiville Area is 
attaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ No counties in and around the Louisville Area were 
designated nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    \9\ A technical amendment for the approval of the redesignation 
request and maintenance plan was subsequently published on August 
24, 2007. See 72 FR 48558.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Analysis of the Commonwealth's Submittal

    On November 10, 2016, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a 
revision for the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP to EPA 
seeking modifications of the Stage II requirements in the Kentucky 
portion of the Louisville Area. Specifically, it seeks the removal of 
Jefferson County Regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance for Gasoline 
Transfer to Motor Vehicles (Stage II Vapor Recovery and Control 
Systems) from the Kentucky SIP. These modifications would remove Stage 
II vapor control requirements for new and upgraded gasoline dispensing 
facilities in the Louisville Area and allow for the decommissioning of 
existing Stage II equipment.
    EPA's primary consideration for determining the approvability of 
the Commonwealth of Kentucky's request is whether this requested action 
complies with section 110(l) of the CAA.\10\ Section 110(l) requires 
that a revision to the SIP not interfere with any applicable 
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as 
defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the 
Act. EPA evaluates each section 110(l) noninterference demonstration on 
a case-by-case basis, considering the circumstances of each SIP 
revision. EPA interprets 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in 
effect, including those that have been promulgated, but for which the 
EPA has not yet made designations. The degree of analysis focused on 
any particular NAAQS in a noninterference demonstration varies 
depending on the nature of the emissions associated with the proposed 
SIP revision. EPA's analysis of Kentucky's November 10, 2016, SIP 
revision pursuant to section 110(l) is provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In addition to a 110(l) noninterference demonstration, CAA 
section 193 is a general savings clause that can prohibit removing a 
control measure entirely if it was adopted in a nonattainment area 
by order, settlement agreement, or plan in effect before the 1990 
CAA amendments. Because Kentucky's Stage II rule was not included in 
the SIP before the 1990 CAA amendments, section 193 of the CAA does 
not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its November 10, 2016, SIP revision, Kentucky used EPA's 
guidance entitled ``Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor 
Control Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing 
Comparable Measures'' to conduct a series of calculations to determine 
the potential impact on air quality of removing the Stage II

[[Page 30811]]

program.\11\ The 110(l) noninterference demonstration for the Kentucky 
portion of the Louisville Area focused on VOC emissions because, as 
mentioned above, Stage II requirements affect VOC emissions and because 
VOC emissions are a precursor for ozone formation. The results of 
Kentucky's analysis are provided in the table below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EPA, Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control 
Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable 
Measures, EPA-457/B-12-001 (Aug. 7, 2012), available at https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/ozone-stage-two-vapor-recovery-rule-and-guidance. This guidance document notes that ``the potential emission 
control losses from removing Stage II VRS are transitional and 
relatively small. ORVR-equipped vehicles will continue to phase in 
to the fleet over the coming years and will exceed 80 percent of all 
highway gasoline vehicles and 85 percent of all gasoline dispensed 
during 2015. As the number of these ORVR-equipped vehicles increase, 
the control attributed to Stage II VRS will decrease even further, 
and the potential foregone Stage II VOC emission reductions are 
generally expected to be no more than one percent of the VOC 
inventory in the area.''

   Table 1--VOC Emissions Difference Between Stage II VRS in Place and
                                 Removed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          VOC  emissions
                          Year                            (tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013...................................................             5.11
2014...................................................             3.10
2015...................................................             1.41
2016...................................................             0.06
2017...................................................            -1.21
2018...................................................            -2.24
2019...................................................            -3.11
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 1 shows that the removal of Stage II vapor recovery systems 
in the Kentucky portion of the Louisville Area starting in 2017 would 
have resulted and will result in a VOC emission decrease. If instead 
Stage II requirements are kept in place, VOC emissions will decrease by 
less, and it will be less beneficial to air quality in the Kentucky 
portion of the Louisville Area to keep Stage II systems in 
operation.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The emissions-reduction disbenefit associated with 
continued implementation of Stage II requirements is due to the 
incompatibility of some Stage II and ORVR systems. Compatibility 
problems can result in an increase in emissions from the underground 
storage tank (UST) vent pipe and other system fugitive emissions 
related to the refueling of ORVR vehicles with some types of vacuum 
assist-type Stage II systems. This occurs during refueling an ORVR 
vehicle when the vacuum assist system draws fresh air into the UST 
rather than an air vapor mixture from the vehicle fuel tank. Vapor 
flow from the vehicle fuel tank is blocked by the liquid seal in the 
fill pipe which forms at a level deeper in the fill pipe than can be 
reached by the end of the nozzle spout. The fresh air drawn into the 
UST enhances gasoline evaporation in the UST which increases 
pressure in the UST. Unless it is lost as a fugitive emission, any 
tank pressure in excess of the rating of the pressure/vacuum valve 
is vented to the atmosphere over the course of a day. See EPA, 
Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from 
State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable Measures, EPA-
457/B-12-001 (Aug. 7, 2012), available at: https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/ozone-stage-two-vapor-recovery-rule-and-guidance. 
Thus, as ORVR technology is phased in, the amount of emission 
control that is gained through Stage II systems decreases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The affected sources covered by the Kentucky portion of the 
Louisville Area portion of Kentucky's Stage II vapor recovery 
requirements are sources of VOC. Other criteria pollutants (carbon 
monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and 
lead) are not emitted by gasoline dispensing facilities and will not be 
affected by the removal of Stage II controls.
    The proposed revisions to Jefferson County Regulation 6.40, 
Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles (Stage 
II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems), include that gasoline 
dispensing facilities located in the Kentucky portion of the Louisville 
Area shall decommission and remove the systems no later than December 
31, 2018. Kentucky noted in its submission that the decommissioning 
procedures in the revised version of Jefferson County Regulation 6.40, 
Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles (Stage 
II Vapor Recovery and Control Systems, follow Petroleum Equipment 
Institute (PEI) guidance, ``Recommended Practices for Installation and 
Testing of Vapor Recovery Systems at Vehicle Refueling Sites,'' PEI/
RP300-09.
    EPA is proposing to determine that Kentucky's technical analysis is 
consistent with EPA's guidance on removing Stage II requirements from a 
SIP, including as it relates to the decommissioning and phasing out of 
the Stage II requirements for the Kentucky portion of the Louisville 
Area. EPA is also making the preliminary determination that Kentucky's 
SIP revision is consistent with the CAA and with EPA's regulations 
related to removal of Stage II requirements from the SIP, and that 
these changes will not interfere with any applicable requirement 
concerning attainment or any other applicable requirement of the CAA, 
and therefore satisfy section 110(l).

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference Jefferson County Regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance 
for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles (Stage II Vapor Recovery and 
Control Systems), effective May 18, 2016. EPA has made, and will 
continue to make, these materials generally available through 
www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact 
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this preamble for more information).

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth of Kentucky's November 
10, 2016, SIP revision that changes the Louisville Area's Stage II 
rule, Jefferson County Regulation 6.40, Standards of Performance for 
Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles (Stage II Vapor Recovery and 
Control Systems), to allow for the removal of the Stage II requirement 
and the orderly decommissioning of Stage II equipment. EPA is proposing 
this approval because the Agency has made the preliminary determination 
that the Commonwealth of Kentucky's November 10, 2016, SIP revision 
related to the Louisville Area's Stage II rule is consistent with the 
CAA and with EPA's regulations and guidance.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described

[[Page 30812]]

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal 
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 15, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2017-13858 Filed 6-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
30810 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2017 / Proposed Rules

purposes of controlling motor vehicle of Jefferson County, submitted a SIP Lousiville Area is attaining the 2008
refueling emissions. See 77 FR 28772. revision to address the Stage II ozone NAAQS.
By that action, EPA waived the requirements for the Kentucky portion
III. Analysis of the Commonwealth’s
requirement for states to implement of the Louisville Area. EPA approved
Submittal
Stage II gasoline vapor recovery systems that SIP revision, containing Jefferson
at gasoline dispensing facilities in County Regulation 6.40, Standards of On November 10, 2016, the
nonattainment areas classified as Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted
serious and above for the ozone Motor Vehicles (Stage II Vapor Recovery a revision for the Jefferson County
NAAQS. Effective May 16, 2012, states and Control Systems), in a notice portion of the Kentucky SIP to EPA
implementing mandatory Stage II published on March 6, 1996. See 61 FR seeking modifications of the Stage II
programs under section 182(b)(3) of the 8873. Louisville’s Stage II rule, as requirements in the Kentucky portion of
CAA were allowed to submit SIP currently incorporated into the SIP, the Louisville Area. Specifically, it
revisions to remove this program. See 40 requires that Stage II systems be tested seeks the removal of Jefferson County
CFR 51.126(b).4 On April 7, 2012, EPA and certified to meet a 95 percent Regulation 6.40, Standards of
released the guidance entitled emission reduction efficiency by using a Performance for Gasoline Transfer to
‘‘Guidance on Removing Stage II system approved by the California Air Motor Vehicles (Stage II Vapor Recovery
Gasoline Vapor Control Programs from Resources Board. The rule requires and Control Systems) from the Kentucky
State Implementation Plans and sources to verify proper installation and SIP. These modifications would remove
Assessing Comparable Measures’’ for function of Stage II equipment through Stage II vapor control requirements for
states to consider in preparing their SIP use of a liquid blockage test and a leak new and upgraded gasoline dispensing
revisions to remove existing Stage II test prior to system operation and every facilities in the Louisville Area and
programs from state implementation five years or upon major modification of allow for the decommissioning of
plans.5 a facility (i.e., 75 percent or more existing Stage II equipment.
equipment change). Louisville also
II. Kentucky’s Stage II Requirements for EPA’s primary consideration for
established an inspection program
Jefferson County determining the approvability of the
consistent with that described in EPA’s
On November 6, 1991, EPA Stage II guidance and has established Commonwealth of Kentucky’s request is
designated and classified Jefferson procedures for enforcing violations of whether this requested action complies
County and portions for Bullitt and the Stage II requirements. with section 110(l) of the CAA.10
Oldham Counties in Kentucky On March 30, 2001, Kentucky Section 110(l) requires that a revision to
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Kentucky submitted to EPA a request to the SIP not interfere with any applicable
portion of the Louisville Area’’ or redesignate the Kentucky portion of the requirement concerning attainment and
‘‘Area’’) as part of the five-county area Louisville Area to attainment for the 1- reasonable further progress (as defined
in and around the Louisville, KY-IN, hour ozone standard and an associated in section 171), or any other applicable
area as a moderate nonattainment area maintenance plan. The maintenance requirement of the Act. EPA evaluates
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.6 See 56 FR plan, as required under section 175A of each section 110(l) noninterference
56694, 56765. As mentioned above, the the CAA, showed that nitrogen oxides demonstration on a case-by-case basis,
‘‘moderate’’ classification triggered and VOC emissions in the Area would considering the circumstances of each
various statutory requirements for this remain below the 1999 ‘‘attainment SIP revision. EPA interprets 110(l) as
Area, including the requirement year’’ levels through the greater than applying to all NAAQS that are in effect,
pursuant to section 182(b)(3) of the CAA ten-year period from 1999–2012. In including those that have been
for the Area to require all owners and making these projections, Kentucky promulgated, but for which the EPA has
operators of gasoline dispensing systems factored in the emissions benefit of the not yet made designations. The degree
to install and operate a system for Area’s Stage II program, thereby of analysis focused on any particular
gasoline vapor recovery of emissions maintaining this program as an active NAAQS in a noninterference
from the fueling of motor vehicles part of its 1-hour ozone SIP. The demonstration varies depending on the
known as ‘‘Stage II.’’ 7 redesignation request and maintenance nature of the emissions associated with
On March 4, 1993, the plan were approved by EPA, effective the proposed SIP revision. EPA’s
Commonwealth of Kentucky, on behalf November 23, 2001. See 66 FR 53665. analysis of Kentucky’s November 10,
Subsequently, Bullitt, Jefferson and 2016, SIP revision pursuant to section
4 As noted above, EPA found, pursuant to CAA
Oldham counties in Kentucky (or 110(l) is provided below.
section 202(a)(6), that ORVR systems are in portions thereof) were designated
widespread use in the motor vehicle fleet and In its November 10, 2016, SIP
waived the CAA section 182(b)(3) Stage II vapor nonattainment as a part of a larger bi- revision, Kentucky used EPA’s guidance
recovery requirement for serious and higher ozone state nonattainment area which entitled ‘‘Guidance on Removing Stage
nonattainment areas on May 16, 2012. Thus, in its included Kentucky and Indiana II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs
implementation rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, counties in and around the Louisville
EPA removed the section 182(b)(3) Stage II from State Implementation Plans and
requirement from the list of applicable Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone Assessing Comparable Measures’’ to
requirements in 40 CFR 51.1100(o). See 80 FR standard.8 On July 5, 2007, the Area conduct a series of calculations to
12264 for additional information. (i.e., the Kentucky portion of the bi-state determine the potential impact on air
5 This guidance document is available at: http://
Louisville Area) was redesignated to quality of removing the Stage II
www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/pdfs/
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

20120807guidance.pdf.
6 The other counties in this nonattainment area NAAQS. See 72 FR 36601.9 The 10 In addition to a 110(l) noninterference
were Clark and Floyd Counties in Indiana. See 56 demonstration, CAA section 193 is a general
FR 56755. 8 No counties in and around the Louisville Area
savings clause that can prohibit removing a control
7 As discussed above, Stage II is a system were designated nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour measure entirely if it was adopted in a
designed to capture displaced vapors that emerge ozone NAAQS. nonattainment area by order, settlement agreement,
from inside a vehicle’s fuel tank when gasoline is 9 A technical amendment for the approval of the or plan in effect before the 1990 CAA amendments.
dispensed into the tank. There are two basic types redesignation request and maintenance plan was Because Kentucky’s Stage II rule was not included
of Stage II systems, the balance type and the subsequently published on August 24, 2007. See 72 in the SIP before the 1990 CAA amendments,
vacuum assist type. FR 48558. section 193 of the CAA does not apply.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:50 Jun 30, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM 03JYP1
30812 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2017 / Proposed Rules

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a I. Background
• does not have Federalism portion of a state implementation plan
implications as specified in Executive (SIP) submission from the State of Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, California regarding Clean Air Act (CAA states to submit SIPs meeting the
1999); or ‘‘Act’’) requirements for ambient applicable requirements of section
• is not an economically significant ozone monitoring in the Bakersfield 110(a)(2) within three years after
regulatory action based on health or Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) for promulgation of a new or revised
safety risks subject to Executive Order the 1997 ozone and 2008 ozone national NAAQS or within such shorter period
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); ambient air quality standards (NAAQS as the EPA may prescribe. Section
• is not a significant regulatory action or ‘‘standards’’). The SIP submission is 110(a)(2) requires states to address
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR intended to revise a portion of the structural SIP elements such as
28355, May 22, 2001); State’s ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP that, more requirements for monitoring, basic
• is not subject to requirements of broadly, provides for implementation, program requirements, and legal
Section 12(d) of the National maintenance, and enforcement of the authority that are designed to provide
Technology Transfer and Advancement standards. We are taking comments on for implementation, maintenance, and
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this proposal and plan to follow with a enforcement of the NAAQS. The SIP
application of those requirements would final action. submission required by these provisions
be inconsistent with the CAA; and DATES: Any comments must arrive by
is referred to as the infrastructure SIP.
• does not provide EPA with the August 2, 2017. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation
discretionary authority to address, as upon states to make a SIP submission to
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
appropriate, disproportionate human the EPA for a new or revised NAAQS,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
health or environmental effects, using but the contents of individual state
OAR–2017–0265 at http://
practicable and legally permissible submissions may vary depending upon
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
methods, under Executive Order 12898 the facts and circumstances. This
Rory Mays at mays.rory@epa.gov. For
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). proposed rule pertains to infrastructure
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
In addition, the SIP is not approved SIP requirements for ambient air quality
follow the online instructions for
to apply on any Indian reservation land monitoring.
submitting comments. Once submitted, Each of the NAAQS revisions
or in any other area where EPA or an
comments cannot be edited or removed applicable to this proposed rule
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
from Regulations.gov. For either manner triggered the requirement for states to
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of of submission, the EPA may publish any
Indian country, the rule does not have submit infrastructure SIPs, including
comment received to its public docket. provisions for ambient ozone
tribal implications as specified by Do not submit electronically any
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, monitoring. On July 18, 1997, the EPA
information you consider to be revised the form and levels of the
November 9, 2000), nor will it impose Confidential Business Information (CBI)
substantial direct costs on tribal primary and secondary ozone standards
or other information whose disclosure is to an 8-hour average of 0.08 parts per
governments or preempt tribal law. restricted by statute. Multimedia million (ppm).1 On March 12, 2008, the
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be EPA revised the levels of the primary
Environmental protection, Air accompanied by a written comment. and secondary 8-hour ozone standards
pollution control, Incorporation by The written comment is considered the to 0.075 ppm.2 The EPA has issued
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, official comment and should include guidance on infrastructure SIP
Reporting and recordkeeping discussion of all points you wish to requirements for the 2008 ozone and
requirements, Volatile organic make. The EPA will generally not other NAAQS that informs the states’
compounds. consider comments or comment development and the EPA’s evaluation
contents located outside of the primary of ambient ozone monitoring.3
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or Section 110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA
Dated: June 15, 2017. other file sharing system). For requires states to provide for the
V. Anne Heard, additional submission methods, please establishment and operation of ambient
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. contact the person identified in the FOR air quality monitoring to (i) monitor,
[FR Doc. 2017–13858 Filed 6–30–17; 8:45 am] FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. compile, and analyze data, and (ii) make
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
For the full EPA public comment policy, data available to the EPA Administrator
information about CBI or multimedia upon request. The EPA’s implementing
submissions, and general guidance on regulations for ambient monitoring
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION making effective comments, please visit regulations for the various NAAQS are
AGENCY http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ found in 40 CFR part 58. Among the
commenting-epa-dockets. requirements for ozone monitoring, 40
40 CFR Part 52 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rory CFR part 58, Appendix D, 4.1(b)
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0265; FRL–9964–44– Mays, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), EPA requires that ‘‘within an [ozone]
Region 9] Region IX, (415) 972–3227, mays.rory@ network, at least one [ozone] site for
epa.gov. each MSA, or [Combined Statistical
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

Approval and Promulgation of Air SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Area (CSA)] if multiple MSAs are
Quality State Implementation Plans; Throughout this document, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’
California; Ambient Ozone Monitoring and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 1 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).
Requirements 2 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
Table of Contents 3 Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director,
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA,
Agency (EPA). I. Background ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
ACTION: Proposed rule. II. Ozone Monitoring Evaluation and Plan Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
Proposed Action 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),’’ September 13, 2013.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:50 Jun 30, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM 03JYP1
Document Created: 2018-11-14 10:20:06
Document Modified: 2018-11-14 10:20:06
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Proposed rule.
Dates		Written comments must be received on or before August 2, 2017.
Contact		Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Sheckler's phone number is (404) 562-9222. She can also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected]
FR Citation		82 FR 30809
CFR Associated		Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds