[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9087-9093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4885]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-5695-9]
RIN 2060-AD93


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories: Gasoline Distribution (Stage I)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule: amendments.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is promulgating, as a direct final rule, amendments to 
the ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories: Gasoline Distribution (Stage I)'' (the ``Gasoline 
Distribution NESHAP''). These amendments implement a proposed 
settlement agreement with the American Petroleum Institute noticed for 
comment on November 15, 1996 regarding improvements in the screening 
equations for determining applicability of the Gasoline Distribution 
NESHAP. This action also addresses some clarifications to the NESHAP 
that were requested by other parties. These clarifications do not 
change the level of the standards or the intent of the NESHAP 
promulgated in 1994.
    In the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, the EPA is 
proposing a rule that is identical to this direct final rule. If 
significant, adverse comments are received on the proposed rule by the 
due date (see DATES section below), this direct final rule will be 
withdrawn and all such comments will be addressed in a subsequent final 
rule based on the proposed rule. If no significant, adverse comments 
are timely received on the proposed rule, then the direct final rule 
remains effective upon publication, and no further action is 
contemplated on the parallel proposal published today.

DATES: This rule is effective April 14, 1997, unless adverse comments 
are received by March 31, 1997. If adverse comments are received, the 
EPA will publish timely notice in the Federal Register withdrawing the 
direct final rule.
    Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act 
(Act), judicial review of NESHAP is available only by filing a petition 
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit within 60 days of today's publication of these direct final 
amendments. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Act, the requirements that 
are the subject of today's notice may not be challenged later in civil 
or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these 
requirements.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-92-38, category VIII 1997 Amendments, 
containing information considered by the EPA in developing the final 
amendments, is available for public inspection and copying between 8:00 
a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for Federal holidays, 
at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, room 
M1500, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., 
Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be 
charged for copying. This docket also contains information considered 
by the EPA in proposing and promulgating the original Gasoline 
Distribution NESHAP.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning 
applicability and rule determinations, contact the appropriate EPA 
regional or Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) 
representative:

Region I: Greg Roscoe, Air Programs Enforcement Office Chief, U.S. EPA, 
Region I, JFK Federal Building (SEA), Boston, MA 02203, Telephone 
number (617) 565-3221
Region II: Kenneth Eng, Air Compliance Branch Chief, U.S. EPA, Region 
II, 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007, Telephone number (212) 637-4080, 
Fax number (212) 637-3998
Region III: Walter K. Wilkie, U.S. EPA, Region III (3AT12), 841 
Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107, Telephone number (215) 566-
2150, Fax number (215) 566-2114
Region IV: Lee Page, U.S. EPA, Region IV (AR-4), 100 Alabama Street, 
SW, Atlanta, GA 30303-3104, Telephone number (404) 562-9131, Fax number 
(404) 562-9095

[[Page 9088]]

Region V: Howard Caine (AE-17J), U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 W. Jackson 
Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, Telephone number (312) 353-9685, Fax number 
(312) 353-8289
Region VI: Sandra A. Cotter (6EN-AT), U.S. EPA, Region VI (6PD-R), 1445 
Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202-2733, Telephone number (214) 665-7347, 
Fax number (214) 665-7446
Region VII: Bill Peterson, U.S. EPA, Region VII, 726 Minnesota Avenue, 
Kansas City, KS 66101, Telephone number (913) 551-7881
Region VIII: Heather Rooney, U.S. EPA, Region VIII (8ART-AP), 999 18th 
Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2405, Telephone number (303) 312-
6971, Fax number (303) 312-6826
Region IX: Christine Vineyard, U.S. EPA, Region IX (Air-4), 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone number (415) 744-
1197
Region X: Chris Hall, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), U.S. EPA, Region 
X, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-9797, Telephone number (206) 
553-1949 or (800) 424-4372 x1949
OECA: Julie Tankersley, U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance 
Assurance (2223A), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, Telephone 
number (202) 564-7002, Fax number (202) 564-0050.

    For information concerning the analyses performed in developing the 
final rule amendments, contact Mr. Stephen Shedd, Waste and Chemical 
Processes Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 
telephone number (919) 541-5397 or fax number (919) 541-0246.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An electronic version of these final 
amendments and the proposal preamble is available for download from the 
EPA Technology Transfer Network (TTN), a network of electronic bulletin 
boards developed and operated by the Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards. The TTN provides information and technology exchange in 
various areas of air pollution control. The service is free, except for 
the cost of a phone call. Dial (919) 541-5742 for data transfer of up 
to 14,400 bits per second. If more information on the operation of the 
TTN is needed, contact the systems operator at (919) 541-5384. The TTN 
is also available on the Internet (access: http://
ttnwww.rtpnc.epa.gov).
    The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background and Summary of Action
II. Summary of and Rationale for Rule Changes
    A. Improvement of Emission Estimation Screening Equations
    B. Clarifications
    1. Excess Emissions Reports
    2. Definition of Bulk Gasoline Terminal
    3. Potential to Emit and Federal Enforcement
    4. Demonstration of Compliance
    5. Oxygenated Gasoline
    6. Reporting Emissions Inventories
III. Administrative Requirements
    A. Paperwork Reduction Act
    B. Executive Order 12866
    C. Regulatory Flexibility
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Regulatory Review
    F. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

I. Background and Summary of Action

    On December 14, 1994 (59 FR 64303), the EPA promulgated the 
``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source 
Categories: Gasoline Distribution (Stage I)'' (the ``Gasoline 
Distribution NESHAP''). The Gasoline Distribution NESHAP regulates all 
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted from new and existing bulk 
gasoline terminals and pipeline breakout stations that are major 
sources of HAP emissions or are located at sites that are major sources 
of HAP emissions. The regulated category and entities affected by this 
action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of regulated   
                 Category                             pentities         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................................  Bulk gasoline terminals.    
                                            Pipeline breakout stations. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

This table is not intended to be exhaustive but, rather, provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be interested in the 
revisions to the regulation affected by this action. To determine 
whether your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully 
examine all of the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.420. If you have 
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular 
entity, consult the appropriate person listed in the preceding FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    On March 29, 1995, the American Petroleum Institute (API), a trade 
association having members who own or operate facilities potentially 
subject to the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP, submitted a Petition for 
Administrative Stay and for Reconsideration of the Gasoline 
Distribution NESHAP. After lengthy negotiations with API, the EPA 
provided notice and requested public comment on a proposed settlement 
in the Federal Register on November 15, 1996 (61 FR 58547). No comments 
were received on the proposed settlement during the 30-day comment 
period. The EPA also issued a guidance memorandum (available on the TTN 
and in the docket), ``Guidance Concerning Notifications Required by 
December 16, 1996 Under Gasoline Distribution NESHAP (40 CFR Part 63, 
Subpart R),'' Bruce Jordan to EPA Regional Offices, November 21, 1996, 
clarifying the notification requirements for major sources that plan to 
be an area source by the first substantive compliance date of the rule, 
December 15, 1997.
    As a result of the settlement agreement, the EPA has made 
modifications to the screening equations in the promulgated rule to 
make them more useful to facilities attempting to demonstrate that they 
are area sources, and therefore not subject to the control requirements 
of the NESHAP. These modifications are discussed in detail in Section 
II.A of this notice.
    In response to requests by other parties, the EPA has also made 
several clarifications to the final NESHAP, as discussed in Section 
II.B of this notice, that are not a direct result of the settlement 
agreement. First, the language of the rule has been revised to clarify 
that the requirement for an excess emissions report applies to all 
affected facilities whether or not they have a continuous monitoring 
system. Second, the definition for bulk gasoline terminal has been 
inserted directly into the rule instead of cross-referencing the 
definition in the new source performance standards for bulk terminals. 
Third, the term ``federally enforceable'' has been replaced with the 
term ``limitations on potential to emit'' (PTE) to accommodate any 
eventual outcome of the EPA's current consideration of PTE issues. 
Fourth, the requirement that compliance be demonstrated upon the EPA's 
request has been clarified to include the calculations and assumptions 
used for the applicability screening equations. Fifth, the EPA has 
clarified the intended meaning of the term ``reformulated or oxygenated 
gasoline containing methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)'' as used in 
defining the parameter ``CF'' for the applicability screening 
equations. Sixth, the EPA has clarified that there is no requirement to 
submit emissions inventory documentation that a facility is not a major 
source to the Administrator for approval. These emissions inventory 
documents need only be maintained at the facility and provided upon 
request.

[[Page 9089]]

II. Summary of and Rationale for Rule Changes

A. Improvement of Emission Estimation Screening Equations

    The final Gasoline Distribution NESHAP provides two options for 
facilities to obtain area source status for this rule and thus not be 
subject to the control requirements of this major source standard. 
These options are the use of an emission screening equation or 
performance of an HAP emissions inventory for the facility. The 
emissions inventory provision is currently implemented outside the 
provisions of this rule and approved by the permitting authority. The 
screening equation option allows facilities to use a specified equation 
in the 1994 final rule to determine their area source status under this 
rule, as long as they are in compliance with the equation parameters 
and the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the rule. These 
screening equations were developed to provide facilities with a way of 
determining whether they are a major source without obtaining an area 
source determination outside the provisions of this rule.
    The 1994 final rule contains two screening equations in Sec. 63.420 
(one for use by bulk gasoline terminals and one for pipeline breakout 
stations) to make an estimation of the total HAP emissions from the 
major gasoline operations at the facility. The equations identify 
facilities that have the potential to emit (PTE) less than 10 tons per 
year (tpy) of a single HAP or less than 25 tpy of a combination of HAP, 
which are the criteria for area sources. Since the equations in the 
final rule included only gasoline storage and transfer operations, the 
rule did not allow the equations to be used by facilities that have HAP 
emissions from other products (such as distillates) or that emit HAP 
from gasoline operations not accounted for in the equations.
    The API, as part of the settlement, requested that the EPA 
incorporate additional modifications to those changes made to the 
screening equations before the 1994 promulgation in order to make the 
equations more useful to facilities attempting to demonstrate that they 
are area sources within the structure of the rule. The API said that 
the ``other'' HAP emissions not considered in the equation are 
routinely very low, and virtually every bulk gasoline terminal has such 
HAP emission sources. (The API's comments were directed toward bulk 
terminals, but they can be applied to also cover pipeline breakout 
stations.) As a result, they felt that the equation, as promulgated, 
had very little utility as a means of screening for rule applicability. 
The EPA reviewed API's supporting information and agreed that the 
utility of the screening equations needed to be improved.
    The EPA and API investigated the development of a factor or 
expression to account for ``other'' HAP emission sources at marketing 
facilities. These other HAP sources consist of activities not already 
accounted for in the screening equations (i.e., sources other than 
gasoline storage vessels, gasoline loading racks and cargo tanks, and 
gasoline vapor leaks from equipment components). HAP emission sources 
not arising directly from the storage and handling of gasoline occur 
routinely in this source category, and include distillate fuel, 
additive tanks, wastewater storage/handling tanks, cleaning/degassing 
of tanks, subsurface recovery (and other remedial actions), service 
station tank bottoms storage, sample handling/laboratory activities, 
and pipeline transmix (interface) storage (i.e., transmix with no 
gasoline content). Gasoline mixtures in storage tanks, such as transmix 
containing gasoline, are considered to be ``gasoline'' in the emission 
screening equations and also in the standards.
    The EPA agreed that the utility of the equations would be further 
enhanced by including a factor to account for these other HAP emission 
sources (OE). However, the EPA believed that it was necessary to limit 
the percentage of total facility HAP emissions that a facility could 
claim from other emission sources because such sources are most likely 
not currently permitted or subject to current enforceable limits on 
emissions, are part of another source category [``Organic Liquids 
Distribution (Non-Gasoline)''] that has yet to be studied, or are 
collocated at other facilities (refineries, chemical plants, military 
bases) and not the primary source of emissions. The API surveyed some 
of its member companies and concluded that HAP emissions from other 
sources at gasoline bulk terminals are low, ranging from 0.1 to 3.5 
tons/yr. Based on this information, API suggested limiting the OE value 
to 5 percent of total facility HAP emissions. The EPA agrees with API 
that limiting the value of OE to 5 percent is appropriate to represent 
typical facilities in this source category. If a facility finds that OE 
contributes more than 5 percent of its total HAP emissions, then the 
facility fits into a combination of source categories and must use the 
emissions inventory approach to determine HAP emissions and the 
applicability of the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP.
    Since the screening equations were originally and continue to be 
normalized, or set equal to ``1,'' to determine area source status, OE 
should thus be divided by either 10 or 25 (the tpy cutoffs defining a 
major source) to be incorporated into the equation. The API suggested, 
and the EPA agreed, that OE (in tpy) should be normalized by dividing 
by 25 (or multiplying by 0.04), since the OE factor will be calculated 
from a variety of emission sources and these emissions will most likely 
be composed of a combination of HAP, rather than a single HAP. 
Additionally, since the allowable value is small (5 percent of total 
facility HAP emissions), the resulting environmental effect from adding 
this parameter to an equation designed for screening purposes is 
expected to be small.

B. Clarifications

1. Excess Emissions Reports
    The EPA was requested after promulgation to clarify whether the 
owner or operator of a pipeline breakout station needs to submit the 
excess emissions report required under Sec. 63.428(h), even though the 
facility is not required to install a continuous monitoring system 
(CMS) in conjunction with the operation of a control device. The 
commenter also asked whether the information to be included in such a 
report would be limited to that indicated in Sec. 63.428(h)(4) (late 
repairs of leaking equipment), and whether the required reporting 
frequency would be semiannual or quarterly.
    The final rule promulgated in 1994, in Sec. 63.428(h) (1) through 
(4), specifies information that must be included in excess emissions 
reports submitted by bulk gasoline terminals and pipeline breakout 
stations. In summary, there are four elements of information required 
to be included in the excess emissions report as excess emissions. They 
are:
    (1) Exceedances or failures to maintain the monitored operating 
parameter value of the vapor processor,
    (2) Failures to take steps to assure that reloadings of nonvapor-
tight gasoline cargo tanks will not occur,
    (3) Reloadings of nonvapor-tight gasoline cargo tanks before vapor 
tightness documentation on those tanks is obtained by the facility, and 
(4) certain information on equipment leaks for which no repair was 
attempted within 5 days or completed within 15 days after detection. 
The section also states that the excess emissions report is to be filed 
as required under Sec. 63.10(e)(3) of CFR part 63, subpart A (General 
Provisions). Section

[[Page 9090]]

63.10(e)(3)(i) specifies that an ``excess emissions and continuous 
monitoring system performance report and/or a summary report'' shall be 
submitted by each owner or operator of an affected source required to 
install a CMS. Also, if the CMS data are to be used for compliance and 
the source experienced excess emissions, quarterly reporting is 
required. [(Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i)(C)].
    The EPA believes that this question may have arisen due to the 
different characteristics of bulk terminals versus pipeline breakout 
stations, and the different elements of information specified for the 
reports in Sec. 63.428 and Sec. 63.10. Items (1) through (3) required 
under Sec. 63.428 are primarily intended to refer to activities at a 
bulk terminal, where the loading of gasoline cargo tanks will be 
controlled with a vapor processor combined with a vapor tightness (test 
and repair) program for the cargo tanks. However, item (1) would also 
apply to pipeline breakout stations that elect to install a control 
device and CMS for storage vessel emission control in response to 
Sec. 63.427(c) and Sec. 60.112b(a)(3). In that case, the report 
required from sources ``required to install a CMS'' under 
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i) would be appropriate for pipeline breakout 
stations. However, for most breakout pipeline breakout stations, only 
item (4) pertaining to the repair of equipment leaks is applicable.
    The EPA's intent in the final rule [as described in the preamble to 
the 1994 promulgated standards (59 FR 64316)] was to require a 
semiannual report under Sec. 63.428(g) and Sec. 63.10(e)(3) for bulk 
terminals and pipeline breakout stations, with this frequency 
increasing to quarterly in the event that any specified excess 
emissions occur that are listed in Sec. 63.428(h)(1) through (4). 
Section 63.10(e)(3)(i)(C) requires the quarterly reporting frequency to 
be followed until a facility's request to reduce the frequency is 
approved.
    In summary, all bulk terminals and pipeline breakout stations are 
required to submit this report, and each facility should include the 
information pertinent to its own situation. The initial reporting 
frequency is semiannual, but will increase to quarterly if excess 
emissions are experienced. The EPA reviewed the language of the rule 
and found that the rule needed revision to clarify this approach. 
Today's action revises the language of the rule to clarify and make 
more explicit the EPA's original intent that the requirement for an 
excess emissions report applies to all affected bulk terminals and 
pipeline breakout stations with or without a CMS.
2. Definition of Bulk Gasoline Terminal
    In the 1994 promulgated rule, several terms were defined in 
Sec. 63.421 through cross-referencing with definitions already provided 
in the Act; in 40 CFR 60, subparts A, K, Ka, Kb, and XX; and in 40 CFR 
63, subpart A. One term intended to be defined in this way was ``bulk 
gasoline terminal.'' The definition for bulk gasoline terminal (as 
included in 40 CFR 60, subpart XX) is as follows:
    Bulk gasoline terminal means any gasoline facility which receives 
gasoline by pipeline, ship or barge, and has a gasoline throughput 
greater than 75,700 liters per day. Gasoline throughput shall be the 
maximum calculated design throughput as may be limited by compliance 
with an enforceable condition under Federal, State or local law and 
discoverable by the Administrator and any other person.
    The approach of cross-referencing the definition of one of the 
affected sources apparently created confusion, possibly because a 
definition for ``pipeline breakout station'' was explicitly included in 
Sec. 63.421. In order to lessen the confusion, and to clearly specify 
that the Agency intended to apply the same facility definition to bulk 
terminals as was used in the bulk terminal NSPS, the definition is 
being inserted directly into subpart R under Sec. 63.421. This change 
does not create new requirements in the rule, but merely makes more 
explicit the EPA's intent concerning the definition of a bulk gasoline 
terminal.
3. Potential To Emit and Federal Enforcement
    The EPA is also replacing the term ``federally enforceable'' as a 
condition for some of the emission screening equation parameters with 
the term ``limitations on potential to emit'' (PTE). The purpose of 
this change is not to make any substantive decision regarding the PTE 
issues that are currently under review by the Agency, but rather to 
recognize that those issues exist and to minimize any confusion 
regarding how those issues should be dealt with in the interim as they 
relate to the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP. The EPA believes that using 
the term ``limitations on potential to emit'' will eliminate the need 
for subsequent amendments to this rule as it relates to PTE issues. PTE 
is defined in Sec. 63.2 Definitions, of the General Provisions of 
subpart A of part 63, and the term ``limitations on potential to emit'' 
has been added to the list of definitions in Sec. 63.421.
    As discussed in the February 29, 1996 (61 FR 7718) Gasoline 
Distribution final rule amendments, the EPA is considering a number of 
options regarding the requirements on potential to emit limits, in 
response to the National Mining court decision. In addition, the EPA 
created a 2-year transition period (January 1995 until January 1997) 
during which the EPA will recognize limitations on PTE, so long as 
those limits are enforceable as a practical matter. In a policy 
memorandum (available on the TTN and in the docket), ``Extension of 
January 25, Potential to Emit Transition Policy,'' John S. Seitz and 
Robert I. Van Heuvelen to EPA Regional Offices, August 27, 1996, the 
EPA has extended this transition period for 18 months until July 31, 
1998, which is later than the December 15, 1997 control equipment 
compliance date for all MACT source categories, including the Gasoline 
Distribution NESHAP. Accordingly, for the critical applicability date 
1 for the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP, the EPA wishes to clarify 
that State-enforceable limits that are enforceable as a practical 
matter will be treated by the EPA as acceptable limitations on 
potential to emit. If, as a result of the PTE rulemaking, a decision is 
made that yields a requirement that PTE limitations must be federally 
enforceable for some or all sources, an appropriate transition period 
will be given to allow time for such sources to obtain federally 
enforceable limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Affected sources must either be in full compliance with the 
major source emission standards in the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP 
or have been determined to be an area source no later than December 
15, 1997. Additionally, each affected source was required to submit 
an initial notification by December 16, 1996 if it is (1) a major 
source, (2) a major source on December 16, 1996 and plans to be an 
area source by December 15, 1997, or (3) using one of the emission 
screening equations in Sec. 63.420. These latter major sources (no. 
3) must include in the notification a non-binding description of and 
a schedule for the actions that are planned to achieve area source 
status [Sec. 63.428(a)].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Demonstration of Compliance
    Section Sec. 63.420(f) of the final rule requires an owner or 
operator to demonstrate compliance with any provision of the rule to 
which the facility is subject, upon request by the EPA. The rule has 
been amended to clarify that this demonstration also needs to be made, 
upon request, for the parameters and assumptions used in performing 
calculations for the applicability screening equations. This change 
does not impose any new requirements, but has been made to eliminate 
any chance for ambiguity in interpreting this rule provision.

[[Page 9091]]

5. Oxygenated Gasoline
    The emission screening equations in Sec. 63.420 of the final rule 
use the parameter ``CF'' to account for the higher HAP content of the 
modified gasolines that are marketed to comply with Federal and State 
ozone and carbon monoxide control programs. These reformulated and 
oxygenated gasolines, in addition to other formula changes, contain 
significant levels of oxygenate, frequently the HAP methyl tert-butyl 
ether (MTBE), which supplies oxygen in the combustion process to reduce 
the amount of carbon monoxide emitted in tailpipe exhaust. The higher 
CF factor of 1.0 for these gasolines that use MTBE as an oxygenate, 
versus a CF factor of 0.161 for ``normal'' gasolines, reflects the fact 
that the overall HAP content of reformulated and oxygenated gasolines 
using MTBE as an oxygenate is significantly higher than the HAP content 
of normal gasoline.
    The definitions given in Sec. 63.421 for reformulated and 
oxygenated gasolines cross-reference existing definitions already 
codified at 40 CFR 80.2(ee) and 40 CFR 80.2(rr), respectively. The CFR 
defines oxygenated gasoline as ``gasoline which contains a measurable 
amount of oxygenate.'' However, this definition may not adequately 
distinguish oxygenated gasoline from normal gasoline. The reason is 
that, in addition to its use as an oxygenate, MTBE is often used in 
generally smaller concentrations to boost the octane rating of normal 
gasoline. Although the MTBE present in these gasolines is generally 
minimal, the EPA was concerned that even these small amounts could be 
construed as qualifying a gasoline as ``oxygenated.'' The EPA's intent 
was not to specify the higher CF factor for normal gasolines with minor 
amounts of MTBE, but only for those gasolines with a sufficient 
quantity of MTBE to create a substantially higher HAP content than 
found in normal gasolines.
    Section 211(k) of the Act specifies a minimum oxygen content for 
reformulated gasolines of 2.0 percent by weight, while EPA guidelines 
issued in response to section 211(m) recommend a minimum oxygen content 
of 2.7 percent by weight for oxygenated gasolines. The EPA's final 
regulations to implement the reformulated gasoline program, promulgated 
on February 16, 1994 (59 FR 7716), specify a minimum allowable per-
gallon oxygen content for reformulated gasoline of 1.5 weight percent 
when the standards are being achieved on an average basis. In order to 
include all of the allowable modified fuels in the CF factor 
definition, the same oxygen content of 1.5 weight percent is being used 
in these rule amendments as the cutoff defining these high-HAP 
gasolines. Since reformulated and oxygenated gasolines are frequently 
oxygenated using MTBE, this minimum oxygen content was converted to 
MTBE volume percent. Based on the molecular composition and density of 
MTBE and a typical density for gasoline, the value of 1.5 percent 
oxygen by weight was calculated to be equivalent to 7.6 percent MTBE by 
volume (available in the docket). Since this value is not inconsistent 
with the existing definitions for reformulated and oxygenated 
gasolines, but only specifies a minimum gasoline MTBE content, the 
promulgated definitions for ``reformulated gasoline'' and ``oxygenated 
gasoline'' are being retained in the rule. The two definitions for the 
term CF have been amended to incorporate this minimum MTBE content.
    The EPA emphasizes that this change merely clarifies the Agency's 
intent in specifying a higher CF value for reformulated and oxygenated 
gasolines that use MTBE as an oxygenate. The higher CF factor of 1.0 is 
intended to be used in the screening equations by those facilities that 
handle gasoline blended with significant amounts (7.6 volume percent or 
more) of MTBE. The 1.0 factor should not be used by facilities that 
handle only gasoline having trace amounts of MTBE. The change has no 
effect on the control programs that require the marketing of these 
fuels, nor does it change or add any reporting, recordkeeping, or 
testing requirements for affected facilities.
6. Reporting Emissions Inventories
    The owner or operator of a stationary source in this category is 
allowed to use methods other than the emission screening equations 
(typically an emissions inventory) to establish that the facility is 
not a major source, provided that he or she ``has documented and 
recorded to the Administrator's satisfaction that the facility is not a 
major source, or is not [collocated with] a major source'' [40 CFR 
63.420(a)(2) and (b)(2)]. Some confusion has been expressed as to 
whether these documents must in all cases be submitted to the 
Administrator for approval prior to December 16, 1996 as an alternative 
to the results of the screening equation or whether it is appropriate 
to maintain these records at the facility. This action clarifies that 
there is no requirement to submit these emissions inventory type 
documents for approval either prior to or after December 16, 1996, and 
that these documents may be maintained at the facility. However, the 
owner or operator is required [Sec. 63.420(f)], ``upon request,'' to 
demonstrate compliance with all of the applicability provisions, 
including this determination that the facility is not a major source.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements of the previously 
promulgated NESHAP were submitted to and approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). A copy of this Information Collection 
Request (ICR) document (OMB control number 2060-0325) may be obtained 
from Ms. Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W. (mail code 2136), Washington, DC 
20460, or by calling (202) 260-2740.
    Today's amendments to the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP have no 
impact on the information collection burden estimates made previously. 
No additional certifications or filings were promulgated. Therefore, 
the ICR has not been revised.

B. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA 
must determine whether a regulation is ``significant'' and therefore 
subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The 
criteria set forth in section 1 of the Order for determining whether a 
regulation is a significant rule are as follows:
    (1) Is likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 
million or more, or adversely and materially affect a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal government communities;
    (2) Is likely to create a serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Is likely to materially alter the budgetary impact of 
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and 
obligations of recipients thereof; or
    (4) Is likely to raise novel or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    The Gasoline Distribution NESHAP promulgated on December 14, 1994 
was treated as a ``significant regulatory action'' within the meaning 
of the Executive Order. An estimate of the cost and benefits of the 
NESHAP was prepared at proposal as part of the background information 
document

[[Page 9092]]

(BID). This estimate was updated in the BID for the final rule to 
reflect comments and changes made in developing the final rule. The 
amendments issued today have no impact on the estimates in the final 
BID. Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this action is a ``non-significant regulatory action'' 
within the meaning of the Executive Order. As such, this action was not 
submitted to OMB for review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

    The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a 
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule. 
When the Agency promulgated the Gasoline Distribution NESHAP, it 
analyzed the potential impacts on small businesses, discussed the 
results of this analysis in the Federal Register, and concluded that 
the promulgated regulation would not result in financial impacts that 
significantly or differentially stress affected small companies. Since 
today's action imposes no additional impacts, the EPA has determined 
that these amendments will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, signed into 
law on March 22, 1995, the EPA must prepare a budgetary impact 
statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a 
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 
million or more. Under section 205, the EPA must select the most cost 
effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives 
of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 
requires the EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any 
small governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the 
rule.
    The EPA has determined that today's action does not include a 
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or 
to the private sector. Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act do not apply to this action.

E. Regulatory Review

    In accordance with sections 112(d)(6) and 112(f)(2) of the Act, 
this regulation will be reviewed 8 years from the date of promulgation. 
This review may include an assessment of such factors as evaluation of 
the residual health risk, any overlap with other programs, the 
existence of alternative methods of control, enforceability, 
improvements in emission control technology and health data, and the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

F. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the EPA submitted a report 
containing the final amendments and other required information to the 
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller 
General of the General Accounting Office prior to publication of the 
amendments in today's Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major 
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Petroleum bulk stations and terminals, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 21, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, part 63 of chapter I of 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

    2. Section 63.420 is amended by revising the equation and the terms 
``CF'' ``CE'', ``Q'' and ``EF'' in paragraph (a)(1), and by adding the 
term ``OE'' to the list in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec. 63.420  Applicability.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *


    ET=CF[0.59(TF)(1-CE)+0.17 
(TE)+0.08(TES)+0.038(TI)+8.5 x 10-6(C)+KQ]+0.04(OE)
* * * * *
CF=0.161 for bulk gasoline terminals and pipeline breakout stations 
that do not handle any reformulated or oxygenated gasoline containing 
7.6 percent by volume or greater methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), OR
CF=1.0 for bulk gasoline terminals and pipeline breakout stations that 
handle reformulated or oxygenated gasoline containing 7.6 percent by 
volume or greater MTBE;
CE=control efficiency limitation on potential to emit for the vapor 
processing system used to control emissions from fixed-roof gasoline 
storage vessels [value should be added in decimal form (percent divided 
by 100)];
* * * * *
Q=gasoline throughput limitation on potential to emit or gasoline 
throughput limit in compliance with paragraphs (c), (d), and (f) of 
this section (liters/day);
* * * * *
EF=emission rate limitation on potential to emit for the gasoline cargo 
tank loading rack vapor processor outlet emissions (mg of total organic 
compounds per liter of gasoline loaded);
OE=other HAP emissions screening factor for bulk gasoline terminals or 
pipeline breakout stations (tons per year). OE equals the total HAP 
from other emission sources not specified in parameters in the 
equations for ET or EP. If the value of 0.04(OE) is greater 
than 5 percent of either ET or EP, then paragraphs (a)(1) and 
(b)(1) of this section shall not be used to determine applicability; * 
* *
* * * * *
    3. Section 63.420 is amended in paragarph (b)(1) by revising the 
equation and the text following the equation to read as follows:


Sec. 63.420  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *

EP=CF [6.7(TF)(1-
CE)+ 0.21(TE)+0.093(TES)+0.1(TI)+5.31 x 10-6(C))+0.0
4(OE);
where:
EP=emissions screening factor for pipeline breakout stations,

 and the definitions for CF, TF, CE, TE, TES, TI, C, and 
OE are the same as provided in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or
* * * * *
    4. Section 63.420 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 63.420  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (f) Upon request by the Administrator, the owner or operator of a 
bulk gasoline terminal or pipeline breakout station subject to the 
provisions of any paragraphs in this section including, but

[[Page 9093]]

not limited to, the parameters and assumptions used in the applicable 
equation in paragraph (a)(1) or (b)(1) of this section, shall 
demonstrate compliance with those paragraphs.
* * * * *
    5. Section 63.421 is amended by adding in alphabetical order 
definitions for ``bulk gasoline terminal'' and ``limitation(s) on 
potential to emit'' to read as follows:


Sec. 63.421  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Bulk gasoline terminal means any gasoline facility which receives 
gasoline by pipeline, ship or barge, and has a gasoline throughput 
greater than 75,700 liters per day. Gasoline throughput shall be the 
maximum calculated design throughput as may be limited by compliance 
with an enforceable condition under Federal, State or local law and 
discoverable by the Administrator and any other person.
* * * * *
    Limitation(s) on potential to emit means limitation(s) limiting a 
source's potential to emit as defined in Sec. 63.2 of subpart A of this 
part.
* * * * *
    6. Section 63.428 is amended by revising paragraphs (g) 
introductory text and (h) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec. 63.428  Reporting and recordkeeping.

* * * * *
    (g) Each owner or operator of a bulk gasoline terminal or pipeline 
breakout station subject to the provisions of this subpart shall 
include in a semiannual report to the Administrator the following 
information, as applicable:
* * * * *
    (h) Each owner or operator of a bulk gasoline terminal or pipeline 
breakout station subject to the provisions of this subpart shall submit 
an excess emissions report to the Administrator in accordance with 
Sec. 63.10(e)(3), whether or not a CMS is installed at the facility. 
The following occurrences are excess emissions events under this 
subpart, and the following information shall be included in the excess 
emissions report, as applicable:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-4885 Filed 2-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P