[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 215 (Thursday, November 6, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60132-60136]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29385]
[[Page 60131]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Part 80
Fuels and Fuel Additives; Elimination of Oxygenated Fuels Program
Reformulated Gasoline (OPRG) Category From the Reformulated Gasoline
Regulations; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 215 / Thursday, November 6, 1997 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 60132]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[FRL-5917-7]
RIN 2060-AH43
Fuels and Fuel Additives; Elimination of Oxygenated Fuels Program
Reformulated Gasoline (OPRG) Category From the Reformulated Gasoline
Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this action, the reformulated gasoline (RFG) regulations
are amended to eliminate the separate treatment for a category of
gasoline used in oxygen averaging. This category, oxygenated fuels
program reformulated gasoline (OPRG), includes reformulated gasoline
intended for use in a state oxygenated fuels program during the winter
time. Under the current RFG regulations, a refiner must meet the oxygen
content standards on average for the entire pool of gasoline they
produce, and for the pool of gasoline they produce that is non-OPRG.
EPA is taking this action because it no longer believes a distinction
between OPRG and RFG that is not intended for oxygenated fuels program
areas (i.e., non-OPRG) is necessary and because removal of the OPRG
category would add flexibility and reduce compliance costs for
regulated parties, without producing a negative environmental impact.
Today's rule also removes a prohibition on adding oxygen to finished
RFG, which will provide parties in RFG/oxygenated fuels program overlap
areas with added flexibility in meeting both programs' standards.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne-Marie C. Pastorkovich at (202)
233-9013.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Regulatory Entities
Regulatory categories and entities potentially affected by this
action include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................. Refiners, importers,
oxygenate blenders of
reformulated gasoline.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could be potentially regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your entity is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine
the existing provisions at 40 CFR 80.2, 80.65, 80.67, 80.69, 80.75,
80.77, 80.78, and 80.128, dealing specifically with OPRG. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Background
On March 17, 1997, EPA proposed amendments to the reformulated
gasoline (RFG) regulations that would eliminate the oxygenate program
reformulated gasoline (OPRG) category.1 As explained in that
notice, EPA issued the proposed rule for several reasons. First,
between 1993, when the final RFG rule was issued, and 1995, when the
RFG program was implemented, the number of overlapping oxygenated fuels
program and RFG areas significantly decreased. Although EPA is
concerned that the statutory mandate for 2.0 weight percent oxygen for
RFG is met,2 the Agency feels that the specific risk of
uneven RFG quality due to overlapping oxygenated fuels/RFG program
areas is significantly less than was expected when the RFG regulations
were promulgated. There is still some risk that an area might receive
relatively low oxygen RFG because of averaging, but the risk is no
longer as likely to be specifically caused by program overlap as in
1993 and 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 62 FR 12586 (March 17, 1997).
\2\ In oxygenated fuels program areas implemented by states as
required by section 211(m) of the Act, the minimum oxygen content
during the winter control period is 2.7 weight % oxygen. This
minimum for oxygenated fuels control periods is unaffected by
today's rule and remains in force. Nothing in today's rule changes
the applicable oxygen standards under the Federal RFG or state
oxygenated fuels programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, based upon EPA estimates made prior to the beginning of the
first year of the RFG program, approximately one-third (33%) of all
gasoline nationwide was predicted to be RFG. Oxygenated fuels program
overlap areas outside of California accounted for approximately one-
third (33%) of the total RFG pool, with approximately 19% going to the
New York CMSA.3 EPA believes that any risk that an area
might receive low oxygen RFG is significantly less than it appeared in
1993 and 1994. As discussed in great detail in the proposed
rule,4 in 1994, roughly one-third of RFG was expected to be
destined for several oxygenated fuels overlap cities outside of
California. Today, the New York City CMSA is the only remaining overlap
area outside California, although the Phoenix, Arizona moderate ozone
nonattainment area opted into the RFG program 5 and is also
an oxygenated fuels area. EPA continues to believe that the risk that
an area might receive low oxygen RFG can be adequately addressed
through another existing compliance mechanism--the RFG surveys required
by 40 CFR 80.68.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ It should be noted that, since these estimates were made in
1994, some areas have opted out of the RFG program and Sacramento,
California joined the program as a required covered area, and
comparative volume totals will have changed somewhat as a result.
These estimates are not based upon the comparative volume of OPRG to
RFG. Rather, they are ``straight'' estimates of a program area's
share of the total RFG ``pool'' and are not broken down into
compliance categories. The reader should be aware that OPRG gasoline
likely represents a smaller, subset of the total volume represented
for each area. The untitled document from which the volume estimates
were taken has been placed in the public docket, docket # A-97-01,
Category II(B). The docket is located at the Air Docket Section, 401
M Street, SW, Room M-1500 Washington, DC and is open Monday through
Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
\4\ 62 FR 12596, 12588.
\5\ ``Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Extension of the
Reformulated Gasoline Program to the Phoenix, Arizona Moderate Ozone
Nonattainment Area,'' 62 FR 30260 (June 3, 1997). The Arizona opt-in
became effective on July 3, 1997 for all persons other than
retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers and August 4, 1997 for
retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Response to Comments
Effective Date: Three commenters wanted the rule to go into effect
by the November 1, 1997, the start date for the 1997-1998 winter
oxygenated fuels program. A fourth commenter wanted the rule to go into
effect ``as expeditiously as due process considerations allow.'' The
rationale for the earliest effective date is to allow regulated parties
to take advantage of maximum flexibility.
However, another commenter urged EPA to implement the change
effective January 1, 1998, in order to alleviate financial burdens on
certain regulated parties. Specifically, companies may have entered
into contracts under which they have already paid for credits needed
this year. An implementation date earlier than January 1, 1998 would,
according to the commenter, devalue those purchased credits without the
possibility of a refund to the purchaser.
EPA believes that the rule should go into effect by November 1,
1997, concurrent with the start of the oxygenated fuels program, in
order to
[[Page 60133]]
allow regulated parties maximum flexibility. A January 1, 1998 start
date falling in the middle of the state oxygenated fuels programs,
would likely add unnecessary confusion. Delaying the start date until
after the 1997-1998 oxygenated fuels season, e.g. until March 1, 1998
or later, would impose an unnecessary burden on the majority of
parties. Today's rule removes burdens associated with the maintenance
of separate recordkeeping, reporting, and product transfer
documentation for OPRG and non-OPRG categories, resulting in a general
reduction in compliance costs. A greater cost benefit would be realized
by the vast majority of parties if the rule is effective on November 1,
1997, the start date of the oxygenated fuels program. Today's rule
eliminates the prohibition on adding oxygen to finished RFG, which
provides regulated parties in overlap areas with added flexibility in
meeting both RFG and oxygenated fuels program standards.
Although there may be an adverse effect on a few parties, the vast
majority will benefit from the earliest implementation of today's rule.
EPA has provided guidance on submitting 1997 RFG reports elsewhere
in this notice.
Effects on Compliance Burdens and Recordkeeping
Five commenters agreed that the rule to do away with the
distinction between OPRG/non-OPRG will help add flexibility and reduce
compliance burdens. Three of these five also agreed that this will also
reduce compliance costs. EPA concurs with these statements. A sixth
commenter was concerned that this rule will increase refiner's
compliance burdens, but did not elaborate on how these burdens will
increase. EPA believes that the reduction of the recordkeeping and
reporting burdens associated with the OPRG category results in a
positive impact in terms of cost, burden, and time for the vast
majority of regulated parties.
Reporting
Some commenters who were supportive of the proposal also noted that
they might not have sufficient lead time to redesign their accounting
methods and reporting software. These commenters asked for flexibility
in reporting. One commenter asked that reporting parties should be
given the option of reporting the OPRG/non-OPRG categories for reports
covering calendar year 1997.
EPA understands that this change may require alterations to some
parties' accounting methods and software. For annual reports covering
calendar year 1997 and for batch reports after November 1, 1997, a
reporting party may choose to report using the OPRG/non-OPRG categories
(i.e., to report ``as usual'') or to report all OPRG in the appropriate
non-OPRG categories.
For 1997 and subsequent years, EPA will look to the refiner's
entire RFG production in order to determine compliance with the annual
average for oxygen and will no longer recognize any distinction between
OPRG and non-OPRG. The same approach will apply for compliance with the
oxygen average for VOC-controlled RFG under the simple model.
EPA plans to amend its reporting forms as soon as practicable in
order to reflect the elimination of the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction.
The RFG reports affected by this rule are: ``Reformulated Gasoline
Program Oxygen Content Averaging Report'' (Simple Model & Complex
Model), ``Reformulated Gasoline Program Credit Transfer Summary
Report,'' and the ``Reformulated Gasoline and Anti-Dumping Batch
Reports.''
Product Transfer Documentation
Some commenters have asked whether they must eliminate the OPRG/
non-OPRG distinction on their product transfer documentation.
Redesigned documentation and forms may not be ready by the effective
date.
Today's action removes all OPRG/non-OPRG distinctions in the
regulations as of the November 1, 1997 effective date. Although parties
may continue to use product transfer documentation differentiating OPRG
from non-OPRG, such distinction is not required by EPA because it no
longer holds any importance. However, regulated parties may wish to
phase-out their use of OPRG category reporting, in order to reduce
confusion.
Effects on Oxygenate Use/Toxic Increase
One commenter stated that removal of the OPRG category will cause
refiners to use less oxygenate and more aromatics in their gasoline.
The addition of aromatics would substitute for lost octane. This effect
was not quantified by the commenter, who stated that today's rule will
cause the gasoline to emit more toxics.
It is important to remember that EPA has not altered the standards
applicable to refiners for oxygen content and toxics under either the
reformulated gasoline or oxygenated fuels programs. Furthermore, the
gasoline quality survey program for oxygenates and toxics, and other
enforcement mechanisms still exist to ensure that the full
environmental benefits of the oxygenate content and toxics standards
are realized.
It is possible that elimination of the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction
may result in some decrease in the use of oxygenates, since credits
generated in RFG areas that are also oxygenated fuels program areas
(i.e. areas requiring a relatively high oxygen content of least 2.7
weight % oxygen during the winter months) may be used in RFG areas that
are not oxygenated fuels program areas (i.e. areas requiring at least
2.0 weight % oxygen all year round). If oxygenate use decreases in some
RFG/non-oxygenated fuels program areas, it is possible that toxics may
increase in those areas. Nevertheless, EPA believes that the survey
mechanism (discussed in greater detail for the following comment) is
adequately designed to ensure the gasoline quality in each covered area
will meet the standards on average for toxics.
Effects on Oxygenate Use/Survey Failures
EPA received comments pertaining to the oxygenate use and survey
failures. The commenters all agreed that EPA's enforcement mechanisms,
including gasoline quality surveys, provide a means to ensure
compliance with RFG program requirements. Two commenters thought that
there may be a marginal increase in risk, but this would be discovered
through the surveys and corrected.
One commenter was concerned that blenders will take advantage of
the elimination of the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction to minimize oxygenate
use and this will cause areas to fail the surveys. A commenter felt
that survey failures result from ``refiners [who] are learning to use
the [credit trading] program.'' 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The commenter also urged EPA to ratchet the minimum oxygen
standard from 1.5 weight % to 1.6 weight % for areas that failed the
oxygen survey series in 1996. On July 31, 1997, EPA published a
notice in the Federal Register announcing a ratchet for several
covered areas. Please refer to ``Change in Minimum Oxygen Content
for Reformulated Gasoline--Notice,'' 62 FR 41047 (July 31, 1997) for
further information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA agrees that the risk of survey failures may increase in the
absence of the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction, because more credits from RFG
areas with wintertime oxygenated fuels program may be used by refiners
to show compliance with the annual oxygen average applicable to the
refiner, with less reliance on use of oxygen in RFG destined for RFG
areas that are not
[[Page 60134]]
wintertime oxygenated fuels program areas. (See the preceding comment.)
The existence of the credit trading program was required by section
211(k)(7) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7545.
Compliance with the RFG oxygen standards is shown over the course of a
calendar year averaging period. Credits may be traded within and
between all covered areas. A general risk always exists, even in the
absence of the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction, that one area may receive RFG
with a slightly higher oxygen content than another area. The compliance
survey provisions, with ratchets upon survey failures, were adopted by
the Agency to address this risk. In 1993 and 1994, the specific risk of
uneven RFG quality due to overlapping RFG and oxygenated fuels program
areas was significantly greater than it is today. Since 1993 and 1994,
many areas have redesignated to attainment for carbon monoxide (CO) and
were able to drop the oxygenated fuels program. The specific risk that
an area might receive relatively low oxygen RFG because of program
overlap has lessened, and EPA believes that the existing survey and
enforcement mechanisms are adequate to address any additional risks
there might be from eliminating the OPRG/non-OPRG category.
Phoenix, AZ
Phoenix, AZ recently opted in to the Federal RFG program. One
commenter stated that this should not affect the decision to remove the
OPRG reporting category. EPA agrees with this comment. Overall, the
number of non-California RFG/oxygenated fuels program overlap areas has
decreased significantly since the RFG program regulations were
finalized in 1993. EPA does not believe that the addition of Phoenix to
the program warrants the burden and expense associated with retention
of the OPRG category.
Economic Impact
EPA received one comment from a party who claimed that today's rule
might have an unspecified negative economic impact on one sector of the
oxygenate industry (i.e., the sector that deals with oxygen credit
contracts). Another commenter stated that the effort of eliminating the
OPRG/non-OPRG distinction may be a great one compared to the benefit
received. All other commenters endorsed the proposed changes as
economically beneficial.
EPA believes that the vast majority of regulated entities,
including small businesses, are reasonably expected to experience
significant cost savings as a result of today's regulation. EPA does
not believe that today's action will, in and of itself, have any
significant impact on oxygenate markets.
EPA disagrees with the characterization that the elimination of
removing the OPRG/non-OPRG distinction would require great effort. The
Agency has designed the regulatory changes to permit great flexibility
for all affected parties. For example, EPA has permitted flexibility in
reporting for all RFG and anti-dumping reports covering calendar year
1997 and due to be submitted on or after November 1, 1997.
III. Today's Rule
EPA is amending the Federal RFG regulations to remove the use of a
separate OPRG category and to eliminate the distinction between OPRG
and non-OPRG. The following sections would be affected by today's
proposal. In most cases, the changes are minor and would remove
references to, and distinctions between, the eliminated OPRG category
and RFG which is non-OPRG.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 80, Section Description of change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 80.2--Definitions. 80.2(nn).... Definition of ``Oxygenated
fuels program reformulated
gasoline,'' or ``OPRG'' is
deleted.
Section 80.65--General requirements for Requirements for designation of
refiners, importers, and oxygenate gasoline as OPRG or non-OPRG
blenders. 80.65(d)(2)(iii) (A) and (B). are deleted.
Section 80.67--Compliance on average. Deletes requirements to meet
80.67(f)(2)(ii), 80.67(h)(1)(v) (A) oxygen average separately and
and (B). to segregate credits for non-
OPRG, since the OPRG versus
non-OPRG distinction is
eliminated.
Section 80.69--Requirements for These sections are deleted, to
downstream oxygen blending. 80.69(f) reflect that there would no
(1) and (2). longer be a category known as
``OPRG.'' \7\
Section 80.75--Reporting requirements. For 80.75(f)(2)(ii)(A) (1)
80.75(f)(2)(ii)(A) (1) through (4) and through (4), the OPRG and non-
(B) (1) and (2); 80.75(f)(2)(iii)(B); OPRG distinction is
80.75(h)(2) (i) and (ii) 80.75(p). eliminated. Thus, the only
categories remaining are VOC-
controlled (divided into
subcategories 1 and 2) and non-
VOC-controlled RFG. Section
80.75(f)(2)(ii)(B) (1) and (2)
is deleted in order to
eliminate to OPRG and non-OPRG
distinction. Section
80.75(f)(2)(iii)(B), which
refers to gasoline designated
as non-OPRG, is deleted.
Section 80.77--Product transfer Requirement to identify
documentation. 80.77(g)(1)(ii). gasoline as OPRG or non-OPRG
is deleted.
Section 80.78--Controls and Before today's rule, this
prohibitions on reformulated gasoline. section prohibits addition of
80.78(a)(6). oxygen to finished RFG, unless
such RFG is designated as OPRG
used in an oxygenated fuels
control area during the
oxygenated fuels control
period. This OPRG
``exception'' is amended to
allow for elimination of the
OPRG/non-OPRG categories.
Specifically, the amended
section allows for addition of
oxygenate to RFG intended for
and used in an oxygenate
gasoline program area.
Sections 80.128 and 80.129--Agreed upon Requirement to compare PTD
procedures for refiners and importers designation consistency for
and Agreed upon procedures for OPRG versus non-OPRG is
oxygenate blenders. 80.128(d)(2) and removed. Similar requirement
80.129(d)(3)(iv). for downstream oxygenate
blenders is removed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Note the change to section 80.78(a)(6).
IV. Statutory Authority
Sections 114, 211, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as amended (42
U.S.C. 7414, 7545, and 7601(a)).
V. Environmental Impact
This rule is expected to have no environmental impact. The original
reason for the OPRG category was concern that RFG quality might suffer
in areas that were not both oxygenated fuels program and RFG areas.
There were several such areas when the RFG rules were promulgated.
However, there are now only two areas, the New York/New Jersey/
Connecticut CMSA and
[[Page 60135]]
Phoenix, Arizona, which currently have overlapping programs during the
winter months. EPA is aware of no data indicating that today's
regulation will encourage the use of lower oxygen content RFG. The
oxygenated fuels program and RFG program oxygen standards remain in
place. The RFG standards are Federally enforced through a variety of
enforcement mechanisms, including the oxygen survey program, which is
specifically designed to ensure that oxygen standards are met on
average in all RFG cities.
VI. Economic Impact and Impact on Small Entities
EPA has determined that this final rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small
governmental jurisdictions. Today's regulation would have a positive
economic impact on the great majority of entities regulated by the RFG
regulation, including small businesses. The elimination of the OPRG/
non-OPRG distinction would result in increased flexibility for
regulated parties, including refiners, importers, and blenders.
Specifically, elimination of this distinction from the RFG regulations
alleviates the burden and cost associated with maintenance of separate
recordkeeping, reporting, and product transfer documentation category
for OPRG and non-OPRG gasoline. Elimination of the OPRG/non-OPRG
distinction should also result in a general reduction of compliance
costs associated with the need to meet the oxygen average separately
for two classes of RFG. A regulatory flexibility analysis has therefore
not been prepared.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act
Per the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and
implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, this action does not involve
the addition of any collection of information as defined therein.
VIII. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866,8 the Agency must determine
whether a regulation is ``significant'' and therefore subject to
interagency review under the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments of communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof, or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
this Executive Order.9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id. at section 3(f)(1)-(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to interagency review under the Order.
IX. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``UMRA''), Pub. L. 104-4, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact
statement to accompany any general notice of proposed rulemaking or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate which 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, for any rule subject to Section 202 EPA generally must
select the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent
with statutory requirements. Under Section 203, before establishing any
regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, EPA must take steps to inform and advise small governments
of the requirements and enable them to provide input.
EPA has determined that this rule does not include a federal
mandate as defined in UMRA. The rule does not include a Federal mandate
that may result in estimated annual costs to State, local or tribal
governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more, and it does not establish regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
X. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act as
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, EPA submitted a report containing this rule to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Gasoline,
Reformulated gasoline, Motor vehicle pollution.
Dated: October 31, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
40 CFR part 80 is amended as follows:
PART 80--REGULATION OF FUELS AND FUEL ADDITIVES
1. The authority citation for part 80 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 114, 211, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545, and 7601(a)).
Sec. 80.2 [Amended]
2. Section 80.2 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(nn).
Sec. 80.65 [Amended]
3. Section 80.65 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(d)(2)(iii).
4. Section 80.67 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) and by revising paragraphs (h)(1)(v)(A)(1) and
(h)(1)(v)(A)(2) and by removing and reserving paragraph (h)(1)(v)(B)
and by removing paragraphs (h)(1)(v)(A)(3) and (h)(1)(v)(A)(4) to read
as follows:
Sec. 80.67 Compliance on average.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(1) * * *
(v) * * *
(A) * * *
(1) VOC controlled; and
(2) Non-VOC controlled.
(B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
Sec. 80.69 [Amended]
5. Section 80.69 is amended by removing paragraph (f).
6. Section 80.75 is amended by revising paragraphs
(f)(2)(ii)(A)(1), (f)(2)(ii)(A)(2), (h)(2)(i)(A) and (h)(2)(i)(B) and
by removing paragraphs (f)(2)(ii)(A)(3), (f)(2)(ii)(A)(4),
(h)(2)(i)(C), (h)(2)(i)(D) and by removing and reserving (h)(2)(ii) to
read as follows:
Sec. 80.75 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
[[Page 60136]]
(A) * * *
(1) Gasoline designated as VOC-controlled; and
(2) Gasoline designated as non-VOC-controlled.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) VOC-controlled; and
(B) Non-VOC-controlled.
* * * * *
7. Section 80.77 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(g)(1)(ii).
8. Section 80.78 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 80.78 Controls and prohibitions on reformulated gasoline.
(a) * * *
(6) No person may add any oxygenate to reformulated gasoline,
except that such oxygenate may be added to reformulated gasoline
provided that such gasoline is used in an oxygenated fuels program
control area during an oxygenated fuels control period.
* * * * *
9. Section 80.128 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(2) to read
as follows:
Sec. 80.128 Agreed upon procedures for refiners and importers.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) Compare the product transfer documents designation for
consistency with the time and place, and compliance model designations
for the tender (VOC-controlled or non-VOC-controlled, VOC region for
VOC-controlled, summer or winter gasoline, and simple or complex model
certified); and
* * * * *
10. Section 80.129 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(3)(v) to
read as follows:
Sec. 80.129 Agreed upon procedures for downstream oxygenate blenders.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) * * *
(v) Review the time and place designations in the product transfer
documents prepared for the batch by the blender, for consistency with
the time and place designations in the product transfer documents for
the RBOB (e.g. VOC-controlled or non-VOC-controlled, VOC region for
VOC-controlled, and simple or complex model).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-29385 Filed 11-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
