Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program Requirements

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program Requirements

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program Requirements

Cecil Rodrigues
Environmental Protection Agency
12 February 2019

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 12, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3369-3373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01882]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0730; FRL-9989-12--Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery Program
Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Maryland. This revision seeks to remove requirements for
gasoline vapor recovery systems installed on gasoline dispensers, the
purpose of which are to capture emissions from vehicle refueling
operations (otherwise known as Stage II vapor recovery). Specifically,
this action would remove from the approved SIP prior approved Stage II
requirements applicable to new gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs)
and existing GDF's undergoing major modification. GDF's will have the
choice whether to install Stage II at new stations or whether to
decommission Stage II at existing stations already equipped with Stage
II. Owners that elect to retain existing Stage II equipment can do so,
but in doing must continue to test and to maintain or replace existing
equipment. Maryland's SIP revision includes a demonstration that
removal of Stage II requirements is consistent with the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and meets all relevant EPA guidance.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 14, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2018-0730 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
spielberger.susan@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, 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, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For 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: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by
email at rehn.brian@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is
used, we refer to EPA. The following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.

I. Background and Purpose
II. Summary of Maryland's Stage II Vapor Recovery Program and SIP
Revision
III. EPA's Evaluation of Maryland's SIP Revisions
IV. Proposed Action
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

On August 25, 2017, the Maryland Department of the Environment
(MDE) submitted a revision to its SIP. This SIP submittal consists of
Maryland's revised Stage II requirement regulations, at COMAR 26.11.24,
Vapor Recovery at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, which have been
revised to allow the decommissioning of existing Stage II vapor
recovery systems and which allows newly constructed GDFs (or those
undergoing major modifications) the option not to install Stage II
equipment. The SIP submittal also includes a demonstration that removal
of Stage II vapor recovery systems in Maryland will not interfere with
any requirement concerning attainment or reasonable progress of any
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. Maryland's SIP demonstration is also intended
to show that removal of Stage II requirements is consistent with all
relevant EPA guidance.
Stage II vapor recovery is an emission control system that is
installed on gasoline dispensing equipment at GDFs for the purpose of
capturing fuel vapor that would otherwise be released from vehicle gas
tanks into the atmosphere during vehicle refueling. Stage II vapor
recovery systems installed on dispensing equipment capture these
refueling emissions at the dispenser and route the refueling vapors
back to the GDF's underground storage tank, preventing volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) that comprise these vapors from escaping to the
atmosphere.
Beginning in 1998, newly manufactured gasoline-burning cars and
trucks have been equipped with on-board vapor recovery (ORVR) systems
that utilize carbon canisters installed directly on the vehicle to
capture refueling vapors in the vehicle to be later routed to the
vehicle's engine for combustion during engine operation.
Stage II vapor recovery systems and ORVR systems were initially
both required by the 1990 amendments to the CAA. Section 182(b)(3) of
the CAA requires areas classified as moderate and above ozone
nonattainment to implement Stage II vapor recovery programs. Also,
under CAA section 184(b)(2), states in the Northeast Ozone Transport
Region (OTR) are required to implement Stage II or comparable measures.
CAA section 202(a)(6) required EPA to promulgate regulations for ORVR
for light-duty cars and trucks (passenger vehicles). EPA adopted these
requirements in a final action published in the April 6, 1994 Federal
Register (59 FR 16262 (hereafter referred to as the ORVR rule). Upon
the effective date of that final rule, moderate ozone nonattainment
areas were no longer subject to CAA section 182(b)(3) Stage II vapor
recovery requirements. Under the ORVR rule, new passenger cars built in
model year 1998 and later were required to be equipped with ORVR
systems, followed by model year 2001 and later light-duty trucks. ORVR
equipment has been installed on nearly all new gasoline-powered light-
duty cars, light-

[[Page 3370]]

duty trucks, and heavy-duty vehicles manufactured since 2006.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ EPA Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures, August 7, 2012, Table A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the phase-in of ORVR controls, Stage II has provided VOC
emission reductions in ozone nonattainment areas and in certain areas
of the OTR. Congress recognized that ORVR systems and Stage II vapor
recovery systems would over time become largely redundant technologies
acting to capture the same pollutants. Therefore, Congress provided
authority in the 1990 amendments to the CAA for EPA to allow states to
remove Stage II vapor recovery programs from their SIPs upon EPA making
a finding that ORVR is in ``widespread use.'' EPA issued a widespread
use finding in a final rule published in the May 16, 2012 Federal
Register (77 FR 28772), in which EPA determined that ORVR was in
widespread use on a nationwide basis. EPA estimated that as of the end
of 2016, more than 88 percent of gasoline refueling nationwide would
occur with ORVR-equipped vehicles.\2\ Thus, Stage II vapor recovery
programs have become largely redundant control systems (for ORVR-
equipped vehicles) and as a result, Stage II vapor recovery systems
achieve ever declining emissions benefits as more ORVR-equipped
vehicles continue to enter the on-road motor vehicle fleet.\3\ In areas
where certain types of vacuum-assist Stage II vapor recovery systems
are used, the interaction between ORVR systems and certain
configurations of Stage II vapor recovery systems results in the
reduction of overall control system efficiency in capturing VOC
refueling emissions compared to what would otherwise be achieved by
ORVR or Stage II acting in the absence of the other. In its May 16,
2012 widespread use rulemaking, EPA also exercised its authority under
CAA section 202(a)(6) to waive certain federal statutory requirements
for Stage II vapor recovery systems at GDFs, which among other things,
exempted all new ozone nonattainment areas classified serious or above
from the requirement to adopt Stage II vapor recovery programs.
Finally, EPA's May 16, 2012 rulemaking also noted that any state
currently implementing Stage II vapor recovery program may submit SIP
revisions that would allow for the phase-out of Stage II vapor recovery
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ EPA Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures, Table A-1, August 7, 2012.
\3\ EPA Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures, p.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary of Maryland's Stage II Vapor Recovery Program and SIP
Revisions

The Maryland portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton, PA-NJ-
DE-MD metropolitan area (hereafter referred to as the Maryland portion
of the Philadelphia area or the Philadelphia area) and the Baltimore,
MD metropolitan area were designated by the CAA as severe nonattainment
for the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\4\ At the same time, the Maryland
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA metropolitan area (hereafter
referred to as the Maryland portion of the Washington area, or the
Washington area) was designated as serious nonattainment under the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS. As a result, Maryland adopted Stage II vapor recovery
regulations (COMAR 26.11.24) for the Maryland portion of the Washington
area, the Maryland portion of the Philadelphia area, and for the
Baltimore, MD area on January 18, 1993 (Maryland Register, February 5,
1993, Vol. 20, Issue 3). Maryland submitted a revision to EPA on
January 18, 1993 to request the addition of Maryland Stage II
requirements to the Maryland SIP, which EPA approved in a final action
published in the June 9, 1994 Federal Register (59 FR 29730). Maryland
submitted a revised version of this regulation to EPA as a SIP revision
on May 23, 2002, which EPA approved in a final action published in the
May 7, 2003 Federal Register (68 FR 24363). Maryland further amended
its Stage II regulation on January 26, 2005, and EPA approved that
revised rule as a revision to the Maryland SIP in a final rule
published in the May 8, 2006 Federal Register (71 FR 26688).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ 40 CFR 81-321, effective November 15, 1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maryland was also required to adopt Stage II, or comparable
measures, on a statewide basis under the Stage II OTR provisions of CAA
section 184(b)(2). Maryland submitted a comparable measures
demonstration to satisfy the Stage II comparability requirement to EPA
on November 5, 1997. EPA approved Maryland's November 1997 Stage II
comparability SIP in a final rule published in the December 9, 1998
Federal Register (63 FR 67780). Maryland's OTR Stage II comparability
demonstration relied on five area source VOC control rules as
comparable measures to Stage II.
On August 25, 2017, Maryland submitted a SIP revision to EPA
consisting of revised Stage II requirements (COMAR26.11.24) adopted by
MDE on November 2, 2015 (state effective November 23, 2015), along with
a demonstration of the emission impacts of removal of the Stage II
requirements on affected Maryland areas. The revised rule removes the
requirements for new Stage II vapor recovery systems in Maryland Stage
II areas, while allowing GDFs with installed Stage II systems the
option to decommission their equipment or to retain it. Maryland's
revised Stage II vapor recovery requirements rule incorporates by
reference requirements and procedures for stations opting to
decommission Stage II vapor recovery equipment, based on Section 14 of
the Petroleum Equipment Institute's Recommended Practices for
Installation and Testing of Vapor Recovery Systems at Vehicle-Fueling
Sites, 2009 edition, PEI/RP300-09.
Under Maryland's revised rule, GDFs opting to continue to operate
Stage II vapor recovery equipment, as well as those opting to
decommission Stage II vapor recovery equipment, are subject to
continued testing requirements (at specified intervals) and
recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to testing. Maryland's
revised rule incorporates by reference several test methods applicable
to GDFs that opt to decommission or to continue to operate Stage II
vapor recovery systems (Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure of Pressure/
Vacuum Valves, TP-201.1E, California EPA Air Resources Board) and
(Determination of Vapor Piping Connections to Underground Gasoline
Storage Tanks (Tie-Tank Test), TP-201.3C, California EPA Air Resources
Board). For GDFs opting to continue Stage II operation (in addition to
prior Stage II test requirements), new tests are added to include a
periodic leak rate and cracking pressure test (per TP-201.1E), as well
as a tie tank test (per TP-201.3C). GDFs opting to decommission will be
subject only to the newly added periodic leak rate and cracking
pressure test (TP-201.1E) and the tie tank test (TP-201.3C). Copies of
test results must be forwarded to MDE within 30 days of the test.
The August 25, 2017 SIP revision also includes a demonstration
supporting the discontinuation of the Maryland Stage II vapor recovery
program. This demonstration, discussed in greater detail below,
consists of an analysis that after the year 2016, the overall emissions
benefits associated with the Stage II program (operated in conjunction
with ORVR) are overwhelmed by an emissions disbenefit caused by an ORVR
incompatibility with certain vacuum-assist type Stage II equipment.
MDE's

[[Page 3371]]

analysis shows that continued operation of the Stage II vapor recovery
program beyond 2016 actually increases VOC emissions due to the
incompatibility between certain Stage II and ORVR equipment, coupled
with the increasing prevalence of ORVR-equipped vehicles. While
Maryland is not requiring every Stage II-equipped GDF to decommission
their equipment, it is assumed a majority of existing stations will do
so upon the removal of state and federal Stage II mandates. Even if all
stations do no decommission their equipment (or delay doing so),
overall emission benefits will be improved by the shift to primarily
ORVR use in current Stage II subject areas.

III. EPA's Evaluation of Maryland's SIP Revision

EPA has reviewed Maryland's revised COMAR 26.11.24, Vapor Recovery
at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, and accompanying SIP narrative, and
has concluded that Maryland's August 25, 2017 SIP revision is
consistent with EPA's widespread use rule (77 FR 28772, May 16, 2012)
and with EPA's ``Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation Plan and Assessing Comparable
Measures'' (EPA-457/B-12-001; August 7, 2012), hereafter referred to as
EPA's Stage II Removal Guidance.
Maryland's August 25, 2017 SIP revision includes a demonstration
supporting the discontinuation of the Maryland Stage II vapor recovery
program, in compliance with the requirements of the CAA sections 110(l)
requirement that revision of the SIP will not interfere with attainment
of or reasonable further progress towards attainment of any NAAQS or
any other applicable CAA requirement. This demonstration was prepared
by MDE based on relevant equations provided in EPA's Stage II Removal
Guidance. From this analysis, Maryland determined that by 2016 the
emissions benefits from the Stage II vapor recovery program (in
conjunction with ORVR) will be overwhelmed by the emission disbenefits
stemming from an incompatibility between certain Stage II vacuum-assist
based systems and ORVR. Beyond 2016, the continuation of Stage II vapor
recovery requirements would increase emissions in the Maryland portions
of all analyzed areas, as summarized in Table 1. Based on this
analysis, Maryland elected to allow decommissioning of Stage II vapor
recovery systems beginning in October 2016.

Table 1--Stage II VOC Reductions for Maryland Ozone Nonattainment Counties/Areas
[In metric tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Arundel............................ 0.07 0.01 -0.03 -0.07 -0.09 -0.11 -0.12
Baltimore............................... 0.09 0.01 -0.05 -0.09 -0.13 -0.15 -0.17
Calvert................................. 0.01 0.01 -0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02
Carroll................................. 0.02 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03
Cecil................................... 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02
Charles................................. 0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03
Frederick............................... 0.05 0.02 -0.01 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06
Harford................................. 0.03 0.01 -0.01 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05
Howard.................................. 0.04 0.00 -0.02 -0.05 -0.06 -0.08 -0.08
Montgomery.............................. 0.11 0.03 -0.03 -0.08 -0.12 -0.15 -0.17
Prince George's......................... 0.13 0.04 -0.04 -0.09 -0.13 -0.16 -0.18
Baltimore City.......................... 0.03 0.00 -0.03 -0.05 -0.06 -0.07 -0.08
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Baltimore Area Total................ 0.28 0.04 -0.15 -0.30 -0.41 -0.48 -0.54
Maryland Portion of Washington Area 0.33 0.10 -0.08 -0.22 -0.33 -0.40 -0.46
Total..............................
Maryland Portion of Philadelphia 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02
Area Total.........................
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Stage II Area Total............. 0.65 0.17 -0.22 -0.52 -0.74 -0.90 -1.01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In evaluating whether a given SIP revision would interfere with
attainment of a NAAQS, EPA generally considers whether the SIP revision
will allow for an increase in actual emission into the air over what is
allowed under the existing EPA-approved SIP. EPA has not required that
states produce a new complete attainment demonstration for every SIP
revision, provided that the status quo air quality is preserved. See
e.g., Kentucky Resources Council, Inc. v. EPA, 467 F.3d 986 (6th Cir.
2006).\5\ EPA believes that a planned Stage II decommissioning that is
shown not to result in an increase in areawide VOC emissions would be
consistent with the conditions of CAA section 110(l), and would not
jeopardize attainment or maintenance of an area that formerly relied
upon Stage II emission reductions in the approved SIP. Maryland has
demonstrated that Stage II vapor recovery will no longer provide
emission reductions when compared to ORVR without Stage II vapor
recovery in all Maryland ozone nonattainment areas. Since 2016, Stage
II vapor recovery (operated in conjunction with ORVR) has been shown by
Maryland to result in increased VOC emissions in Maryland's three ozone
nonattainment areas--due to incompatibilities between certain types of
Stage II equipment and vehicle ORVR systems. Therefore, EPA believes
discontinuance of Stage II in Maryland's three ozone nonattainment
areas will not interfere with those areas' ability to attain or
maintain the NAAQS, or to provide reasonable further progress in
meeting the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ EPA Guidance on Removing Stage II Gasoline Vapor Control
Programs from State Implementation Plans and Assessing Comparable
Measures, August 7, 2012, Section 2.2.

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

[[Page 3372]]

States in the OTR defined by the CAA remain obligated under CAA
section 184(b)(2) to implement (on a statewide basis) either a Stage II
vapor recovery program, or other measures capable of achieving emission
reductions ``comparable to those achievable'' by Stage II vapor
recovery. EPA issued guidance on this OTR comparability demonstration
in 1995 and later updated that guidance as part of its August 2012
Stage II Removal Guidance--in light of the decreasing role of Stage II
as a means of controlling refueling emissions and the increasing
prominence of ORVR-equipped vehicles.
Maryland submitted a comparable measures SIP revision to EPA on
November 5, 1997 demonstrating that control measures already
implemented in those counties in Maryland not subject to Stage II vapor
recovery under CAA section 182(b)(3) achieved comparable emission
reductions to Stage II vapor recovery. Maryland's chosen Stage II
comparable measures included non-point, or area source, controls on:
Cold and vapor degreasing operations, lithographic printing, screen
printing, expandable polystyrene operations, and vehicle refinishing.
To address areas in Maryland subject to Stage II or a comparable
measure (as a result of the CAA section 184 requirements specific to
OTR states), EPA approved Maryland's November 1997 Stage II
comparability SIP for attainment and marginal ozone nonattainment
counties in a final action published in the December 9, 1998 Federal
Register (63 FR 67780). Maryland is not required to further demonstrate
Stage II comparability for those counties as that action remains in
effect.
However, Maryland is required to newly demonstrate Stage II
comparability for the Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington areas--
where Stage II vapor recovery was previously mandated by CAA section
182(b)(3) prior to EPA's issuance of its ORVR ``widespread use''
determination. The 110(l) demonstration in Maryland's August 25, 2017
SIP revision shows that Stage II no longer yields VOC emissions
benefits in these three nonattainment areas after 2016, when operated
in conjunction with ORVR. Therefore, since Stage II provides no
additional benefits beyond ORVR (and results in increases in VOC
emissions beyond 2016) in these three nonattainment areas, EPA believes
that removal of Stage II after 2016 satisfies the Stage II
comparability requirement of section 184 for these three ozone
nonattainment areas.
In addition to the CAA section 182 and 184 requirements applicable
to Stage II vapor recovery, CAA section 193 prohibits modification of
any control requirement in effect before enactment of the CAA of 1990
(i.e., November 15, 1990) in a current nonattainment area--unless
modification ``ensures equivalent or greater emission reductions.''
Therefore, a Stage II vapor recovery control program implemented under
a SIP prior to November 1990 may not be removed from the SIP until
another requirement is shown to achieve equal or greater emissions
reductions than Stage II vapor recovery. Maryland did not have a Stage
II program prior to November 15, 1990, so Stage II was not a part of
the Maryland SIP prior to that date. Therefore, this ``general savings
clause'' requirement of CAA section 193 does not apply to Maryland or
to this action.

IV. Proposed Action

EPA is proposing to approve Maryland's August 25, 2017 SIP revision
for statewide removal of Stage II vapor recovery requirements.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve Maryland's revised COMAR
26.11.24, Vapor Recovery at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, and
incorporate it into the Maryland SIP. EPA is proposing to approve this
SIP revision because it meets all applicable requirements of the Clean
Air Act and relevant EPA guidance and because approval of this SIP
revision will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the ozone
NAAQS.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
notice or other relevant matters. These comments will be considered
before taking final action.

V. Incorporation by Reference

In this proposed rule, EPA proposes to include in our subsequent
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 the State of Maryland's revised
COMAR 26.11.24 Vapor Recovery at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
(effective date November 23, 2015), which includes amendments to
Regulations .01, .01-1, .02, .03, .03-1, .04, and .07 and the addition
of Regulation .03-1. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through http://www.regulations.gov and at
the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified in the
For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more
information).

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 CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 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
action merely approves 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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
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 in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 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, this proposed rule to remove Maryland Stage II vapor
recovery requirements does not have tribal implications as specified by

[[Page 3373]]

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

Dated: December 28, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2019-01882 Filed 2-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P