8566 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

• 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 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

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. 

Dated: February 3, 2021. 

Deborah Szaro, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 1. 

[FR Doc. 2021–02538 Filed 2–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2020–0209; FRL–10019– 

69–Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; New Hampshire; 

Sulfur Content Limitations for Fuels 

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 New 

Hampshire on March 11, 2019. This 

revision establishes sulfur content 

limitations for fuels. In addition, the 

State requests withdrawal from the SIP 

of the existing sulfur limitations 

regulation, which will be superseded if 

and when EPA takes final action on the 

State’s revised sulfur limitations 

regulation. The intended effect of this 

action is to propose approval of the 

State’s March 11, 2019 submittal into 

the New Hampshire SIP. This action is 

being taken under the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 10, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– 

OAR–2020–0209 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

mcwilliams.anne@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, the 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. The 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

at https://www.regulations.gov or at the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Air and 

Radiation Division, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays and 

facility closures due to COVID–19. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anne McWilliams, Air Quality Branch, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square— 

Suite 100, (Mail code 05–2), Boston, MA 

02109–3912, tel. (617) 918–1697, email 

mcwilliams.anne@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Purpose 

II. New Hampshire’s SIP Revision 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of New Hampshire’s SIP 

Revision 

a. Liquid Fuels 

b. Solid Fuels 

c. Gaseous Fuels 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background and Purpose 

New Hampshire’s Env-A 400 Sulfur 

Content Limits of Fuels was approved 

by EPA as a revision to the New 

Hampshire SIP on August 14, 1992 (57 

FR 36603). Env-A 400 Sulfur Content 

Limits of Fuels was subsequently 

renumbered by the state as Env-A 1600 

Fuel Specifications (Env-A 1600). 

Env-A 1600 was submitted to EPA as a 

revision to the SIP in 2003 with a 

subsequent amendment submitted in 

2015. However, New Hampshire 

withdrew both submittals prior to EPA 

action. Effective July 1, 2018, New 

Hampshire’s Revised Statutes 

Annotated (RSA) 125–C:10–d was 

amended to reduce the sulfur limits in 

liquid fuels imported into or distributed 

within the State. The State’s March 11, 

2019 SIP submittal of revised Env-A 

1600 Fuel Specifications implements 

the state statute, (RSA) 125–C:10–d as 

amended. 

Env-A 1600 is intended to prevent, 

abate, and control the use of fuels 

containing specific pollutant elements 

and compounds. In conjunction with 

the submittal of Env-A 1600, on May 22, 

2019, the New Hampshire Department 

of Environmental Services (NH DES) 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 8567 

1The residual oil limit for the Androscoggin 

Valley Air Quality Controls Region was 2.2% by 

weight. 

2The coal sulfur limit of 2.0 lb sulfur per MMBtu 

is equivalent to an emission limit of 4.0 lbs SO2/ 

MMBtu averaged over any consecutive 3-month 

period. The subject facilities, Merrimack Station 

and Schiller Station, have federally enforceable SO2

permit limits of 0.39 lb/MMBtu (7-day rolling 

average) and 0.83 lb/MMBtu (24-hr calendar 

average), respectively. 

requested removal of Env-A 400 Sulfur 

Content Limits in Fuels, which 

currently exists in the New Hampshire 

SIP but has been superseded as a matter 

of state law by Env-A 1600. Env-A 400 

is now a state regulation unrelated to 

sulfur limitations in fuels. 

II. New Hampshire’s SIP Revision 

On March 11, 2019, the NH DES 

submitted a SIP revision to EPA. This 

SIP revision includes Env-A 1600 Fuel 

Specifications, with amendments to 

Env-A 1603 and 1604 Sulfur Content 

Limitations effective December 21, 

2018. The amended Env-A 1603 and 

1604 lower the allowable limits for the 

sulfur content of liquid and solid fuels. 

The submitted Env-A 1600 removes the 

provisions of the EPA’s previously 

approved Env-A 400 related to sulfur 

content requirements for natural gas, as 

explained below in section III.c. 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of New 

Hampshire’s SIP Revision 

a. Liquid Fuels 

The previous SIP-approved Env-A 400 

generally allowed for the use of 

distillate oil (No. 2), No. 4 oil, and 

residual oil (Nos. 5 and 6) with a sulfur 

in fuel limit containing 0.4% sulfur by 

weight, 1% sulfur by weight, and 2% 

sulfur by weight, respectively.1 The 

submitted revised Env-A 1603 prohibits 

on and after July 1, 2018 the importation 

of, and prohibits on and after February 

1, 2019 the sale or distribution (except 

for fuel remaining in storage for a device 

not requiring a permit pursuant to RSA 

125–C:11) of, fuels having a sulfur 

content in excess of the limits contained 

in Table 1: 

TABLE 1—REVISED SULFUR CONTENT

OF LIQUID FUELS

Fuel type Percent by weight 

No. 2 oil, also referred to 

as distillate oil.

0.0015% (15 parts million (ppm)). 

No. 4 oil .......................... 0.25% (250 ppm). 

No. 5 oil or No. 6 oil, also 

referred to as residual 

oil.

0.5% (500 ppm). 

In addition, Env-A 1603, Sulfur 

Content of Liquid Fuels prohibits the 

use of subject fuels at a stationary 

source or unit, and prohibits any person 

from supplying such fuels, having a 

sulfur content in excess of that in Table 

2: 

TABLE 2—STATE APPROVED SULFUR

CONTENT OF LIQUID FUELS

Fuel type Percent by weight 

JP–4 aviation fuel ........... 0.4% (4,000 parts million 

(ppm)). 

Aviation gasoline ............ 0.05% (500 ppm). 

Kerosene-1 oil ................ 0.04% (400 ppm). 

Kersonene-2 oil and Jet 

A, A–1, B, and JP–8 

aviation fuels.

0.3% (3,000 ppm). 

Used oil ........................... 2%. 

Sulfur in fuel limits for these fuel types 

are not specified in the previously SIPapproved Env-A 400 and therefore this 

strengthens the SIP. 

EPA finds that Env-A 1600 contains 

fuel sulfur limits which are more 

stringent than those in the original rule 

(Env-A 400), and in addition, includes 

sulfur limits for additional fuels 

(kerosene and several grades of aviation 

fuel) which have not been previously 

addressed in the SIP. 

b. Solid Fuels 

For solid fuel, the previous SIPapproved Env-A 400 required the use of 

coal with a maximum sulfur content of 

2.8 pounds sulfur per million BTU gross 

heat content for existing sources, a three 

month weighted average of 2.0 pounds 

sulfur per million BTU for coal received 

for use in any stationary source for the 

generation of heat or power, and 1.5 

pounds sulfur per million BTU gross 

heat content for sources placed in 

operation after April 15, 1970. Env-A 

1604 Sulfur Content Limitations for 

Solid Fuels limits the maximum sulfur 

content in coal to the following: 

TABLE 3—REVISED SULFUR CONTENT

OF SOLID FUELS

Percent by weight 

Coal-burning device 

placed in operation before April 15, 1970.

2.8 pounds per million 

BTU (lb/MBTU) gross 

heat content. 

Coal-burning device 

placed in operation on 

or after April 15, 1970.

1.5 lb/MBTU gross heat 

content. 

1.0 lb/MBTU gross heat 

content average over 

any consecutive 3- 

month period. 

Env-A 1604 is silent on the previously 

approved three-month weighted average 

of 2.0 pounds sulfur per million BTU for 

coal received for use in any stationary 

source for the generation of heat or 

power. However, NH DES’s SIP 

submission points out that current 

federally approved permit operating 

conditions for the two stationary 

sources in the State put into operation 

prior to April 15, 1970 are more 

stringent than the previously approved 

sulfur in coal requirement in Env-A 

400.2

c. Gaseous Fuels 

SIP-approved Env-A 400 requires that 

gaseous fuel (natural and manufactured 

gas) shall contain no more than 5 grains 

per 100 cubic feet of sulfur, calculated 

as hydrogen sulfide (H2S), at standard 

conditions. Env-A 1600 does not 

include sulfur limits for gaseous fuels. 

New Hampshire’s SIP submittal points 

out that the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (FERC) determines the 

allowable sulfur content of natural gas 

in interstate pipelines. In addition, New 

Hampshire’s SIP submission states that 

Subchapter C of EPA regulations at 40 

CFR 79.55 specifies that propane-based 

fuel, defined as ‘‘gaseous motor vehicle 

fuel, marketed commercially as liquified 

petroleum gas (LPG), whose primary 

constituent is propane’’ shall have a 

sulfur limit, including odorant, as 

specified in the table below. In addition, 

commercial propane is sold in several 

grades and each grade has a sulfur 

content specification (also shown in the 

table 4 below) as published by the Gas 

Processor’s Association. 

TABLE 4—SULFUR CONTENT OF GASEOUS FUELS

Fuel ppmvd 

(as S) 

gr/100 scf 

(as H2S) 

gr/100 scf 

(as S) 

Natural Gas .................................................................................................................................. 338 0.3 20 

Natural Gas & Manufactured Gas ............................................................................................... 338 0.25 20 

EPA 40 CFR 79.55 Table F94–B Propane Based Fuel Specifications ...................................... ........................ ........................ 7.7 

GPA HD–5 Propane (industry standard) ..................................................................................... 169 10 10 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
8568 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

3The NH DES letter dated November 20, 2020, 

signed by Craig A. Wright is included in the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

4https://www.energy.gov/fe/services/petroleumresrves/heating-oil-reserves as visited on July 8, 

2020. 

TABLE 4—SULFUR CONTENT OF GASEOUS FUELS—Continued 

Fuel ppmvd 

(as S) 

gr/100 scf 

(as H2S) 

gr/100 scf 

(as S) 

Commercial Propane (industry standard) .................................................................................... 254 15 15 

Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act 

provides that EPA shall not approve any 

implementation plan revision if it 

would interfere with any applicable 

requirements concerning attainment and 

reasonable progress, or any other 

applicable requirement of the CAA. As 

noted above, Env-A 1600 as a whole 

contains more stringent sulfur in fuel 

limits than the current SIP-approved 

rule (Env-A 400). Even though Env-A 

1600 does not contain limits for sulfur 

in gaseous fuels (HD–5 Propone and 

Commercial Propane), the lowering of 

the allowed sulfur in fuel content of the 

solid and liquid fuels will result in an 

overall reduction in the sulfur content 

of fuels. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

find that the requirements of section 

110(l) have been met. 

The rule contains a provision 

whereby the State may, upon 

application, allow suppliers to defer 

compliance with sulfur content 

emission limits of the rule during fuel 

supply shortages, provided that 

compliance is not deferred for more 

than 90 days. Additional requests to 

defer compliance may be made if the 

supply shortage continues longer than 

90 days. The regulation requires the 

supplier to: (1) Describe efforts made to 

obtain compliant fuel, (2) indicate how 

much compliant fuel the supplier has at 

the time of the request, and (3) provide 

an estimate of the duration of the 

shortage. The rule requires that the State 

confer with EPA upon receipt of a 

deferral request. In addition, the rule 

requires that the State notify EPA within 

5 days of issuing an order deferring 

compliance. 

In a letter dated November 20, 2020, 

NH DES provided additional 

information on the possible impact of 

granting a deferral request during a 

supply shortage.3 NH DES 

conservatively estimated that the 

granting of a temporary statewide sulfur 

in fuel deferral would only increase the 

SO2 emissions by an average of 1.9 lb 

SO2 per square mile per day. NH DES 

further clarifies that the adoption of the 

low sulfur in fuels limits is SIP 

strengthening and considered one 

component of the State’s Regional Haze 

strategy. Based on modeling conducted 

in support of regional haze plan 

development, a temporary deferral of 

the sulfur in fuel requirements would 

not cause significant degradation of 

visibility. Finally, NH DES highlighted 

the establishment of the Department of 

Energy Northeast Home Heating Oil 

Reserve (NEHHOR), a one-million-barrel 

supply of ultra-low sulfur distillate 

which can be released should a 

disruption in supply occur.4

Since (1) the supplier must 

demonstrate that certain conditions are 

met, (2) the deferral of the emission 

limits may not be permanent or openended, (3) such deferral requires 

notification to EPA, (4) such a 

temporarily deferral will not result in a 

significant increase in SO2 emissions or 

visibility impairment, and (5) the 

unlikelihood of such a request due to 

the NEHHOR, we propose to find the 

provision approvable. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve Env-A 

1600, Fuel Specifications, which was 

submitted to EPA by New Hampshire on 

March 11, 2019. In addition, EPA is 

proposing to remove previously SIP 

approved Env-400, Sulfur Content of 

Fuels, which has been superseded by 

Env-A 1600 as a matter of state law. EPA 

is soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this notice or on 

other relevant matters. These comments 

will be considered before taking final 

action. Interested parties may 

participate in the Federal rulemaking 

procedure by submitting written 

comments to this proposed rule by 

following the instructions listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this Federal 

Register. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

New Hampshire’s regulation Env-A 

1600 Fuel Specifications as discussed in 

section III. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these documents 

generally available through https://

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 1 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). EPA is 

also proposing to remove provisions of 

Env-A 400 Sulfur Content Limit in 

Fuels, approved August 14, 1992 (57 FR 

36603) from the New Hampshire State 

Implementation Plan, which is 

incorporated by reference in accordance 

with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed 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 expected to be an Executive 

Order 13771 regulatory action because 

this action is not significant 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 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 8569 

1 In March 2008, EPA completed another review 

of the primary and secondary ozone standards and 

tightened them further by lowering the level for 

both to 0.075 ppm. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). 

Additionally, in October 2015, EPA completed a 

review of the primary and secondary ozone 

standards and tightened them by lowering the level 

for both to 0.70 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 

2015). 

2The requirements of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) 

include attainment of the NAAQS, full approval 

under section 110(k) of the applicable SIP, 

determination that improvement in air quality is a 

result of permanent and enforceable reductions in 

emissions, demonstration that the state has met all 

applicable section 110 and part D requirements, and 

a fully approved maintenance plan under CAA 

section 175A. 

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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: February 3, 2021. 

Deborah Szaro, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA 

Region 1. 

[FR Doc. 2021–02535 Filed 2–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2020–0321; FRL–10016– 

97–Region 3] 

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 1997 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards Second 

Maintenance Plan for the Tioga County 

Area 

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 Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania. This revision pertains to 

the Commonwealth’s plan, submitted by 

the Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection (PADEP), for 

maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS) (referred to as the ‘‘1997 

ozone NAAQS’’) in the Tioga County, 

Pennsylvania area (Tioga County Area). 

This action is being taken under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 10, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2020–0321 at https://

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 (e.g., 

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 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Yarina, Planning & 

Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. 

The telephone number is (215) 814– 

2108. Mr. Yarina can also be reached via 

electronic mail at yarina.adam@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 

10, 2020, PADEP submitted a revision to 

the Pennsylvania SIP to incorporate a 

plan for maintaining the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS in the Tioga County Area 

through July 6, 2027, in accordance with 

CAA section 175A. 

I. Background 

In 1979, under section 109 of the 

CAA, EPA established primary and 

secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 

parts per million (ppm), averaged over 

a 1-hour period. 44 FR 8202 (February 

8, 1979). On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 

38856),1 EPA revised the primary and 

secondary NAAQS for ozone to set the 

acceptable level of ozone in the ambient 

air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour 

period. EPA set the 1997 ozone NAAQS 

based on scientific evidence 

demonstrating that ozone causes 

adverse health effects at lower 

concentrations and over longer periods 

of time than was understood when the 

pre-existing 1-hour ozone NAAQS was 

set. 

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the 

CAA to designate areas throughout the 

nation as attaining or not attaining the 

NAAQS. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23857), EPA designated the Tioga 

County Area as nonattainment for the 

1997 ozone NAAQS, effective June 15, 

2004. The Tioga County Area consists 

solely of Tioga County in Pennsylvania. 

Once a nonattainment area has three 

years of complete and certified air 

quality data that has been determined to 

attain the NAAQS, and the area has met 

the other criteria outlined in CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E),2 the state can 

submit a request to EPA to redesignate 

the area to attainment. Areas that have 

been redesignated by EPA from 

nonattainment to attainment are referred 

to as ‘‘maintenance areas.’’ One of the 

criteria for redesignation is to have an 

approved maintenance plan under CAA 

section 175A. The maintenance plan 

must demonstrate that the area will 

continue to maintain the standard for 

the period extending 10 years after 

redesignation, and it must contain such 

additional measures as necessary to 

ensure maintenance as well as 

contingency measures as necessary to 

assure that violations of the standard 

will be promptly corrected. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS