8574 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

regional emission analysis (40 CFR 

93.109(e)). However, because LMP areas 

are still maintenance areas, certain 

aspects of transportation conformity 

determinations still will be required for 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects. Specifically, for such 

determination, RTPs, TIPs, and 

transportation projects still will have to 

demonstrate that they are fiscally 

constrained (40 CFR 93.108), meet the 

criteria for consultation (40 CFR 93.105 

and 93.112) and transportation control 

measure implementation in the 

conformity rule provisions (40 CFR 

93.113). Additionally, conformity 

determinations for RTPs and TIPs must 

be determined no less frequently than 

every four years, and conformity of plan 

and TIP amendments and transportation 

projects is demonstrated in accordance 

with the timing requirements specified 

in 40 CFR 93.104. In addition, for 

projects to be approved, they must come 

from a currently conforming RTP and 

TIP (40 CFR 93.114 and 93.115). The 

Tioga County Area remains under the 

obligation to meet the applicable 

conformity requirements for the 1997 

ozone NAAQS. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA’s review of PADEP’s March 10, 

2020 submittal indicates that it meets all 

applicable CAA requirements, 

specifically the requirements of CAA 

section 175A. EPA is proposing to 

approve the second maintenance plan 

for the Tioga County Area as a revision 

to the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

IV. 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 it is not a significant 

regulatory action 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 

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 

rulemaking, proposing approval of 

Pennsylvania’s second maintenance 

plan for the Tioga County Area, does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

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, Intergovernmentalrelations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organiccompounds. 

Dated: February 3, 2021. 

Diana Esher, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2021–02558 Filed 2–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2020–0719; FRL–10019– 

44–Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; 

Regulations To Limit Premises-Wide 

Actual and Potential Emissions From 

Major Stationary Sources of Air 

Pollution 

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 

Connecticut. This revision proposes to 

approve into the Connecticut SIP state 

regulations that apply restrictions on 

emissions of criteria pollutants for 

which EPA has established National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards. 

Separately, we are also proposing to 

approve Connecticut regulations that 

apply restrictions on emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The 

Connecticut regulations impose legally 

and practicably enforceable emissions 

limitations restricting eligible sources’ 

actual and potential emissions below 

major stationary source thresholds, if a 

source chooses to be covered by the 

regulations. Such restrictions would 

generally allow eligible sources to avoid 

having to comply with reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) 

that would otherwise apply to major 

stationary sources, title V operating 

permit requirements, or other 

requirements that apply only to major 

stationary sources. 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–2020–0719 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

bird.patrick@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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 8575 

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 

https://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: 

Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics and 

Indoor Programs Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

Region 1, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 

100, (Mail code 05–2), Boston, MA 

02109–3912, telephone 617–918–1656, 

email lancey.susan@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. Evaluation Under Section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act 

III. Evaluation Under Section 112 of the 

Clean Air Act 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background and Purpose 

In a letter dated October 26, 2020, the 

Connecticut Department of Energy and 

Environmental Protection (DEEP) 

submitted a formal revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP 

revision consists of Regulations of 

Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA) 

section 22a–174–33a, Limit on 

Premises-wide Actual Emissions Below 

50% of Title V Thresholds, effective 

September 24, 2020, and RCSA section 

22a–174–33b, Limit on Premises-wide 

Actual Emissions Below 80% of Title V 

Thresholds, effective September 24, 

2020, as the regulations relate to criteria 

pollutants. The Connecticut regulations 

impose legally and practicably 

enforceable emissions limitations 

restricting eligible sources’ actual and 

potential emissions below major 

stationary source thresholds, if a source 

chooses to be covered by the 

regulations. 

Federally-enforceable limits on 

criteria pollutants or their precursors 

(e.g., VOCs or PM–10) may have the 

incidental effect of limiting certain 

HAPs listed pursuant to section 112(b) 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

As a legal matter, no additional program 

approval by the EPA is required beyond 

SIP approval under section 110 of the 

CAA in order for these criteria pollutant 

limits to be recognized as federally 

enforceable. However, section 112 of the 

Act provides the underlying authority 

for controlling all HAP emissions, 

regardless of their relationship to 

criteria pollutant controls. 

In a letter dated December 21, 2020, 

Connecticut DEEP also requested that 

EPA approve RCSA sections 22a–174– 

33a and 22a–174–33b under section 

112(l) of the CAA, as the regulations 

relate to HAPs. As noted earlier, RCSA 

sections 22a–174–33a and 22a–174–33b 

are designed to limit air pollutant 

emissions from major stationary sources 

to below major stationary source 

thresholds by including legally and 

practicably enforceable restrictions on 

potential and actual emissions. 

On April 24, 2017 in the Federal 

Register, EPA approved Connecticut’s 

General Permit to Limit Potential to 

Emit issued on November 9, 2015 

(GPLPE). See 82 FR 18868. The GPLPE 

expired on November 8, 2020. The 

GPLPE was a general permit designed to 

limit air pollutant emissions from major 

stationary sources to below major source 

thresholds by including legally and 

practicably enforceable permit 

restrictions on potential and actual 

emissions. Connecticut adopted new 

RCSA sections 22a–174–33a and 22a– 

174–33b as a replacement program for 

the GPLPE, as opposed to a renewal of 

the GPLPE, in order to avoid a lapse in 

federal enforceability of the applicable 

requirements. Therefore, RCSA sections 

22a–174–33a and 22a–174–33b are 

intended to replace the GPLPE as a 

means of limiting a source’s potential to 

emit to below major stationary source 

thresholds. 

EPA’s review of this material 

indicates the regulations satisfy the 

criteria necessary for EPA’s approval as 

a SIP revision under section 110 of the 

CAA and satisfy the criteria necessary to 

be approved under Section 112 of the 

CAA. EPA is proposing to approve the 

Connecticut SIP revision consisting of 

RCSA section 22a–174–33a, Limit on 

Premises-wide Actual Emissions Below 

50% of Title V Thresholds, effective 

September 24, 2020, and RCSA section 

22a–174–33b, Limit on Premises-wide 

Actual Emissions Below 80% of Title V 

Thresholds, effective September 24, 

2020, under Section 110 of the CAA. 

EPA is also separately proposing to 

approve RCSA section 22a–174–33a, 

Limit on Premises-wide Actual 

Emissions Below 50% of Title V 

Thresholds, effective September 24, 

2020, and RCSA section 22a–174–33b, 

Limit on Premises-wide Actual 

Emissions Below 80% of Title V 

Thresholds, effective September 24, 

2020, under Section 112 of the CAA. 

II. Evaluation Under Section 110 of the 

Clean Air Act 

The State of Connecticut’s principal 

purpose in issuing RCSA sections 22a– 

174–33a and 22a–174–33b is to have a 

federally and practicably enforceable 

means of expeditiously restricting 

sources’ potential and actual emissions 

of air pollutants, such that those eligible 

sources would no longer be required to 

comply with reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) that would 

otherwise apply to major stationary 

sources, title V operating permit 

requirements, or other requirements that 

only apply to major stationary sources. 

The operating permit provisions in title 

V of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990 created interest in mechanisms for 

limiting sources’ potential to emit, 

thereby allowing eligible sources to 

avoid being defined as ‘‘major’’ with 

respect to title V operating permit 

programs. Please note, however, that a 

source that is eligible for coverage under 

RCSA sections 22a–174–33a and 22a– 

174–33b may still need a title V 

operating permit if EPA promulgates a 

National Emissions Standard for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) or 

a New Source Performance Standard 

(NSPS) which require non-major 

sources to obtain a title V permit. 

Connecticut’s RCSA sections 22a– 

174–33a and 22a–174–33b require the 

owner or operator committing to operate 

pursuant to the applicable regulation to 

submit a notification on forms 

prescribed by the Commissioner. The 

owner or operator is required to keep 

records that include, among other 

things, calculation of a source’s actual 

emissions of regulated air pollutants 

and a detailed description of the 

methodology used to calculate those 

actual emissions. The methodology used 

by an eligible source must be selected 

from a preferential hierarchy of 

methodologies explicitly identified in 

the regulations. Under RCSA section 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
8576 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1See ‘‘Options for Limiting Potential to Emit of 

a Stationary Source under Section 112 and Title V 

of the Clean Air Act,’’ issued by John Seitz, Office 

of Air Quality Planning and Standards to EPA Air 

Division Directors, dated January 25, 1995. https:// 

www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/ 

documents/ptememo.pdf. 

22a–174–33a, facilities may commit to 

be limited to emissions less than 50% 

of the title V operating permit program 

thresholds for a major source; or, 

alternatively, under RCSA section 22a– 

174–33b, certain specified source 

categories may commit to be limited to 

emissions up to, but no more than, 80% 

of the title V operating permit program 

thresholds for a major stationary source 

provided the owner or operator 

conducts the additional specified 

monitoring and any other additional 

requirements required by RCSA 22a– 

174–33b for the relevant source 

category. 

Connecticut’s RCSA sections 22a– 

174–33a and 22a–174–33b contain 

emissions limitations, requirements for 

the source to calculate actual emissions, 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

require subject sources to submit an 

annual compliance certification. 

Additionally, as noted above, RCSA 

section 22a–174–33b provides enhanced 

monitoring requirements for specific 

source categories at premises operating 

according to section 22a–174–33b 

which limits a source’s potential and 

actual emissions up to, but to no more 

than, 80% of the title V operating permit 

program thresholds for a major source. 

This approach was developed in 

accordance with an EPA guidance 

document entitled ‘‘Options for 

Limiting Potential to Emit of a 

Stationary Source under Section 112 

and Title V of the Clean Air Act,’’ issued 

by John Seitz, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards to EPA Air 

Division Directors, dated January 25, 

1995.1 This guidance outlines various 

approaches to establishing federallyenforceable mechanisms to limit 

emissions from sources that wish to 

limit potential emissions to below major 

source levels. Connecticut’s RCSA 22a– 

174–33a and 22a–174–33b satisfy the 

criteria necessary for EPA’s approval as 

a SIP revision under section 110 of the 

CAA. The regulations contain legally 

enforceable limitations on emissions 

that are also federally and practicably 

enforceable. 

III. Evaluation Under Section 112 of the 

Clean Air Act 

The state of Connecticut has also 

requested approval of RCSA sections 

22a–174–33a and 22a–174–33b under 

section 112(l) of the Act for the purpose 

of creating federally enforceable 

limitations on the potential to emit of 

HAPs. Approval under CAA section 

112(l) is necessary because the SIP 

approval discussed above, pursuant to 

section 110 of the Act, does not extend 

to HAPs. Approval pursuant to section 

112(l) of the Act will render RCSA 

sections 22a–174–33a and 22a–174–33b 

federally enforceable for sources of 

HAPs. 

In order for EPA to approve 

Connecticut’s RCSA sections 22a–174– 

33a and 22a–174–33b for limiting the 

potential to emit of HAPs, the 

regulations must meet the statutory 

criteria for approval under section 

112(l)(5) of the Act. In a July 10, 1996 

Federal Register notice EPA revised 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, to provide for 

approval of programs designed to limit 

sources’ potential to emit HAPs under 

the authority of section 112(l) of the 

CAA. A state must demonstrate that it 

has satisfied the general approval 

criteria contained in 40 CFR 63.91(d). 

The process of providing ‘‘up-front 

approval’’ assures that a state has met 

the criteria in section 112(l)(5) of the 

CAA (as codified in 40 CFR 63.91(d)). 

That is, that the state has demonstrated 

that its program contains adequate 

authorities to assure compliance with 

each applicable Federal requirement, 

adequate resources for implementation, 

and an expeditious compliance 

schedule. To the extent that these have 

already been satisfied through a title V 

program approval, a state need not 

resubmit information demonstrating 

that it meets the general approval 

criteria in 40 CFR 63.91(d). Therefore, 

under 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3), interim or 

final title V operating permit program 

approval satisfies the criteria set forth in 

40 CFR 63.91(d) for ‘‘up-front 

approval.’’ On May 13, 2002, EPA 

granted full approval of Connecticut’s 

title V operating permit program. See 67 

FR 31966. In addition, Connecticut’s 

regulations contain legally and 

practicably enforceable restrictions on 

potential and actual emissions. 

Accordingly, the EPA is proposing to 

approve RCSA sections 22a–174–33a 

and 22a–174–33b pursuant to 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart E and section 112(l) of 

the Act because the program meets the 

applicable approval criteria in section 

112(l)(5) of the Act and 40 CFR 63.91. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Connecticut’s RCSA section 22a–174– 

33a, Limit on Premises-wide Actual 

Emissions Below 50% of Title V 

Thresholds, effective September 24, 

2020, and RCSA section 22a–174–33b, 

Limit on Premises-wide Actual 

Emissions Below 80% of Title V 

Thresholds, effective September 24, 

2020, as a revision to the State’s SIP 

with respect to criteria pollutants and is 

separately proposing to approve the 

regulations under section 112(l) of the 

Act with respect to HAPs. EPA is 

proposing to approve Connecticut’s 

request in accordance with the 

requirements of sections 110 and 112 of 

the CAA. 

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 

the Connecticut regulations to limit 

premises-wide actual and potential 

emissions from major stationary sources 

of air pollution as discussed in section 

IV. of this preamble. 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). 

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; 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 24 / Monday, February 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 8577 

• 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, 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. 2021–02537 Filed 2–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS