1

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

DATE: 

SUBECT:

April 22, 2014

Technical Support Document—Pennsylvania; Portable 

Fuel Container Amendment to Pennsylvania State 

Implementation Plan 

/s/

FROM: Irene Shandruk, Physical Scientist

TO: Pennsylvania; Docket No. EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0298

/s/

THRU: Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director

Office of Air Program Planning

A. BACKGROUND

The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that Pennsylvania adopt and enforce a plan, known as the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

throughout the Commonwealth. This technical support document (TSD) evaluates the March 7, 2014 

submittal of the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision pertaining to the repeal of the 

Pennsylvania portable fuel container (PFC) provisions set forth in 25 Pa. Code §§ 130.101-130.108.

The Commonwealth’s PFC regulation, published October 5, 2002 (32 Pa.B. 4819), limited emissions 

of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into the atmosphere from the use of PFCs designated to hold 

gasoline. The regulation restricted the sale, supply, offer for sale and manufacture of PFCs and spouts 

for sale and for use in the Commonwealth on or after January 1, 2003. The regulation was part of the 

Commonwealth’s plan to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

for ground-level ozone since VOCs are a precursor to the formation of ground-level ozone, and high 

concentrations of ground-level ozone are a serious public health and welfare threat. The PFC 

regulation was approved as a SIP revisions by EPA on December 8, 2004 (69 FR 70893), and was 

codified at 40 CFR 52.2063(c)(299). Following the regulation’s approval in the Pennsylvania SIP, the 

PFC regulation was included as a VOC control measure in Redesignation Requests and Maintenance 

Plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS as well as the Attainment Demonstration for the Philadelphia 

Area 8-hour ozone Nonattainment Area.

On February 26, 2007, EPA promulgated Federal PFC requirements (72 FR 8428), which were 

codified at 40 CFR 59.600-59.699 and became effective nationwide beginning January 1, 2009. The 

Federal PFC regulation for controlling emissions from new and in-use portable fuel containers apply to 

more types of portable containers (portable fuel, diesel, and kerosene containers) than did the 
2

Commonwealth’s regulation. The Federal PFC requirements also have more stringent permeation and 

evaporation standards and eliminate problematic auto shut-off spouts. Finally, since the Federal 

requirements are effective nationwide, this eliminates non-compliant cross-state border sales.

During its 2011 Regulatory Review Initiative, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 

Protection (PADEP) determined that the PFC regulation was unnecessary and moved to repeal it. The 

Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB) amended 25 Pa. Code Chapter 130 (relating to 

standards for products) by publishing the repeal of the PFC regulation (25 Pa. Code §§ 130.101—

130.108) on July 14, 2012 (42 Pa.B. 4463). The Commonwealth PFC regulation was superseded by 

the more stringent Federal PFC requirements.

B. EPA REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION OF STATE SUBMITTAL

Section 110(l) of the CAA states that the EPA Administrator may not approve a revision to a SIP if 

the revision would interfere with any applicable requirements concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. Pennsylvania’s analysis 

demonstrates that repealing the Commonwealth’s regulatory requirements and relying on the 

Federal requirements for PFCs is not contrary to section 110(l). Table 1 compares requirements of 

the former Commonwealth PFC regulation with the Federal PFC requirements. 

Table 1. Comparison of Pennsylvania’s and EPA’s PFC Requirements

Applicable VOC Emission 

Control Requirement

Pennsylvania’s PFC 

Requirements

Federal PFC 

Requirements

One Opening per Container Required Required

Spout: Auto Close and Seal Required Required

Spout: Auto Shut-off Required Not Required

Warranty Required Required

Permeation Barrier Seal Less than 0.4 grams 

hydrocarbons/gallon/day

Less than 0.3 grams 

hydrocarbons/gallon/day

Non-gasoline PFC Affected No Yes

Applicable to All 50 States No Yes

Each of the Federal requirements is equally as stringent as, or more stringent than, the 

Commonwealth’s PFC requirements and achieve greater emission reductions than Pennsylvania’s 

PFC regulation:

 Pennsylvania’s regulation applied only to portable containers for gasoline fuels whereas the 

Federal regulation applies to portable containers for diesel and kerosene as well as portable 

containers for gasoline fuels.

 Pennsylvania’s regulation required automatic shut-off spouts whereas the Federal regulation 

does not require automatic shut-off spouts. In 72 FR 8428, page 8500, EPA notes that 

automatic shut-off spouts actually increase spillage and emissions due to the wide variety of 

fill-hole designs on the receiving fuel tanks, resulting in the auto shut-off spouts not working 

well with a variety of equipment types.

 The Federal permeation and evaporation standard for PFCs of less than 0.3 grams 

hydrocarbons per gallon of fuel per day is 25% more stringent than the permeation standard 

of less than 0.4 grams per gallon of gasoline per day in Pennsylvania’s regulation.

 Pennsylvania’s regulation did not prevent cross-state border sales of non-compliant PFCs, 

whereas the Federal requirements apply to all PFCs manufactured in or imported into the 
3

United States for use in the United States beginning January 1, 2009. This reduces the 

opportunity for cross-state border sales of non-compliant PFCs.

Calculations

Pennsylvania estimated statewide VOC emissions using the control factors associated with the 

Federal PFC requirements. Emission estimates were calculated for 2002, 2009, and 2018. Since 

Pennsylvania’s PFC regulation went into effect in January 2003 and the Federal PFC regulation was 

effective January 2009, the rule penetration resulting from both effective dates was taken into 

account when calculating the emissions for the Federal PFC requirements. Rule penetration is an 

estimate of the percentage of emissions emitted by a facility or activity covered by a regulation. As 

older non-complying containers were replaced by Commonwealth-compliant containers and then 

with Federally-compliant containers, the mix of container types changed. By 2020, all PFCs used 

in Pennsylvania are expected to be Federally-compliant containers. 

The 2002 actual VOC emissions estimate of 12,255.32 tons per year (TPY) was originally 

calculated for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) by E.H. Pechan 

& Associates, Inc. The Pechan calculations are documented in the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air 

Management Association (MARAMA) file, MANEVU_2002_Area_040606.mdb, located on the 

MARAMA website www.marama.org. The 2002 actual VOC emissions estimate was used as the 

basis for the demonstration for both the Commonwealth and the Federal calculations because 

neither the Federal nor the Commonwealth regulation was in effect in 2002.

The 2009 statewide projected VOC emissions of 8,923.08 TPY was derived from MARAMA’s 

controlled, grown estimate contained in the file, MANEVU2009AreaV3_1.mdb

(www.marama.org). The 2009 MARAMA emission estimate was calculated using a control factor. 

To compare the emissions resulting from the two different regulations, the MARAMA number had 

to first be calculated as uncontrolled emissions. To remove the control factor (control efficiency, 

rule effectiveness and rule penetration) from the 2009 MARAMA emission estimate, the estimate 

was divided by the control factor MARAMA had originally applied (shown below).

PA Rule Control Factor = Rule Effectiveness x Rule Penetration x Control Efficiency,

Where: 

Rule Effectiveness = 0.80

Control Efficiency = 0.55

Rule Penetration = 0.65

PA Rule Control Factor = 0.80 x 0.55 x 0.65 = 0.29

Statewide Uncontrolled VOC Emission = Controlled Emissions / (1 – Control Factor)

 = 8,923.079 / (1 – 0.29)

 = 12,567.72 TPY

Once uncontrolled emission estimates were calculated, the Federal and Commonwealth control 

factors were applied to the controlled 2009 VOC estimate. Both sets of control factors were applied 

because in 2009 both the Federal and Commonwealth requirements were in effect. Where the 

Federal requirement had not yet penetrated, a portion of the Commonwealth requirement had 

penetrated, resulting in a medley of non-compliant, Federally-compliant, and Commonwealthcompliant PFCs. Rule penetration was comprised of Federal plus Commonwealth requirements 
4

(shown below).

Federal Rule Control Factor = Rule Effectiveness x Rule Penetration x Control Efficiency,

Where:

Federal Rule Effectiveness = 1.00

Federal Control Efficiency = 0.75

Federal Rule Penetration = 0.10

Combined Control Factor = PA Control Factor + Federal Control Factor

 = 0.29 + (1.00 x 0.75 x 0.10)

 = 0.37

Controlled Emissions = Uncontrolled VOC Emission x (1 – Combined Control Factor)

= 12,567.72 x (1 – 0.37)

= 7,917.66 TPY VOC

The 2018 statewide projected VOC emissions of 6, 148.05 TPY was derived from MARAMA’s 

controlled, grown estimate contained in the file, MANEVU2018AreaV3_1.mdb 

(www.marama.org), and was calculated using a control factor as well. To compare the emissions 

resulting from the Federal and Commonwealth regulations, the MARAMA number first had to be 

calculated as uncontrolled emissions. To remove the control factor from the 2018 MARAMA 

emission estimate, the estimate was divided by the control factor MARAMA had originally applied 

(shown below):

PA Rule Control Factor = Rule Effectiveness x Rule Penetration x Control Efficiency,

Where: 

Rule Effectiveness = 0.80

Control Efficiency = 1.00

Rule Penetration = 0.65

PA Rule Control Factor = 0.80 x 1.00 x 0.65 = 0.52

Statewide Uncontrolled VOC Emission = Controlled Emissions / (1 – Control Factor)

 = 6,148.049 / (1 – 0.29)

 = 12,808.44 TPY

Then only the Federal control factor was applied, on the assumption that the Federal regulation had 

fully penetrated, entirely replacing the Commonwealth-compliant containers.

Federal Rule Control Factor = Rule Effectiveness x Rule Penetration x Control Efficiency,

Where:

Federal Rule Effectiveness = 1.00

Federal Control Efficiency = 0.75

Federal Rule Penetration = 0.10

Federal Rule Control Factor = 1.0 x 1.0 x 0.75
5

 = 0.75

Controlled Emissions = Uncontrolled VOC Emission x (1 – Control Factor)

= 12,808.44 x (1-0.75)

= 3202.11 TPY VOC

The PA emission estimate had previously been calculated for PADEP: The 2002 actual emissions 

were originally calculated by Pechan and can be found in the MARAMA file, 

MANEVU_2002_Area_040606.mdb. The 2009 projected emissions came from MARAMA’s 

controlled, grown estimate contained in the file, MANEVU2009AreaV3_1.mdb. As the controls 

were already applied, this number is unchanged. The controls assumed a control efficiency of 65%, 

a rule penetration of 55%, and rule effectiveness of 80%. The 2018 projected emissions developed 

by MARAMA are contained in the file, MANEVU2018AreaV3_1.mdb. VOC projected emissions 

statewide were 6,148.0494 TPY. Since controls were already applied, this number is unchanged. 

The controls assumed a control efficiency of 65%, rule penetration of 100%, and rule effectiveness 

of 80%. 

Table 2. shows a comparison of the statewide VOC emissions calculated for both the Federal and 

Commonwealth PFC regulations for 2002, 2009, and 2018. 

Table 2. Comparison of VOC Emissions Estimates for Federal and Pennsylvania PFC 

Regulations

2002 2009 2018

PA Rule VOC 

Emissions (TPY)

12,255.32 8,923.08 6,148.05

Federal Rule VOC 

Emissions (TPY)

12,255.32 7,917.66* 3,202.11*

Additional VOC 

Emissions (TPY) 

from Federal Rule

N/A 1,005.42 2,945.94

*Assumes Commonwealth-compliant PFC containers are in use when Federal-compliant containers are not.

The same methodology as applied to a representative county, Lancaster County, to demonstrate that 

the results achieved statewide by replacing the Commonwealth regulation with the Federal 

regulation also holds true at the local level. 

C. RECOMMENDATION

The repeal of the provisions set forth in 25 Pa. Code §§ 130.101-130.108 and removal from the 

Pennsylvania SIP does not negatively affect the ozone air quality, since the Commonwealth’s 

regulation is being superseded by more stringent PFC Federal requirements codified at 40 CFR 

59.600-59.699. The reductions of VOC emissions achieved through the Commonwealth’s PFC 

regulation will be maintained by the VOC emission reductions achieved through the Federal PFC 

requirements, which in fact achieve greater VOC emission reductions than that of the 

Commonwealth’s PFC regulation. Therefore, EPA approval of this SIP revision is recommended.