Rule2021-11925
Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards Second Maintenance Plan for the Tioga County Area
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 9, 2021
Effective
July 9, 2021
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The 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). EPA is approving these revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 109 (Wednesday, June 9, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30543-30545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11925]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0321; FRL-10023-81-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: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. The 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). EPA is
approving these revisions to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with
the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 9, 2021.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0321. All documents in the docket are listed on
the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, or please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Yarina, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
The telephone number is (215) 814-2108. Mr. Yarina can also be reached
via electronic mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2970485b40474807684d4844694c5948074e465f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2f764e5d46414e016e4b4e426f4a5f4e01484059">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On February 8, 2021 (86 FR 8569), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In the
NPRM, EPA proposed approval of Pennsylvania's plan for maintaining the
1997 ozone NAAQS in the Tioga County Area through July 6, 2027, in
accordance with CAA section 175A. The formal SIP revision was submitted
by PADEP on March 10, 2020.
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
On July 6, 2007 (72 FR 36892, effective same day), EPA approved a
redesignation request and maintenance plan from PADEP for the Tioga
County Area. In accordance with CAA section 175A(b), at the end of the
eighth year after the effective date of the redesignation, the state
must also submit a second maintenance plan to ensure ongoing
maintenance of the standard for an additional 10 years, and in South
Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA,\1\ the D.C. Circuit held
that this requirement cannot be waived for areas--like the Tioga County
Area--that had been redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS prior to revocation and that were designated attainment for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. CAA section 175A sets forth the criteria for
adequate maintenance plans. In addition, EPA has published longstanding
guidance that provides further insight on the content of an approvable
maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five elements: (1) An attainment emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance
demonstration; (3) a commitment for continued air quality monitoring;
(4) a process for verification of continued attainment; and (5) a
contingency plan.\2\ PADEP's March 10, 2020 submittal fulfills
Pennsylvania's obligation to submit a second maintenance plan and
addresses each of the five necessary elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
\2\ ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni Memo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the February 8, 2021 NPRM, EPA allows the submittal
of a limited maintenance plan (LMP) to meet the statutory requirement
that the area will maintain for the statutory period. Qualifying areas
may meet the maintenance demonstration by showing that the area's
design value \3\ is well below the NAAQS and that the historical
stability of the area's air quality levels indicates that the area is
unlikely to violate the NAAQS in the future. EPA evaluated PADEP's
March 10, 2020 submittal for consistency with all applicable EPA
guidance and CAA requirements. EPA found that the submittal met CAA
section 175A and all CAA requirements and proposed approval of the LMP
for the Tioga County Area as a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations. The design value for an ozone nonattainment
area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other specific requirements of PADEP's March 10, 2020 submittal and
the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPRM and
will not be restated here.
III. EPA's Response to Comments Received
EPA received comments on the February 8, 2021 NPRM from two
commenters. All comments received are in the docket for this rulemaking
action. A summary of the comments and EPA's responses are provided
herein.
The first commenter asserts that EPA cannot approve this plan
because air quality levels were not at or below 85% of the NAAQS, and
that one of EPA's methods for demonstrating continued future
maintenance of the NAAQS is flawed.
Comment 1: The commenter asserts that EPA cannot approve this plan
``because the air quality has not been below 85% of the NAAQS for the
time period EPA claims.'' The commenter claims that the following
statement in EPA's proposed approval of the limited maintenance plan is
incorrect: ``The Tioga County Area has maintained air quality levels
below the 1997 ozone NAAQS since the Area first attained the NAAQS in
2006, and maintained air quality levels at or below 85% of the NAAQS
since 2009.'' The commenter claims that this statement is refuted by
EPA's own data, which shows the air quality was at 0.071 for the years
2010-2012.
[[Page 30544]]
Response 1: The cited statement from the proposal is factually
accurate, and EPA does not agree with the commenter that it is
unsupported by the air quality data, nor do we agree that the commenter
has identified a valid basis for disapproval. As discussed in the
February 8, 2021 NPRM, based on the rounding convention described in 40
CFR part 50, appendix I, the 1997 ozone NAAQS is attained if the design
value is 0.084 parts per million (ppm) or below (see 86 FR 8571); 85%
of this standard would be a design value of 0.071 ppm. The data
therefore supports EPA's statement in the NPRM that the Tioga County
Area has maintained air quality levels below the 1997 ozone NAAQS since
the Area first attained the NAAQS in 2006, and maintained air quality
levels at or below 85% of the NAAQS since 2009. It is worth noting that
even if the commenter's assertion were correct, the Area would have
been below 85% of the standard since 2012 and the Area's LMP would
still be approvable consistent with EPA's long-standing guidance.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable
Ozone Nonattainment Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994;
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO
Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6,
1995; and ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM<INF>10</INF> Nonattainment Areas'' from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS,
dated August 9, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 2: The commenter also asserts that one of EPA's methods for
demonstrating continued future maintenance of the standard--
specifically, the method that adds the greatest recent design value
increase to the current design value--is ``arbitrary and has no basis
in scientific fact.'' The commenter goes on to assert that ``not only
is the highest increase during a certain point in time in the past not
indicative of potential future conditions, but EPA arbitrarily chooses
a time period with seemingly no bounds . . . EPA's use of this
arbitrary formula to determine whether an area will not violate the
NAAQS at some point in the future is based in science hope, not science
fact and EPA should re-evaluate its use in approving the Tioga County
Limited Maintenance Plan.''
Response 2: As discussed in the February 8, 2021 NPRM, states may
demonstrate continued maintenance of the NAAQS by showing stable or
improving air quality trends in one or more ways (see 86 FR 8571). The
method that the commenter refers to was relied on by EPA as additional
support that the Tioga County LMP demonstrates continued maintenance of
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Consistent with EPA's long-standing guidance, the
primary evidence EPA relied upon in determining that the Area would
continue to maintain the standard throughout the ten years of the LMP
was the clear downward trend of ozone levels in the Tioga County Area
since 2006, including levels at or below 85% of the NAAQS since
2009.\5\ Additionally, EPA notes the Tioga County Area is currently in
attainment for the more-stringent 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS, which have
design values of 0.075 ppm and 0.070 ppm, respectively; and future year
design value projections from EPA show that the design value for the
Tioga County Area is expected to be 0.0573 ppm (see 86 FR 8572). The
data cited in the comment, taken together with these other factors,
strengthen EPA's considered judgement that the plan adequately
demonstrates continued maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 3: The second commenter asserts that EPA cannot approve the
Tioga County Area LMP because ``it would do something that is not
authorized under the rules.'' The commenter then advances various
policy and legal theories that do not appear to be related to
hypothetical future litigation in federal court regarding the legality
of the Tioga LMP. The comment makes assertions about what factors the
court will consider in resolving this hypothetical action and
speculates how the court will rule against EPA.
Response 3: EPA has no knowledge of any lawsuit involving the Tioga
LMP in federal court and has not reason to believe any such litigation
exists. Because the comment is addressed to hypothetical litigation,
also because EPA's authority to approve this plan is well-established
in the NPRM, it is EPA's judgment it has no obligation to respond to
commenter's speculation as to the actions that EPA will need to take to
address the ruling of a hypothetical lawsuit.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving PADEP's second maintenance plan for the Tioga
County Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS as a revision to the Pennsylvania
SIP.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
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 if
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 action:
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> 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.);
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
<bullet> 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
<bullet> 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 rule 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.
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
[[Page 30545]]
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take
effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report,
which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this action and other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General
of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by August 9, 2021. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action, approving PADEP's second maintenance plan for the
Tioga County Area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, may not be challenged later
in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 28, 2021.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart NN--Pennsylvania
0
2. In Sec. 52.2020, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding
the entry ``Second Maintenance Plan for the State College 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area'' at the end of the table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2020 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of non-regulatory SIP State Additional
revision Applicable geographic area submittal date EPA approval date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Second Maintenance Plan for Tioga County Area.......... 3/10/20 6/9/21, [insert The Tioga County
the State College 1997 8-Hour Federal Register area consists
Ozone Nonattainment Area. citation]. solely of Tioga
County.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-11925 Filed 6-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 9, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.