Proposed Rule2022-00028
Finding of Failure To Attain the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide Standard; Tennessee; Sullivan County Nonattainment 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
January 13, 2022
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine that the Sullivan County, Tennessee sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>) nonattainment area failed to attain the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) by the applicable attainment date of October 4, 2018, based upon a weight of evidence analysis of available quality-assured and certified SO<INF>2</INF> ambient air monitoring data and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions data from January 2015 through December 2017. If EPA finalizes this determination as proposed, the State of Tennessee will be required to submit revisions to the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP) that, among other elements, provide for expeditious attainment of the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> standard.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2095-2101]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00028]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2021-0428; FRL-9374-01-R4]
Finding of Failure To Attain the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide Standard;
Tennessee; Sullivan County Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
determine that the Sullivan County, Tennessee sulfur dioxide
(SO<INF>2</INF>) nonattainment area failed to attain the 2010 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or
standard) by the applicable attainment date of October 4, 2018, based
upon a weight of evidence analysis of available quality-assured and
certified SO<INF>2</INF> ambient air monitoring data and SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions data from January 2015 through December 2017. If EPA
finalizes this determination as proposed, the State of Tennessee will
be required to submit revisions to the Tennessee State Implementation
Plan (SIP) that, among other elements, provide for expeditious
attainment of the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> standard.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 14, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2021-0428 at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from <a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. 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, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit <a href="https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evan Adams, Air Regulatory
[[Page 2096]]
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Adams can be
reached by telephone at (404) 562-9009 or via electronic mail at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7d1c191c100e53180b1c133d180d1c531a120b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7415101519075a1102151a341104155a131b02">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
B. Designations, Classifications, and Attainment Dates for the
2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
II. Proposed Determinations and Consequences
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
C. Sullivan County SO<INF>2</INF> Monitoring Network
D. SO<INF>2</INF> Data Considerations and Proposed Determination
E. Consequences for SO<INF>2</INF> Nonattainment Areas Failing
To Attain Standards by Attainment Dates
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. The 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''), EPA has
established primary and secondary NAAQS for certain pervasive air
pollutants (referred to as ``criteria pollutants'') and conducts
periodic reviews of the NAAQS to determine whether they should be
revised or whether new NAAQS should be established. The primary NAAQS
represent ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance
of which EPA has determined, including a margin of safety, are
requisite to protect the public health. The secondary NAAQS represent
ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance of which
EPA has determined are requisite to protect the public welfare from any
known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of
such air pollutant in the ambient air.
Under the CAA, EPA must establish a NAAQS for SO<INF>2</INF>, which
is primarily released to the atmosphere through the burning of fossil
fuels by power plants and other industrial facilities. Short-term
exposure to SO<INF>2</INF> can damage the human respiratory system and
increase breathing difficulties. Small children and people with
respiratory conditions, such as asthma, are more sensitive to the
effects of SO<INF>2</INF>. Sulfur oxides at high concentrations can
also react with compounds to form small particulates that can penetrate
deeply into the lungs and cause health problems.
EPA first established primary SO<INF>2</INF> standards in 1971 at
0.14 parts per million (ppm) over a 24-hour averaging period and 0.3
ppm over an annual averaging period.\1\ In June 2010, EPA revised the
primary NAAQS for SO<INF>2</INF> to provide increased protection of
public health, providing for revocation of the 1971 primary annual and
24-hour SO<INF>2</INF> standards for most areas of the country
following area designations under the new NAAQS.\2\ The 2010 NAAQS is
75 parts per billion (ppb) (equivalent to 0.075 ppm) over a 1-hour
averaging period.\3\ A violation of the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF>
NAAQS occurs when the annual 99th percentile of ambient daily maximum
1-hour average SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations, averaged over a 3-year
period, exceeds 75 ppb.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
\2\ 40 CFR 50.4(e).
\3\ See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
\4\ 40 CFR 50.17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Designations, Classifications, and Attainment Dates for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS
Following promulgation of any new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation as
attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On August 5, 2013, EPA finalized
its first round (round 1) of designations for the 2010 primary
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.\5\ Specifically, in the 2013 action, EPA
designated 29 areas in 16 states as nonattainment for the 2010
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS, including a portion of Sullivan County
(hereinafter referred to as ``the Sullivan County Area'' or Area) in
Tennessee. The Sullivan County Area lies within a 3-kilometer (km)
radius circle centered around the B-253 powerhouse at the Eastman
Chemical Company facility in Kingsport, Tennessee (Eastman), which
encompasses an SO<INF>2</INF> monitor operating at the time of
designation (Air Quality System (AQS) Site ID: 47-163-0007).\6\ EPA's
round 1 designations for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS, including the
Sullivan County Area, became effective on October 4, 2013. Pursuant to
CAA section 192(a), the attainment date for the Area was no later than
October 4, 2018, which is five years after the effective date of the
final action designating each round 1 area as nonattainment for the
2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013).
\6\ For exact descriptions of the Sullivan County Area, refer to
40 CFR 81.343.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CAA section 179(c) of the CAA, within six months of the
attainment date, the EPA is required to make a determination, based on
the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether an area
attained by that date. If the EPA determines that an area failed to
attain by the attainment date, EPA is required to publish that
determination in the Federal Register. CAA section 179(c)(2). On June
25, 2021, EPA entered into a consent decree with the Center for
Biological Diversity in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California.\7\ The consent decree requires EPA to finalize,
by January 31, 2022, or March 31, 2022, depending on the nonattainment
area, a determination whether certain round 1 SO<INF>2</INF>
nonattainment areas (including the Sullivan County Area) attained the
1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> standard by the October 4, 2018 attainment date.
For the Sullivan County Area, the consent decree deadline is March 31,
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Center for Biological Diversity et al v. EPA; Case No.
3:20-cv-05436-EMC in the docket for this proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Proposed Determination and Consequences
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
Section 179(c)(1) of the CAA requires EPA to determine whether a
nonattainment area attained an applicable standard by the applicable
attainment date based on the area's air quality as of the applicable
attainment date. A determination of whether an area's air quality meets
applicable standards is generally based upon the most recent three
years of complete, quality-assured data gathered at established state
and local air monitoring stations (SLAMS) in a nonattainment area and
entered into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.\8\ Data from
ambient air monitors operated by state and local agencies in compliance
with EPA's monitoring requirements must be submitted to AQS.\9\
Monitoring agencies annually certify that these data are accurate to
the best of their knowledge.\10\ EPA uses the certified air monitoring
data to calculate design values that are used to determine the area's
air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50 Appendix T (for
SO<INF>2</INF>).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ AQS is EPA's repository of ambient air quality data.
\9\ 40 CFR 58.16.
\10\ 40 CFR 58.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.17 and in
accordance with 40 CFR part 50 Appendix T, the 2010 1-hour annual
SO<INF>2</INF> standard is met when the design value is less than or
equal to 75 ppb. Design values are calculated by
[[Page 2097]]
computing the three-year average of the annual 99th percentile daily
maximum 1-hour average concentrations.\11\ When calculating 1-hour
primary standard design values, the calculated design values are
rounded to the nearest whole number (i.e., 1 ppb) by convention. An
SO<INF>2</INF> 1-hour primary standard design value is valid if it
encompasses three consecutive calendar years of complete data. A year
is considered complete when all four quarters are complete, and a
quarter is complete when at least 75 percent of the sampling days are
complete. A sampling day is considered complete if 75 percent of the
hourly concentration values are reported; this includes data affected
by exceptional events that have been approved for exclusion by the EPA
Administrator.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ As defined in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T, section 1(c),
daily maximum 1-hour values refer to the maximum 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> concentration values measured from midnight to
midnight that are used in the NAAQS computations.
\12\ See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T, sections 1(c), 3(b), 4(c),
and 5(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA notes that when determining the attainment status of
SO<INF>2</INF> nonattainment areas, including when making
determinations of attainment by the attainment date, in addition to
ambient monitoring data, the Agency may also consider air quality
dispersion modeling and/or a demonstration that the control strategy in
the SIP has been fully implemented.\13\ With regard to the use of
monitoring data for such determinations, EPA's 2014 Nonattainment
SO<INF>2</INF> Guidance \14\ specifically notes that ``[i]f the EPA
determines that the air quality monitors located in the affected area
are located in the area of maximum concentration, the EPA may be able
to use the data from these monitors to make the determination of
attainment without the use of air quality modeling data.'' \15\ The
modeling analysis of whether monitors are located in the area of
maximum concentration is necessary where EPA is making a determination
that an area attained by its attainment date based solely on that
monitoring information. In the case of the Sullivan County Area, the
SLAMS monitors did not start collecting data until the middle of 2016;
therefore, a valid 2015-2017 design value based on three consecutive
calendar years cannot be calculated.\16\ EPA's proposed determination
that the area did not attain by its attainment date is, therefore,
based on a technical analysis of the weight of available evidence --
including monitoring data and emissions data from the relevant time
period, as described in section II.C and II.D of this notice. As noted,
the determination of whether the monitors are located in the area of
maximum concentration is not needed in this situation, because a
demonstration is not being made that the Area has attained the 2010
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS by the October 4, 2018, attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ For the Sullivan County Area, EPA has not yet approved an
attainment demonstration with accompanying emission limits into the
SIP. Thus, EPA cannot analyze compliance with an approved SIP
control strategy.
\14\ EPA, Guidance for 1-Hour SO<INF>2</INF> Nonattainment Area
SIP Submissions (April 2014) (``2014 SO<INF>2</INF> Guidance''),
p.49, available at: <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf">https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf</a>.
\15\ Id., p.50.
\16\ The current SO<INF>2</INF> monitoring network in the Area,
which is comprised of four SLAMS monitors and represented in
Tennessee's ambient air monitoring network plan, is designed to
measure SO<INF>2</INF> air quality in the areas of expected maximum
1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> concentration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
Section 110(a)(2)(B)(i) of the CAA requires states to establish and
operate air monitoring networks to compile data on ambient air quality
for all criteria pollutants. EPA's monitoring requirements are
specified by regulation in 40 CFR part 58. These requirements are
applicable to the state, and where delegated, to local air monitoring
agencies that operate criteria pollutant monitors. The regulations in
40 CFR part 58 establish specific requirements for operating air
quality surveillance networks to measure ambient concentrations of
SO<INF>2</INF>, including requirements for measurement methods, network
design, quality assurance procedures, and the minimum number of
monitoring sites designated as SLAMS. In sections 4.4 and 4.5 of
Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58, EPA specifies minimum SLAMS monitoring
requirements for SO<INF>2</INF>. SLAMS produce data that are eligible
for comparison with the NAAQS, and therefore, the monitor must be an
approved federal reference method (FRM), federal equivalent method
(FEM), or approved regional method (ARM) monitor. Appendix A to 40 CFR
part 58 specifies quality assurance requirements for SLAMS monitors.
The minimum number of required SO<INF>2</INF> SLAMS is described in
sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 of Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58. According to
section 4.4.2, the minimum number of required SO<INF>2</INF> monitoring
sites is determined by the population weighted emissions index for each
state's core based statistical area. Section 4.4.3 describes additional
monitors that may be required by an EPA regional administrator.
Under 40 CFR 58.10, states are required to submit annual monitoring
network plans (AMNP) for ambient air monitoring networks for approval
by EPA. Each AMNP discusses the status of the air monitoring network as
required under 40 CFR 58.10 and addresses the operation and maintenance
of the air monitoring network, including any proposed modifications to
the network. EPA reviews these AMNPs for compliance with the applicable
monitoring network design requirements in 40 CFR part 58.\17\ EPA also
conducts regular technical systems audits (TSAs) during which EPA
reviews and inspects ambient air monitoring programs to assess
compliance with applicable regulations concerning the collection,
analysis, validation, and reporting of ambient air quality data.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., letter dated September 14, 2020, from Caroline
Y. Freeman, Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IV, to
Michelle Owenby, Director, Division of Air Pollution Control, TDEC.
Copies of EPA letters responding to Tennessee's AMNPs for 2016-2020
are included in the docket for this proposed action.
\18\ See 40 CFR part 58, appendix A, section 2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Sullivan County Area, the Tennessee Department of
Environment and Conservation (TDEC) is responsible for assuring that
the Area meets air quality monitoring requirements. TDEC submitted an
annual monitoring network plan to EPA that describes the various
monitoring sites operated by TDEC.\19\ EPA approved TDEC's most recent
AMNP on September 30, 2021, and concluded that the air agency's ambient
air monitoring network meets or exceeds the requirements for the
minimum number of SLAMS for all criteria pollutants, including
SO<INF>2</INF>, in the Sullivan County Area.\20\ For additional
information related to Sullivan County Area's SO<INF>2</INF> monitoring
network, including EPA's TSAs and the State's response and air
monitoring data, please refer to EPA's technical support document (TSD)
located in the docket for this proposed action (Sullivan County
TSD).\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See, e.g., Tennessee's current AMNP ``2021 Tennessee Annual
Monitoring Network Plan.'' EPA Region 4 approved the 2021 AMNP on
September 30, 2021. Copies of Tennessee's AMNPs for 2015-2021 are
included in the docket for this proposed action.
\20\ See letter dated September 30, 2021, from Caroline Y.
Freeman, Director, Air and Radiation Division, EPA Region IV, to
Michelle Owenby, Director, Division of Air Pollution Control, TDEC
in the docket for this proposed action.
\21\ See Technical Support Document Finding of Failure to Attain
the 2010 1-Hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS For the Sullivan County,
Tennessee Nonattainment Area in the docket for this proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Sullivan County SO<INF>2</INF> Monitoring Network
During the round 1 SO<INF>2</INF> designations in 2013, Eastman
operated an industrial
[[Page 2098]]
SO<INF>2</INF> monitor near the facility at the Ross N. Robinson site
(AQS ID: 47-163-0007). From 2010 to 2012, Tennessee certified to EPA
that all industry-operated monitoring data in Tennessee, including the
Eastman SO<INF>2</INF> monitor, met EPA regulatory requirements,
including quality assurance requirements. EPA used this data as the
basis for an SO<INF>2</INF> nonattainment determination on August 13,
2013, based on a 2009-2011 design value of 196 ppb at the Ross N.
Robinson industrial monitor.
In September 2013 (and subsequently in 2016), after an EPA TSA, EPA
found that Tennessee was unable to provide the required quality
assurance records and documentation for the industry-operated air
monitoring sites in Sullivan County. EPA determined that the Eastman
industrial monitors were not meeting the quality assurance requirements
in 40 CFR part 58 Appendix A and therefore not comparable to the NAAQS.
As a result of EPA's TSA findings, TDEC assigned a NAAQS exclusion flag
to the Ross N. Robinson industrial monitor's data in AQS beginning in
September 2013 to indicate the data did not meet regulatory
requirements. For the 2015-2017 period, no valid SO<INF>2</INF>
monitoring data were collected in the Area from January 1, 2015, to
July 20, 2016. Consequently, the Area did not have a valid
SO<INF>2</INF> design value for the 2015-2017 period. See Sullivan
County TSD for more details on EPA's TSAs.
To characterize SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations in the Sullivan
County Area, Tennessee began operating a SLAMS SO<INF>2</INF> monitor
(AQS ID: 47-163-6001) on July 21, 2016, adjacent to the Ross N.
Robinson industrial monitoring site under an EPA-approved quality
assurance project plan, and in accordance with EPA's regulatory
requirements at Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58. The Ross N. Robinson
SLAMS site is located adjacent to Eastman's industrial monitor of the
same name on Wilburn Drive in Kingsport. On September 1, 2016, TDEC
also installed a second monitor (AQS ID: 47-163-6002) at the Skyland
Drive industrial monitoring site to further characterize high elevation
SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations in the complex terrain around the
Sullivan County Area. This monitor was sited in accordance with the
normalized air modeling conducted by Tennessee in accordance with 40
CFR part 58 and EPA's SO<INF>2</INF> Monitoring Technical Assistance
Document (TAD).\22\ The Skyland Drive SLAMS monitor site is located
with Eastman's industrial SO<INF>2</INF> monitor of the same name on
Skyland Drive at Bagwell St. in Kingsport. The primary monitors \23\ at
each of these sites are FEM monitors. Valid hourly SO<INF>2</INF> data
for the Area became available for the remainder of the design value
period (i.e., from July 21, 2016, to December 31, 2017) once the Ross
N. Robinson SLAMS site started operating. These monitoring data have
been reported to AQS and certified by TDEC. Eastman stopped reporting
data to AQS in 2016 for their industrial monitors and ceased operating
these monitors in 2019. During the 2015-2017 design value period, the
TDEC SLAMS monitors did not collect data in 2015 or the first half of
2016. Therefore, a valid 2015-2017 design value cannot be calculated
for the nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented
Monitoring Technical Assistance Document (TADs), Draft February 2016
in the docket for this proposed action.
\23\ A primary monitor is a term defined in 40 CFR part 58 that
means the monitor identified by the monitoring organization that
provides concentration data used for comparison to the NAAQS. For
any specific site, only one monitor for each pollutant can be
designated in AQS as primary monitor for a given period of time. The
primary monitor identifies the default data source for creating a
combined site record for purposes of NAAQS comparisons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2017, Tennessee committed to expanding its existing
SO<INF>2</INF> ambient air monitoring network within the nonattainment
area.\24\ In 2018, EPA approved the portion of TDEC's AMNP that added
two SLAMS monitors within the Sullivan County Area to characterize the
expected areas of maximum 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations near the
Eastman facility.\25\ TDEC subsequently began operating the two
additional SLAMS sites at Happy Hill (AQS ID: 47-163-6004) in October
2018 and Andrew Johnson Elementary School (AQS ID: 47-163-6003) in
January 2019 to characterize the areas of expected maximum 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations around the facility. These monitors were
sited in accordance with the normalized air modeling conducted by
Tennessee in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and EPA's SO<INF>2</INF>
TAD. EPA approved the SO<INF>2</INF> portion of TDEC's AMNP in 2016,
2018, 2019, and 2020.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ In 2017, EPA commented on TDEC's SO<INF>2</INF> draft
attainment SIP for the Sullivan County Area and recommended that the
State expand the monitoring network within the nonattainment area to
verify that the SO<INF>2</INF> emission reduction measures proposed
in the attainment SIP at the time would ensure attainment of the 1-
hour standard. See EPA 2017 comment letter found in the docket for
this proposed action. Tennessee submitted an attainment SIP for the
Sullivan County Area on May 11, 2017. EPA proposed approval of the
attainment SIP on June 29, 2018 (83 FR 30609) but has not finalized
approval as of this action.
\25\ See letter dated July 24, 2018, from Beverly Banister,
Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxic Management Division, EPA Region
IV, to Michelle Owenby, Director, Division of Air Pollution Control,
TDEC included in the docket for this proposed action.
\26\ The most recent TDEC AMNP, submitted and approved in 2020,
includes four SO<INF>2</INF> SLAMS in the nonattainment area which
will provide NAAQS-comparable monitoring data moving forward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. SO2 Data Considerations and Proposed Determination
As discussed in section II.C above, air monitoring data in the area
from January 1, 2015, to July 20, 2016, did not meet the quality
assurance requirements in 40 CFR part 58 Appendix A and therefore are
not comparable to the NAAQS. Therefore, a valid 2015-2017 design value
could not be determined for the nonattainment area. In lieu of a 2015-
2017, 3-year design value, EPA has developed a weight of evidence
assessment based on available air quality monitoring data and source-
specific SO<INF>2</INF> emissions in the Area from January 2015 through
December 2017 to support the determination that the Sullivan County
Area did not attain the 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> standard by the October
4, 2018, attainment date based on the area's air quality as of the
attainment date. This section summarizes EPA's weight of evidence
approach and data considerations for the nonattainment area. More
detailed discussions on the air monitoring and SO<INF>2</INF> emission
data are provided in EPA's Sullivan County TSD located in the docket
for this proposed action.
1. Sullivan County SO<INF>2</INF> Monitoring Data
As discussed in section I.B above, the applicable attainment date
for the Sullivan County Area, is October 4, 2018. In accordance with
Appendix T to 40 CFR part 50, determinations of SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
compliance are based on three consecutive calendar years of data. To
determine the air quality as of the attainment date in the
nonattainment area, EPA reviewed the available data collected during
the three calendar years immediately preceding the attainment date for
the Sullivan County Area (i.e., January 1, 2015, through December 31,
2017), as well as SO<INF>2</INF> emissions data at Eastman.
As discussed above, no NAAQS-comparable SO<INF>2</INF> monitoring
data is available for the Area for January 1, 2015, to July 20, 2016.
The available SLAMS SO<INF>2</INF> data for the Sullivan County Area
from July 21, 2016, through December 31, 2017, have been certified by
TDEC. EPA has also evaluated the completeness of these data in
accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T. The
data collected by TDEC in the three calendar years preceding the
attainment date meet the quarterly completeness criteria
[[Page 2099]]
for only 6 out of 12 quarters at the Ross N. Robinson SO<INF>2</INF>
monitor since the monitor began operation on July 21, 2016, and 5 out
of 12 quarters at the Skyland Drive SO<INF>2</INF> monitor since the
monitor began operation on September 1, 2016. The available annual 99th
percentile daily maximum 1-hour average SO<INF>2</INF> data at each
monitoring site within the Sullivan County Area for the 2015-2017
period are presented in Table 1.
Table 1--2015-2017 SO2 Monitoring Data for the Sullivan County Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour
average (ppb)
Site (AQS ID) ------------------------------------------------ Design value valid?
2015 2016 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ross N. Robinson (47-163-6001). \a\ N/A \b\ 152 92 No.
Skyland Dr. (47-163-6002)...... \a\ N/A \b\ 91 78 No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ The SLAMS monitors did not collect data in 2015.
\b\ The Ross N. Robinson monitor had only two quarters of complete data in 2016 due to the monitor beginning
operation on July 21, 2016. The Skyland Drive monitor had only one quarter of complete data in 2016 due to the
monitor beginning operation on September 1, 2016.
Source: EPA AQS Design Value Report, retrieved September 14, 2021.
The data in Table 1 indicates that although the two sites in the
Sullivan County Area did not have complete data in 2015 and 2016 to
determine a 3-year design value, both monitors consistently measured
99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations
above the 75 ppb level of the 1-hour NAAQS in 2016 and 2017, after
beginning operation in mid-2016. Both monitors have complete 2017
datasets.
For an area to attain the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS by the October
4, 2018, attainment date, the design value based upon monitored air
quality data from 2015-2017 at each eligible monitoring sites must be
equal to or less than 75 ppb for the 1-hour standard. Table 1 above
shows that the annual 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour average at
each monitoring site exceeds 75 ppb in 2016 and 2017. See also Table 1
in the Sullivan County TSD.
2. Eastman SO<INF>2</INF> Emissions Data
As mentioned above, in round 1 SO<INF>2</INF> designations, EPA
designated as nonattainment the portion of Sullivan County within a 3-
km radius circle centered at Eastman's B-253 powerhouse, which at the
time of designations encompassed the one monitor that was violating the
2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS based on 2009-2011 air quality data.
Table 2 shows that the SO<INF>2</INF> emissions, expressed in tons per
year (tpy), from Eastman account for more than 99 percent of the total
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions in Sullivan County during the 2015-2017 period
relevant for this proposed determination that the Area failed to attain
the SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. Prior to
the Sullivan County Area being designated as nonattainment for the 2010
1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS in 2013, Eastman operated 15 coal-fired
boilers at their facility to generate steam and electricity. As
discussed in more detail in the Sullivan County TSD for this proposed
action, Eastman's annual SO<INF>2</INF> emissions have been steadily
decreasing since 2013 due primarily to the changes in operations of the
coal-fired boilers.
Table 2--2015-2017 SO2 Emission Data for the Sullivan County SO2
Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Sullivan
County SO2 Eastman SO2
Calendar year emissions from emissions
all sources (tpy)
(tpy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2015.................................. 17,980 17,978
2016.................................. 14,325 14,324
2017.................................. 10,792 10,746
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 2, the total annual SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from
Eastman decreased over 7,000 tpy from 17,978 tpy in 2015 to 10,746 tpy
in 2017. During 2015-2017, the annual emissions were highest in 2015,
when no air monitoring data is available, and emissions decreased
significantly in 2016 and 2017. The decrease was primarily because of
the conversion of two large coal-fired boilers, Boilers 27 and 28 in
the B-253 powerhouse, from burning coal to natural gas fuel that was
completed in 2016. These two boiler conversions were part of a larger
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions control project beginning in 2014 and ending
in 2018, which converted all five boilers in the B-253 powerhouse from
burning coal to burn natural gas fuel. These conversions had a
significant impact on SO<INF>2</INF> emissions: Emissions from the B-
253 powerhouse decreased from 14,171 tpy in 2012 to less than 10 tpy in
2019.\27\ The total annual SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from the entire
Eastman facility decreased from 21,246 tpy in 2012 to 4,510 tpy in
2019. See Sullivan County TSD for complete details of the boiler
conversions and resulting emissions changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ The conversion of the B-253 boilers from burning coal to
natural gas was completed in October 2018. Thus, the SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions from the B-253 powerhouse dropped significantly to 10 tpy
in 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important to also consider trends in hourly SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions since the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS is a short-term standard
that is evaluated using hourly measurements of ambient SO<INF>2</INF>
concentrations. EPA's evaluation of Eastman's hourly emissions data
found that their emissions were over 33 percent higher during the
period from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016, (when no valid ambient
monitoring data was available), than the July 1, 2016, through December
31, 2017, period (when valid
[[Page 2100]]
ambient monitoring data show exceedances of the NAAQS).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Figure 5 and Table 3 of the Sullivan County TSD in the
docket for this proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Weight of Evidence Analysis Conclusions and Proposed Determination
To determine the air quality in the Sullivan County Area as of the
applicable attainment date, EPA reviewed the available ambient
monitoring data and annual and hourly SO<INF>2</INF> emissions data at
Eastman from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. As shown in Table
1, the available SO<INF>2</INF> ambient monitoring data in the Sullivan
County Area indicates that the 99th percentile maximum daily 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> concentration in both 2016 and 2017 exceeded the 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS level of 75 ppb. The primary SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions sources in the nonattainment area are the coal-fired boilers
at Eastman. Both the annual SO<INF>2</INF> emissions and the hourly
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from the Eastman boilers were significantly
higher from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016, when air monitoring data
are not available, than from July 1, 2016, through December 31, 2017,
when air monitoring data are available. Ambient SO<INF>2</INF>
concentrations are very source-oriented, and in this case, the Eastman
boilers make up virtually the entire emissions inventory for the Area.
Considering that the ambient measured concentrations exceeded the level
of the NAAQS in 2016 and 2017, when emissions from the primary source
of SO<INF>2</INF> were lower than they were in 2015, EPA believes it is
reasonable to expect that the 99th percentile maximum daily 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> concentration in 2015 likely also exceeded the level of
75 ppb. Consequently, the three-year average of: The 99th percentile
value for 2015 (likely exceeded the level of the NAAQS), 2016 (exceeded
the level of the NAAQS), and 2017 (exceeded the level of the NAAQS)
almost certainly would have resulted in a design value that violated
the NAAQS. EPA therefore proposes to find that this analysis of
available ambient concentration data and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions data
demonstrates by a weight of evidence that the Sullivan County Area
failed to attain the 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS by the required
attainment date of October 4, 2018.
E. Consequences for SO2 Nonattainment Areas Failing To Attain Standards
by Attainment Dates
The consequences for SO<INF>2</INF> nonattainment areas for failing
to attain the standard by the applicable attainment date are set forth
in CAA section 179(d). Under section 179(d), a state must submit a SIP
revision for the area meeting the requirements of CAA sections 110 and
172, the latter of which requires, among other elements, a
demonstration of attainment and reasonable further progress, and
contingency measures. In addition, under CAA section 179(d)(2), the SIP
revision must include such additional measures as EPA may reasonably
prescribe, including all measures that can be feasibly implemented in
the area in light of technological achievability, costs, and any non-
air quality and other air quality-related health and environmental
impacts.
In this case, the dominant source of SO<INF>2</INF> emissions in
the Sullivan County Area is the Eastman facility. EPA expects that
information concerning potential additional control measures would be
collected by TDEC as part of its development of the SIP revision to
address the requirements that would be triggered by a final finding of
failure to attain for the Area. The State is required to submit the SIP
revision within one year after EPA publishes a final action in the
Federal Register determining that the nonattainment area failed to
attain the applicable SO<INF>2</INF> standard by the applicable
attainment date. In addition to triggering requirements for a new SIP
submittal, a final determination that a nonattainment area failed to
attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date would trigger the
implementation of contingency measures adopted into the SIP under
172(c)(9).
Under CAA sections 179(d)(3) and 172(a)(2), the new attainment date
for each nonattainment area is the date by which attainment can be
achieved as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years
after EPA publishes a final action in the Federal Register determining
that the nonattainment area failed to attain the applicable
SO<INF>2</INF> standard by the applicable attainment date.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Pursuant to CAA sections 172(a)(2)(D) and 192(a), the
attainment date extension provision under section 172(a)(2)(A) does
not apply to the SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
Under CAA section 179(c)(1), EPA proposes to determine that the
Sullivan County Area failed to attain the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF>
standard by the applicable attainment date of October 4, 2018. This
determination is based upon a weight of evidence analysis of available
quality assured and certified SO<INF>2</INF> monitored air quality data
and emissions data from January 2015 through December 2017 in lieu of a
valid 2015-2017 design value. If finalized as proposed, the State of
Tennessee would be required under CAA section 179(d) to submit a
revision to the SIP for the Sullivan County Area. The required SIP
revision for the area must, among other elements, demonstrate
expeditious attainment of the standards within the period prescribed by
CAA section 179(d). If finalized as proposed, the SIP revision required
under CAA section 179(d) would be due for submittal to EPA no later
than one year after the publication date of the final action.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
notice.\30\ The Agency will accept comments from the public on this
proposal for the next 30 days. The deadline and instruction on how to
submit comment can be found in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections of this
notice. EPA will consider these comments before taking final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ The scope of this proposed action is limited to whether the
Sullivan County Area attained the 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> standard by
the applicable October 4, 2018, attainment date. Therefore, EPA is
not soliciting further comment on the approvability of the State's
2017 SO<INF>2</INF> attainment SIP that the Agency previously
proposed to approve on June 29, 2018. See 83 FR 30609. The comment
period for that proposal closed on July 30, 2018. EPA has not yet
taken final action on that SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at <a href="https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders">https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders</a>.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and therefore
was not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA because it does not contain any information
collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This
proposed action, if finalized, would require the state to adopt and
submit a SIP revision to satisfy CAA requirements and would
[[Page 2101]]
not itself directly regulate any small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action itself
imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments,
or the private sector. This action proposes to determine that the
Sullivan County Area failed to attain the NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. If finalized, this determination would trigger
existing statutory timeframes for the State to submit SIP revisions.
Such a determination in and of itself does not impose any federal
intergovernmental mandate.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. The proposed finding of failure to attain
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS does not apply to tribal areas, and the proposed
rule would not impose a burden on Indian reservation lands or other
areas where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. Thus, this proposed 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.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children,
per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of
the Executive Order. This proposed action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because the effect of this proposed action, if finalized,
would be to trigger additional planning requirements under the CAA.
This proposed action does not establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because
it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
effect of this proposed action, if finalized, would be to trigger
additional planning requirements under the CAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Pollution, Sulfur
dioxide.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 29, 2021.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022-00028 Filed 1-12-22; 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 January 13, 2022.
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.