12892 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 42 / Friday, March 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1On February 25, 2019 (effective April 17, 2019), 

based on a review of the full body of currently 

available scientific evidence and exposure/risk 

information, EPA issued a decision to retain the 

existing NAAQS for SO2. See 84 FR 9866. 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, the EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely proposes to approve 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); 

• 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 the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, 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 the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: February 23, 2021. 

Deborah Jordan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04387 Filed 3–4–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0482; FRL–10019– 

57–Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; TN: Redesignation 

of the Sumner County 2010 Sulfur 

Dioxide Unclassifiable Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), on September 29, 

2020, to redesignate the Sumner County, 

Tennessee unclassifiable area 

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Sumner 

County Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to attainment/ 

unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour 

primary sulfur dioxide (SO2) national 

ambient air quality standard (hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘2010 SO2 1-hour 

NAAQS’’). EPA now has sufficient 

information to determine that the 

Sumner County Area is attaining the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and, therefore, 

is proposing to approve the State’s 

request and redesignate the Area to 

attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 5, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2020–0482 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Evan Adams, Air Regulatory 

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 adams.evan@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) 

establishes a process for air quality 

management through the establishment 

and implementation of the national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 

On June 2, 2010, EPA revised the 

primary SO2 NAAQS, establishing a 

new 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 parts per 

billion (ppb). See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 

2010).1 After the promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS, EPA is required to 

designate all areas of the country, 

pursuant to section 107(d)(1)–(2) of the 

CAA. For the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, 

designations were based on EPA’s 

application of the nationwide analytical 

approach to, and technical assessment 

of, the weight of evidence for each area, 

including but not limited to available air 

quality monitoring data and air quality 

modeling results. In advance of 

designating the Sumner County Area, 

EPA issued updated designations 

guidance through a March 20, 2015, 

memorandum from Stephen D. Page, 

Director, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, to Air Division 

Directors, U.S. EPA Regions 1–10 titled, 

‘‘Updated Guidance for Area 

Designations for the 2010 Primary 

Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard,’’ which contained the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 42 / Friday, March 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules 12893 

2The 2015 memorandum is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-04/ 

documents/20150320so2designations.pdf. 

3This designation guidance has since been 

supplemented by a July 22, 2016, designation 

guidance memorandum from Stephen D. Page, 

Director, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors, 

U.S. EPA Regions 1–10. The 2016 memorandum is 

available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/2016-07/documents/areadesign.pdf. 

4 ‘‘Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards Designations Modeling Technical 

Assistance Document,’’ August 2016 draft, available 

at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016- 

06/documents/so2modelingtad.pdf. EPA released 

earlier drafts of this document in May 2013 and 

February 2016. 

5See Sierra Club et. al. v. McCarthy, Civil Action 

No. 3:13–cv–3953–SI (N.D. Cal.), and 79 FR 31325 

(June 2, 2014). 

6TVA Gallatin was also subject to EPA’s 2015 

Data Requirements Rule (DRR) for the 2010 SO2 1- 

hour NAAQS. See https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/2016-06/documents/tn.pdf for 

Tennessee’s letter dated January 15, 2016 with the 

Data Requirements Rule (DRR) source list. 

7 In accordance with the DRR, 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart BB, through a letter dated June 7, 2016, 

Tennessee notified EPA that the State chose to 

characterize peak 1-hour SO2 concentrations for 

TVA Gallatin using air quality dispersion modeling. 

8See 81 FR 45039 (July 12, 2016), codified at 40 

CFR 81.343. 

9EPA SO2 designations website can be found at 

https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations. 

10The modeling files are not included in the 

electronic docket for this proposed action due to 

their nature, size, and incompatibility with the 

Federal Docket Management System. These files are 

available at the EPA Region 4 office for review. To 

request these files, please contact the person listed 

in the notice under the section titled FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

11While CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) also lists 

specific requirements for redesignations, those 

requirements only apply to redesignations of 

nonattainment areas to attainment and, therefore, 

are not applicable in the context of a redesignation 

of an area from unclassifiable to attainment/ 

unclassifiable. 

12Historically, EPA has designated most areas 

that do not meet the definition of nonattainment as 

‘‘unclassifiable/attainment.’’ EPA has reversed the 

order of the label to be ‘‘attainment/unclassifiable’’ 

to better convey the definition of the designation 

category and so that the category is more easily 

distinguished from the separate unclassifiable 

category. See 83 FR 1098 (January 9, 2018) and 83 

FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). EPA reserves the 

‘‘attainment’’ category for when EPA redesignates a 

nonattainment area that has attained the relevant 

NAAQS and has an approved maintenance plan. 

factors that EPA evaluated in 

determining the appropriate 

designations and associated boundaries 

when designating the Sumner County 

Area, including: (1) Air quality 

characterization via ambient monitoring 

or dispersion modeling results; (2) 

emissions-related data; (3) meteorology; 

(4) geography and topography; and (5) 

jurisdictional boundaries.2 3 The 

guidance also referenced EPA’s nonbinding Monitoring Technical 

Assistance Document (Monitoring TAD) 

and Modeling Technical Assistance 

Document (Modeling TAD),4 which 

contain scientifically sound 

recommendations on how air agencies 

should conduct such monitoring or 

modeling. 

EPA completed the first set of initial 

area designations for the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 NAAQS in 2013 (Round 1). 

Pursuant to a March 2, 2015, consent 

decree and court-ordered schedule,5

EPA finalized a second set of initial area 

designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS in 2016 (Round 2). The March 

2, 2015, consent decree identified the 

following emissions criteria such that 

EPA must designate, in Round 2, an area 

surrounding any stationary source 

which had: (a) annual emissions in 2012 

exceeding 16,000 tons of SO2, or (b) 

both an annual average emissions rate of 

at least 0.45 pounds of SO2 per one 

million British thermal units, according 

to EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division 

Database, and annual emissions of at 

least 2,600 tons of SO2 in 2012. Sumner 

County, Tennessee contained one 

source, Tennessee Valley Authority 

(TVA) Gallatin Fossil Plant (TVA 

Gallatin), that met these Round 2 

criteria. EPA evaluated the Area, using 

the five factors identified previously, 

during the Round 2 designations. This 

evaluation is discussed further in 

Section III of this notice. TVA Gallatin 

is located in north-central Tennessee in 

the southern portion of Sumner County, 

approximately 5 kilometers (km) 

southeast of the center of Gallatin, 

Tennessee. TVA Gallatin is a large 

Electric Generating Unit that was 

included in the list of facilities to be 

designated pursuant to the March 2, 

2015, Consent Decree.6 7

EPA’s March 20, 2015, guidance 

specified the designation category 

definitions to be used in the Round 2 

designations. Specifically, EPA defined 

a ‘‘nonattainment’’ area as an area that 

EPA has determined violates the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS based on the most 

recent three years of quality-assured, 

certified ambient air quality monitoring 

data or an appropriate modeling 

analysis, or that EPA has determined 

contributes to a violation in a nearby 

area; and defined an ‘‘attainment’’ area 

as an area that EPA has determined 

meets the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and 

does not contribute to a violation of the 

NAAQS in a nearby area based on 

either: (a) the most recent 3 years of 

ambient air quality monitoring data 

from a monitoring network in an area 

that is sufficient to be compared to the 

NAAQS per EPA interpretations in the 

Monitoring TAD, or (b) an appropriate 

modeling analysis. As discussed further 

in Section III of this notice, EPA was 

unable to determine whether the 

Sumner County Area met the definition 

of a nonattainment area or the definition 

of an attainment area based on the 

available information at the time of the 

Round 2 designations. As a result, EPA 

designated the Sumner County Area as 

unclassifiable in the Round 2 

designations published on July 12, 

2016.8 The boundary for this 

designation was the jurisdictional 

boundary of Sumner County. 

Detailed rationale, analyses, and other 

information supporting EPA’s original 

Round 2 designation for this Area can 

be found in the Round 2 designation’s 

technical support document (TSD) for 

Tennessee. That TSD, along with all 

other supporting materials for the 

original 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS 

designation for Sumner County, can be 

found on EPA’s SO2 designations 

website.9 In support of this proposed 

redesignation action, EPA evaluated 

new modeling for the Sumner County 

Area provided by Tennessee and 

developed a new TSD. The TSD for this 

proposed action is included in the 

docket.10

II. What are the criteria for 

redesignating an area from 

unclassifiable to attainment/ 

unclassifiable? 

Section 107(d)(3)(A) of the CAA 

provides that the Administrator may 

notify the Governor of any state that the 

designation of an area should be revised 

‘‘on the basis of air quality data, 

planning and control considerations, or 

any other air quality-related 

considerations the Administrator deems 

appropriate.’’ 11 The Act further 

provides in section 107(d)(3)(D) that 

even if the Administrator has not 

notified a state Governor that a 

designation should be revised, the 

Governor of any state may, on the 

Governor’s own motion, submit a 

request to revise the designation of any 

area, and the Administrator must 

approve or deny the request. In keeping 

with CAA section 107(d)(3)(A), areas 

that are redesignated to attainment/ 

unclassifiable 12 must meet the 

requirements for attainment areas and, 

thus, must meet the relevant NAAQS. In 

addition, the area must not contribute to 

ambient air quality in a nearby area that 

does not meet the NAAQS. See the 

definitions for nonattainment area, 

attainment area, and unclassifiable area 

in CAA section 107(d)(1)(A)(i)–(iii). 

In its designations under the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS, EPA has generally 

defined an attainment/unclassifiable 

area as an area that, based on available 

information including (but not limited 

to) appropriate monitoring data and/or 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
12894 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 42 / Friday, March 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

13The final Round 2 designations TSD can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/2016-07/documents/r4_tn_final_designation_

tsd_06302016.pdf. 

14The demonstration of attainment through air 

quality dispersion modeling requires an area to 

review and report annual SO2 emissions pursuant 

to DRR ongoing verification at 40 CFR 51.1205(b). 

In its September 29, 2020, redesignation request 

letter, Tennessee also requested to terminate the 

section 51.1205(b) annual reporting requirement 

because the modeling analyses demonstrated a 

value of at least 50 percent below the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 NAAQS at all receptors. EPA will address the 

annual reporting termination request in a separate 

action which has no bearing on the proposed 

approval of the redesignation. 

15 ‘‘Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area 

SIP Submissions,’’ April 2014, at 67, available at 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016- 

06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_

sip.pdf; ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance 

Demonstrations for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 

(CO) Nonattainment Areas,’’ November 1993, at 3, 

available at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ 

aqmguide/collection/cp2/19931130_berry_actual_

emissions_ozone_co_maintenance_demos%20.pdf. 

16The SO2 NAAQS and the design value 

compared to the NAAQS is the 3-year average of the 

annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum 

concentrations. 

17See the TSD in the docket for this proposed 

action for further information and analysis of the 

updated modeling. 

modeling analyses, EPA has determined 

meets the NAAQS and determined that 

the available information indicates that 

the area does not likely contribute to 

ambient air quality in a nearby area that 

does not meet the NAAQS. EPA is 

proposing to find that the Sumner 

County Area now meets the definition 

of attainment/unclassifiable based upon 

air quality dispersion modeling analyses 

that demonstrates attainment, i.e., no 

violations of the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS and not contributing to a 

nearby area that is not meeting the 

NAAQS. EPA preliminarily finds this 

information sufficient for the purposes 

of redesignating an area from 

unclassifiable to attainment/ 

unclassifiable. Such redesignations are 

functionally similar to initial 

designations and are not subject to CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E), which, amongst 

other things, requires attainment to be 

due to permanent and enforceable 

measures and which requires a 

demonstration that the area will 

maintain the NAAQS for 10 years. 

III. What is EPA’s rationale for 

proposing to redesignate the area? 

The Sumner County Area was 

designated unclassifiable by EPA on 

July 12, 2016. EPA’s rationale for the 

unclassifiable designation is fully 

explained in the TSD associated with 

that action.13 As discussed in the final 

TSD, the revised modeling provided by 

Tennessee in March 2016 for the final 

designation action used allowable SO2

emissions rates from the TVA Gallatin 

facility that had not yet been made 

federally enforceable. Additionally, the 

final modeling analysis did not 

appropriately account for background 

SO2 concentrations in the Area which 

was considered inconsistent with EPA’s 

Modeling TAD and modeling guidelines 

in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W. 

Tennessee submitted an updated 

modeling analysis with its letter signed 

by Michelle Owenby, Director of TDEC’s 

Division of Air Pollution Control, on 

September 29, 2020, requesting that 

EPA redesignate Sumner County, 

Tennessee, to attainment/unclassifiable 

for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.14 This 

updated modeling was performed using 

the current version of EPA’s 

recommended dispersion model, 

AERMOD version 19191, with the most 

recent three years of actual SO2

emissions (2017–2019) from the TVA 

Gallatin facility and concurrent 

meteorology data. Additionally, the 

updated modeling used recent 2016 

land cover data and appropriately 

accounted for background SO2

concentrations in the Area. The TSD 

included in the docket for this proposed 

redesignation action provides a detailed 

summary of Tennessee’s modeling 

analysis and EPA’s evaluation of the 

modeling. 

According to EPA’s guidance on 

redesignations, SO2 nonattainment areas 

using modeling to demonstrate 

attainment for a redesignation request 

are expected to use maximum allowable 

emissions.15 However, this statement 

derives from the requirements of CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E), which applies only 

to the redesignation of nonattainment 

areas to attainment. For redesignations 

of unclassifiable areas, the necessary 

analysis is equivalent to what would be 

required in a designation in the first 

instance since EPA has not found the 

area to be attainment or nonattainment. 

In this first instance, the goal is to 

characterize existing ambient air 

quality. As such, it is appropriate to use 

actual emissions for estimating existing 

air quality. EPA’s acceptance of 

modeling using actual emissions in this 

instance should not be construed to 

define what would be needed for a 

demonstration of attainment and 

maintenance for purposes of a 

redesignation of a nonattainment area to 

attainment. 

After reviewing Tennessee’s request 

under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D) and all 

available information, EPA is proposing 

to find that the modeling provided by 

the State comports with EPA’s current 

Modeling TAD and EPA’s Guideline on 

Air Quality Models (40 CFR part 51 

Appendix W) and is acceptable for 

assessing the attainment status of the 

Sumner County Area. The State’s 

modeling indicates that the predicted 

maximum design value at any receptor 

in the modeling domain is 60.5 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), or 

23.1 ppb.16 EPA’s review confirms that 

the modeling results appropriately 

characterize the air quality in the 

Sumner County Area that predicted 

ambient SO2 concentrations are below 

the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS of 196.4 

mg/m3, or 75 ppb.17 Additionally, there 

is no evidence of monitored or modeled 

violations in the surrounding counties 

such that the source is contributing to 

any nearby area that does not meet the 

NAAQS. EPA is therefore proposing to 

approve Tennessee’s redesignation 

request and proposing to redesignate the 

entirety of Sumner County that was 

designated as unclassifiable in July 2016 

to attainment/unclassifiable based on 

the currently available information that 

demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Tennessee’s September 29, 2020, 

redesignation request and to redesignate 

the Sumner County Area from 

unclassifiable to attainment/ 

unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. EPA has reviewed the 

modeling provided by the State with its 

redesignation request and preliminarily 

finds that it complies with EPA’s 

current Modeling TAD and EPA’s 

Guideline on Air Quality Models (40 

CFR part 51 Appendix W) and is 

acceptable for assessing the attainment 

status of the Sumner County Area. If 

finalized, approval of the redesignation 

request would change the legal 

designation, found at 40 CFR part 81, of 

Sumner County from unclassifiable to 

attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment/unclassifiable is an 

action that affects the status of a 

geographical area and does not impose 

any additional regulatory requirements 

on sources beyond those imposed by 

state law. A redesignation to attainment/ 

unclassifiable does not create any new 

requirements. Accordingly, this 

proposed action merely proposes to 

redesignate an area to attainment/ 

unclassifiable and does not impose 

additional requirements. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 42 / Friday, March 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules 12895 

• 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); 

• 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 

• Will not have disproportionate 

human health or environmental effects 

under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 

7629, February 16, 1994). 

This proposed action does not 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, this proposed action does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), nor will it impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: February 25, 2021. 

John Blevins, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04406 Filed 3–4–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R09–RCRA–2019–0491; FRL–10019– 

33–Region 9] 

California: Authorization of State 

Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) approved revisions to 

California’s federally authorized 

hazardous waste program by publishing 

proposed and final rules in the Federal 

Register on October 18, 2019 and 

January 14, 2020, respectively. The 

notice for the proposed rule 

inadvertently and unintentionally left 

out citations for approving the State’s 

authority to adopt additional waste 

streams as universal wastes in the State 

Analogues to the Federal Program table. 

In addition, the scope of the State 

program that is considered ‘‘broader in 

scope’’ than the federal program was 

mis-designated. We are proposing to 

correct these and related errors. EPA 

seeks public comment prior to taking 

final action. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

correction must be received by April 5, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

RCRA–2019–0491, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurie Amaro, EPA Region 9, 75 

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105. By phone: (415) 972–3364 or by 

email at Amaro.Laurie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Why are corrections to the revised 

state program authorization necessary? 

States that have received final 

authorization from EPA under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA) § 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), 

must maintain a hazardous waste 

program that is equivalent to, consistent 

with, and no less stringent than the 

federal program. As the federal program 

changes, states must change their 

programs and ask EPA to authorize the 

changes. EPA’s Federal Register notices 

regarding proposed and final 

authorization of revisions to state 

hazardous waste management programs 

provide the public with an opportunity 

to comment and also offer details with 

respect to the scope of the revised 

program authorizations on which both 

the general public and the regulated 

community may rely. Where these 

notices omit critical information or fail 

to clearly delineate the scope of 

authorized program revisions, 

corrections may be necessary and/or 

appropriate. 

B. What corrections is EPA making to 

this rule? 

After proposing updates to 

California’s authorized hazardous waste 

program on October 18, 2019 (80 FR 

55871), EPA authorized changes to 

California’s hazardous waste program 

on January 14, 2020 (85 FR 2038). EPA 

is now proposing to correct the updated 

authorization by clarifying that: (1) 

California is authorized to add federallyregulated hazardous waste streams to its 

universal waste program and the 

requirements that California establishes 

to manage such added waste streams are 

federally enforceable, whether they are 

added to California’s universal waste 

program prior to or after EPA’s 

authorization of the State’s universal 

waste program; (2) State universal waste 

requirements that apply to non-RCRA 

wastes designated by California as 

‘‘hazardous waste,’’ also known as 

‘‘non-RCRA hazardous waste,’’ are 

beyond the scope of the federal program 

and are not being authorized; and, 

similarly, (3) other wastes that are 

sometimes federally-regulated 

hazardous waste and sometimes nonRCRA hazardous waste under California 

law, are part of the federally authorized 

program, but only insofar as these 

materials constitute federally-regulated 

hazardous waste. If these corrections are 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS