Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 2095 

IV. Participating in the Public Hearing 

Registration: To register to attend the 

virtual public hearing, on ‘‘Scientific 

Data and Information Related to the 

Residue of Carcinogenic Concern for the 

New Animal Drug Carbadox; Public 

Hearing; Request for Comments’’ please 

register at https://fda.zoomgov.com/j/ 

1600135012?

pwd=MFdjMW9FRXg4RGllc

3FHWVhkWVAyZz09 by March 9, 2022. 

If you have any questions, you can 

contact CarbadoxPublicHearing2022@

fda.hhs.gov (See DATES and ADDRESSES). 

Please provide complete contact 

information for each attendee, including 

name, title, affiliation, address, email, 

and telephone. 

Request for Oral Presentations: During 

online registration, you may indicate if 

you wish to make a formal presentation 

(with accompanying slide deck) or 

present oral comments during the 

public hearing session (with no slide 

deck). If you decide you wish to make 

a presentation after registering online, 

you may submit a request to 

CarbadoxPublicHearing2022@

fda.hhs.gov. All requests to make 

presentations must be received by 

February 18, 2022. FDA will do its best 

to accommodate requests to make public 

presentations. Individuals and 

organizations with common interests are 

urged to consolidate or coordinate their 

presentations. FDA will determine the 

amount of time allotted to each 

presenter and the approximate time 

each presentation is to begin and will 

select and notify participants by 

February 23, 2022. 

If selected for a formal oral 

presentation (with a slide deck), each 

presenter must submit an electronic 

copy of their presentation (PowerPoint 

or PDF) to 

CarbadoxPublicHearing2022@

fda.hhs.gov with the subject line 

‘‘Scientific Data and Information 

Related to the Residue of Carcinogenic 

Concern for the New Animal Drug 

Carbadox; Public Hearing; Request for 

Comments’’ on or before March 4, 2022. 

No commercial or promotional material 

will be permitted to be presented or 

distributed at the public hearing. 

Persons notified that they will be 

presenters are encouraged to be online 

early. Actual presentation times may 

vary based on how the hearing 

progresses in real time. An agenda for 

the hearing and any other background 

materials will be made available no later 

than 5 days before the hearing at https:// 

www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/ 

workshops-conferences-meetings/part15-public-hearing-scientific-data-andinformation-related-residuecarcinogenic-concern-new. 

Transcripts: Please be advised that as 

soon as a transcript of the public 

hearing is available, it will be accessible 

at https://www.regulations.gov. It may 

also be viewed at the Dockets 

Management Staff (see ADDRESSES). A 

link to the transcript will also be 

available on the Agency’s website at 

https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/ 

workshops-conferences-meetings/part15-public-hearing-scientific-data-andinformation-related-residuecarcinogenic-concern-new. 

Dated: January 7, 2022. 

Lauren K. Roth, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00475 Filed 1–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Indian Gaming Commission 

25 CFR Part 559 

RIN 3141–AA76 

Facility License; Correction 

AGENCY: National Indian Gaming 

Commission, Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects the 

preamble to a proposed rule published 

in the Federal Register of December 1, 

2021, regarding Facility Licenses. The 

document contained incorrect dates for 

submitting comments. This correction 

clarifies that comments are due January 

31, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Hoenig, 202–632–7003. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of December 1, 

2021, in FR Doc. 2021–25845, on page 

68200, in the third column, change the 

DATES caption to read: 

DATES: Written comments on this 

proposed rule must be received on or 

before January 31, 2022. 

Dated: January 6, 2022. 

Michael Hoenig, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00625 Filed 1–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7565–01–P 

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 (SO2) nonattainment area 

failed to attain the 2010 1-hour SO2

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 SO2 ambient air monitoring 

data and SO2 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 SO2 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 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 

https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Evan Adams, Air Regulatory 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2096 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

1See 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971). 2 40 CFR 50.4(e). 

3See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010). 4 40 CFR 50.17. 

5See 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013). 6For exact descriptions of the Sullivan County 

Area, refer to 40 CFR 81.343. 

7See Center for Biological Diversity et al v. EPA; 

Case No. 3:20-cv-05436–EMC in the docket for this 

proposed action. 

8AQS is EPA’s repository of ambient air quality 

data. 

9 40 CFR 58.16. 

10 40 CFR 58.15. 

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: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. The 2010 SO2 NAAQS 

B. Designations, Classifications, and 

Attainment Dates for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS 

II. Proposed Determinations and 

Consequences 

A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory 

Provisions 

B. Monitoring Network Considerations 

C. Sullivan County SO2 Monitoring 

Network 

D. SO2 Data Considerations and Proposed 

Determination 

E. Consequences for SO2 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 SO2, which is primarily 

released to the atmosphere through the 

burning of fossil fuels by power plants 

and other industrial facilities. Shortterm exposure to SO2 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 SO2. 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 SO2

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 SO2 to 

provide increased protection of public 

health, providing for revocation of the 

1971 primary annual and 24-hour SO2

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 

SO2 NAAQS occurs when the annual 

99th percentile of ambient daily 

maximum 1-hour average SO2

concentrations, averaged over a 3-year 

period, exceeds 75 ppb.4

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 SO2 NAAQS.5 Specifically, in 

the 2013 action, EPA designated 29 

areas in 16 states as nonattainment for 

the 2010 SO2 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 SO2 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 

SO2 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 SO2

NAAQS. 

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 

SO2 nonattainment areas (including the 

Sullivan County Area) attained the 1- 

hour SO2 standard by the October 4, 

2018 attainment date. For the Sullivan 

County Area, the consent decree 

deadline is March 31, 2022. 

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 

SO2). 

Specifically, under EPA regulations in 

40 CFR 50.17 and in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50 Appendix T, the 2010 1- 

hour annual SO2 standard is met when 

the design value is less than or equal to 

75 ppb. Design values are calculated by 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 2097 

11As defined in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T, 

section 1(c), daily maximum 1-hour values refer to 

the maximum 1-hour SO2 concentration values 

measured from midnight to midnight that are used 

in the NAAQS computations. 

12See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T, sections 1(c), 

3(b), 4(c), and 5(a). 

13For 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. 

14EPA, Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment 

Area SIP Submissions (April 2014) (‘‘2014 SO2

Guidance’’), p.49, available at: https://www.epa.gov/ 

sites/default/files/2016-06/documents/ 

20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf. 

15 Id., p.50. 

16The current SO2 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 

SO2 air quality in the areas of expected maximum 

1-hour SO2 concentration. 

17See, 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. 

18See 40 CFR part 58, appendix A, section 2.5. 

19See, 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. 

20See 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. 

21See Technical Support Document Finding of 

Failure to Attain the 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS For 

the Sullivan County, Tennessee Nonattainment 

Area in the docket for this proposed action. 

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 

SO2 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

EPA notes that when determining the 

attainment status of SO2 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 SO2 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 SO2 NAAQS by the 

October 4, 2018, attainment date. 

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 SO2, 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 SO2. 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 SO2 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 SO2

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

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 SO2, in the 

Sullivan County Area.20 For additional 

information related to Sullivan County 

Area’s SO2 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

C. Sullivan County SO2 Monitoring 

Network 

During the round 1 SO2 designations 

in 2013, Eastman operated an industrial 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2098 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

22See SO2 NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented 

Monitoring Technical Assistance Document (TADs), 

Draft February 2016 in the docket for this proposed 

action. 

23A 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. 

24 In 2017, EPA commented on TDEC’s SO2 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 SO2 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. 

25See 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. 

26The most recent TDEC AMNP, submitted and 

approved in 2020, includes four SO2 SLAMS in the 

nonattainment area which will provide NAAQScomparable monitoring data moving forward. 

SO2 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 industryoperated monitoring data in Tennessee, 

including the Eastman SO2 monitor, met 

EPA regulatory requirements, including 

quality assurance requirements. EPA 

used this data as the basis for an SO2

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 industryoperated 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 SO2 monitoring 

data were collected in the Area from 

January 1, 2015, to July 20, 2016. 

Consequently, the Area did not have a 

valid SO2 design value for the 2015– 

2017 period. See Sullivan County TSD 

for more details on EPA’s TSAs. 

To characterize SO2 concentrations in 

the Sullivan County Area, Tennessee 

began operating a SLAMS SO2 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 SO2

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 SO2 Monitoring 

Technical Assistance Document 

(TAD).22 The Skyland Drive SLAMS 

monitor site is located with Eastman’s 

industrial SO2 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 SO2 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. 

In 2017, Tennessee committed to 

expanding its existing SO2 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 

SO2 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 SO2 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 SO2 TAD. EPA approved the SO2

portion of TDEC’s AMNP in 2016, 2018, 

2019, and 2020.26

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 sourcespecific SO2 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 SO2 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 SO2 emission data 

are provided in EPA’s Sullivan County 

TSD located in the docket for this 

proposed action. 

1. Sullivan County SO2 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 SO2

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 SO2

emissions data at Eastman. 

As discussed above, no NAAQScomparable SO2 monitoring data is 

available for the Area for January 1, 

2015, to July 20, 2016. The available 

SLAMS SO2 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 2099 

27The conversion of the B–253 boilers from 

burning coal to natural gas was completed in 

October 2018. Thus, the SO2 emissions from the B– 

253 powerhouse dropped significantly to 10 tpy in 

2019. 

for only 6 out of 12 quarters at the Ross 

N. Robinson SO2 monitor since the 

monitor began operation on July 21, 

2016, and 5 out of 12 quarters at the 

Skyland Drive SO2 monitor since the 

monitor began operation on September 

1, 2016. The available annual 99th 

percentile daily maximum 1-hour 

average SO2 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

Site 

(AQS ID) 

Annual 99th percentile daily 

maximum 1-hour average 

(ppb) 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: 

aThe SLAMS monitors did not collect data in 2015. 

bThe 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 SO2 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 SO2

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 SO2 Emissions Data 

As mentioned above, in round 1 SO2

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 SO2 NAAQS based on 2009–2011 

air quality data. Table 2 shows that the 

SO2 emissions, expressed in tons per 

year (tpy), from Eastman account for 

more than 99 percent of the total SO2

emissions in Sullivan County during the 

2015–2017 period relevant for this 

proposed determination that the Area 

failed to attain the SO2 NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date. Prior to the 

Sullivan County Area being designated 

as nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 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 SO2 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

Calendar year 

Total Sullivan 

County SO2

emissions from 

all sources 

(tpy) 

Eastman SO2

emissions 

(tpy) 

2015 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 17,980 17,978 

2016 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 14,325 14,324 

2017 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10,792 10,746 

As shown in Table 2, the total annual 

SO2 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 SO2 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 SO2 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 SO2

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. 

It is important to also consider trends 

in hourly SO2 emissions since the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS is a short-term standard 

that is evaluated using hourly 

measurements of ambient SO2

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2100 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

28See Figure 5 and Table 3 of the Sullivan County 

TSD in the docket for this proposed action. 

29Pursuant 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 

SO2 NAAQS. 

30The scope of this proposed action is limited to 

whether the Sullivan County Area attained the 1- 

hour SO2 standard by the applicable October 4, 

2018, attainment date. Therefore, EPA is not 

soliciting further comment on the approvability of 

the State’s 2017 SO2 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. 

ambient monitoring data show 

exceedances of the NAAQS).28

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 

SO2 emissions data at Eastman from 

January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. 

As shown in Table 1, the available SO2

ambient monitoring data in the Sullivan 

County Area indicates that the 99th 

percentile maximum daily 1-hour SO2

concentration in both 2016 and 2017 

exceeded the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS level 

of 75 ppb. The primary SO2 emissions 

sources in the nonattainment area are 

the coal-fired boilers at Eastman. Both 

the annual SO2 emissions and the 

hourly SO2 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 

SO2 concentrations are very sourceoriented, 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 

SO2 were lower than they were in 2015, 

EPA believes it is reasonable to expect 

that the 99th percentile maximum daily 

1-hour SO2 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 SO2 emissions data demonstrates by 

a weight of evidence that the Sullivan 

County Area failed to attain the 1-hour 

SO2 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 SO2

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 

SO2 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 SO2 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 SO2

standard by the applicable attainment 

date.29

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 SO2 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 SO2 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. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 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 SO2 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, lowincome 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 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0446; FRL–9398–01– 

R4] 

Air Plan Approval; KY; Jefferson 

County Emissions Statements 

Requirements for the 2015 8-Hour 

Ozone Standard Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Jefferson County portion 

of the Kentucky State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Kentucky through 

the Kentucky Division for Air Quality 

(KDAQ) to EPA on August 12, 2020. The 

proposed revision was submitted by 

KDAQ on behalf of the Louisville Metro 

Air Pollution Control District 

(LMAPCD) to address the emissions 

statement requirements for the 2015 8- 

hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) for the Jefferson 

County portion of the Louisville, 

Kentucky 2015 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (hereinafter referred 

to as ‘‘Jefferson County’’). Jefferson 

County is part of the Kentucky portion 

of the Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana 

2015 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 

(hereinafter referred to as ‘‘the 

Louisville, KY Area’’) which is 

comprised of Bullitt, Jefferson, and 

Oldham Counties in Kentucky. EPA will 

consider the emissions statement 

requirements for the Bullitt and Oldham 

County portions of the Louisville, KY 

Area in a separate action. This action is 

being proposed pursuant to the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 14, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2020–0446 at 

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 

www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tiereny Bell, 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. 

The telephone number is (404) 562– 

9088. Ms. Bell can also be reached via 

electronic mail at bell.tiereny@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1