Quiero saber acerca de...

16538

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 30, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
4 Sacramento Metro AQMD for sources subject to a FIP, including cogeneration and resource recovery projects, projects with stack heights greater than 65 meters or that use dispersion techniques as defined in 51.100 which are major sources or major modifications under 52.21, and sources for which the EPA has issued permits under 52.21 for which applications were received by July 31, 1985, only for sections 110a2C, DiII interfere with measures in any other state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, only, and J.
5 All areas in California that are subject to the federal PSD program as provided in 40 CFR 52.270 for sections 110a2C, DiII interfere with measures in any other state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, only, and J, except for South Coast AQMD where the federal PSD program applies to all pollutants except greenhouse gases.
6 All areas in California that are subject to the federal PSD program as provided in 40 CFR 52.270 for sections 110a2Dii with respect to section 126a, only.

FR Doc. 202106110 Filed 32921; 8:45 am BILLING CODE 656050P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
EPAR08OAR20200516; FRL10020
22Region 8

Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; South Dakota; Control of Emissions From Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Environmental Protection Agency EPA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:

The Environmental Protection Agency EPA is approving a Clean Air Act CAA or the Act section 111d state plan submitted by the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources DENR or the Department on January 3, 2020. This plan was submitted to fulfill the requirements of the CAA and is responsive to the EPAs promulgation of Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times EG for existing municipal solid waste MSW landfills. The South Dakota state plan establishes performance standards and operating requirements for existing MSW landfills
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:52 Mar 29, 2021

Jkt 253001

within the State of South Dakota and provides for the implementation and enforcement of those standards and requirements by the Department. The EPA is taking this action pursuant to requirements of the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on April 29, 2021. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of April 29, 2021.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPAR08OAR20200516. All documents in the docket are listed on the http www.regulations.gov website.
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through http
www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Lohrke, Air and Radiation Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8ARDTRM, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado, 802021129, 303
3126396, lohrke.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document we, us, and our means the EPA.
I. Background The background for this action is discussed in detail in our October 29, 2020 proposed rule 85 FR 68538. In that document we proposed to approve the South Dakota state plan for existing MSW landfills as it was submitted by the Secretary of the South Dakota DENR
on January 3, 2020. Analysis of the South Dakota state plan may be found in the aforementioned proposed rule and the technical support document TSD associated with the docket for todays action.
We received comments from one commenter during the public comment period opened by the proposed rule.
Our response to the comments is addressed in Section II. below.
II. Response to Comments The proposed rule published in the Federal Register at 85 FR 68538
received comments on Sections I and II
of the preamble of that publication. The comments relevant to todays action are summarized here with the corresponding Agency response.

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Comment: On Section I of the preamble of the proposed rule, the commenter broadly questioned the efficacy of both implementing the standards and requirements of outdated EG finalized in 2016, and the promulgation of two separate and distinct emission standardsone for new and another for existing facilities within the same source category.
Response: The EPA is not statutorily obligated to conduct review and revision of EG for existing sources but maintains the discretion to do so when appropriate. Changes in best practices and cost effectiveness of available technology within the MSW landfill industry since the original EG for MSW
landfills were promulgated in 1996
prompted the Agency to review those standards and requirements. The review of the 1996 EG allowed EPA to find that a rule revision was appropriate and would increase potential for emission reductions at MSW landfills as well as streamline implementation of requirements and standards for landfill owners and operators. Although the standards and requirements promulgated in 2016 are over four years old at this point, these major revisions to the EG for MSW landfills are relatively new and reflect the accumulation of industry developments over a timeframe of 20 years. The EPA
is neither statutorily obligated, nor capable, of revising EG at a pace faster than the development of new, practical control technologies or best practices in emission reductions. Rather, the Agency is constrained in its revision of EG by the realities of what best system of emissions reduction is available to the regulated population, while taking into account the cost and other limiting factors affecting implementation of such a system of reductions at designated facilities.
The EPA differentiates regulations for new and existing facilities of the same source category under a similar logic.
CAA section 111 authorizes the EPA to develop new source performance standards NSPS and emission guidelines for existing sources EG.
This distinction in performance standards for different source populations acknowledges the reality that the best system of emission reduction reasonably available to newer and older facilities may be different when considering cost and practicability of implementation.
Comment: The commenter desired a more in-depth review of the regulated facilities and the state plan submittal.
Response: The requested information is available in associated documents found in the docket for the proposed
E:FRFM30MRR1.SGM

30MRR1