[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18280-18285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06756]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0148; FRL-9793-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Nevada; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan; Reconsideration of
BART Compliance Date for Reid Gardner Generating Station
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; Notice of Reconsideration of Final Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is granting reconsideration of the compliance date for the
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) emission limits for oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) at the Reid Gardner Generating Station (RGGS)
promulgated in a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) on August 23, 2012.
EPA is also proposing to extend the compliance date for the
NOX emission limits applicable to Units 1, 2, and 3 at RGGS
by 18 months from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. We seek comment
only on the aspects of the FIP specifically identified in this notice.
We are not opening for reconsideration any other provisions of our FIP
for RGGS or our partial approval of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP.
DATES: Comments must be submitted no later than May 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0148, by one of the following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
(2) Email: [email protected].
(3) Mail or Deliver: Anita Lee (Air-2), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Hearings: EPA intends to hold one or more public hearings to accept
oral and written comments on the proposed rulemaking. EPA will provide
notice and additional details related to the hearings in the Federal
Register, on our Web site, and in the docket.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 9,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at EPA Region 9
[[Page 18281]]
(e.g., maps, voluminous reports, copyrighted material), and some may
not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect
the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal
business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Lee, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-
3958, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we'', ``us'',
and ``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Summary of Relevant EPA Actions
B. Petition for Reconsideration
C. Supplemental Information
II. EPA's Proposed Action
A. Justification for Proposing to Extend Compliance Date
B. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere with Attainment
or Reasonable Further Progress
C. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere with Any Other
Applicable Requirement of the CAA
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
13563
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. Background
A. Summary of Relevant EPA Actions
On December 13, 2011, EPA signed a final rule approving all aspects
of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP except for the state's BART
determination for reducing NOX emissions at RGGS.\1\ Due to
delays associated with publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register, the rule was not published until March 26, 2012.\2\ However,
an unofficial copy of the final rule was provided to all interested
parties soon after signature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Regional Haze Rule (RHR), BART, and the Nevada Regional
Haze SIP are described elsewhere in greater detail. See, for
example, EPA's proposed approval of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP on
June 22, 2011 (76 FR 36450).
\2\ 77 FR 17334.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 22, 2012, the state of Nevada indicated by letter that it
intended to submit a SIP revision to EPA in September 2012, including
provisions to reduce the emission limit for Unit 3 at RGGS from 0.28
pounds of NOX per million British thermal units (lb/MMBtu)
to 0.20 lb/MMBtu and to require installation of controls on or before
June 30, 2016.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See letter dated March 22, 2012 from Michael Elges, Deputy
Administrator of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to
Deborah Jordan, Director of the Air Division at EPA Region 9, re:
Proposed Amendment to Nevada's 2009 Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 12, 2012, EPA proposed to partially approve and partially
disapprove the remaining portion of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP, i.e.,
Nevada's BART determination for reducing NOX emissions at
RGGS.\4\ EPA proposed approval of the NOX emission limit of
0.20 lb/MMBtu for Units 1 and 2. Because the state's intended SIP
revision to reduce the emission limit for Unit 3 had not yet been
submitted to EPA, we proposed, among other things, disapproval of the
NOX emission limit of 0.28 lb/MMBtu for Unit 3. EPA
concurrently proposed a FIP, generally consistent with the state's
intentions, including an emission limit for Unit 3 of 0.20 lb/MMBtu.
EPA's proposed FIP included a provision requiring compliance with the
BART emission limits within five years from promulgation of the final
rule. EPA held two public hearings on May 3, 2012 to take comment on
our proposed FIP. The comment period closed on June 4, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 77 FR 21896.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 23, 2012, EPA promulgated our final rule to approve in
part, disapprove in part, and implement a FIP for the disapproved
portions of the Nevada BART determination for RGGS.\5\ The preamble to
the final rule discusses in more detail our final action and the
comments we received during the comment period for our proposal. Based
on comments from EarthJustice, representing a consortium of eight non-
governmental organizations, that a 5-year compliance timeframe to meet
the NOX emission limit of 0.20 lb/MMBtu was excessive,\6\
EPA reevaluated the compliance date for our final rulemaking.
Notwithstanding an inaccurate statement in section I of the preamble to
our final rule,\7\ EPA noted in section II.K of the preamble that our
March 26, 2012 approval of the portions of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP
included the portion of the Nevada Administrative Code (NAC
445B.22096(2)(a)) requiring compliance with BART emission limits on
three power plants, including RGGS, ``[o]n or before January 1, 2015;
or (2) [n]ot later than 5 years after approval of Nevada's state
implementation plan for regional haze by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency Region 9, whichever comes first.'' \8\
Therefore, consistent with the compliance dates in the Nevada Regional
Haze SIP that EPA approved on March 26, 2012, EPA finalized a
compliance date in the FIP of January 1, 2015.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 77 FR 50936.
\6\ See letter dated June 4, 2012 from Suma Peesapati,
EarthJustice, to Thomas Webb, EPA Region 9, re: Approval and
Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Nevada;
Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0130).
\7\ In section I of the preamble to the final rule, EPA
incorrectly stated that we did not take action on the schedules for
compliance for RGGS in our March 26, 2012 final rulemaking. See 77
FR 50936 (August 23, 2012).
\8\ EPA's final rulemaking on March 26, 2012 approved portions
of the NAC, including ``445B.22096, excluding the NOX
emission limits and control types in sub-paragraph (1)(c).'' See
Table 1 in 40 CFR 52.1470(c).
\9\ On October 11, 2012, the Nevada State Environmental
Commission adopted a revised regulation from the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection that, among other things, extended the
compliance date for achieving BART emission limits for
NOX at RGGS from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. See
information available at http://www.sec.nv.gov/main/hearing_1012.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Petition for Reconsideration
On October 19, 2012, Nevada Energy (NV Energy, also known as Nevada
Power Company) filed a petition to the Administrator for
reconsideration of our August 23, 2012, final rule pursuant to section
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA.\10\ The petition addresses one issue and
requests that EPA reconsider the compliance date of January 1, 2015,
for meeting the final NOX emission limits of 0.20 lb/MMBtu
on Units 1, 2 and 3 at RGGS. NV Energy asserts that (1) EPA erroneously
adopted a January 1, 2015, deadline for Reid Gardner Generating
Station, (2) EPA's decision to set the January 1, 2015, compliance date
without having proposed it deprived NV Energy of the ability to comment
on a shorter compliance period, and (3) EPA's adoption of the January
1, 2015, compliance date was arbitrary and capricious because EPA
failed to consider the impact of administrative
[[Page 18282]]
delays in issuing the final rule before setting the compliance
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See letter dated October 19, 2012 from Samuel Boxerman,
Sidley Austin LLP representing Nevada Energy, to Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator, US EPA, re: Petition for Reconsideration of EPA's
Final Rule entitled, ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; Nevada; Regional Haze State and Federal
Implementation Plans; BART Determination for Reid Gardner Generating
Station.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Supplemental Information
In a letter dated January 31, 2013, NV Energy submitted
supplemental information to EPA describing the steps necessary to
comply with the BART emission limits for NOX on Units 1, 2
and 3 at RGGS, including required regulatory approvals, design,
procurement, construction, commissioning, and testing of the new air
pollution controls that NV Energy would need to install to comply with
BART.\11\ Based on the amount of time required for the necessary steps,
NV Energy states that the January 1, 2015 deadline originally included
in the Nevada Regional Haze SIP, and finalized in EPA's FIP for RGGS,
is not achievable, but demonstrates that the affected units at RGGS
could meet the BART emission limits for NOX by June 30,
2016, based on an expeditious and compressed schedule for compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See letter dated January 31, 2013 from Starla Lacy,
Executive, Environmental, Health, and Safety at NV Energy to Anita
Lee, US EPA Region 9, re: Nevada Regional Haze State Implementation
Plan, Compliance Deadline for Units 1, 2, & 3 at Reid Gardner
Generating Station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. EPA's Proposed Action
In today's action, EPA is granting reconsideration of the
compliance date in our FIP for achieving the NOX emission
limits at RGGS and proposing to extend the compliance date by 18 months
from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. EPA is granting reconsideration
of the compliance date based on one of the arguments provided by NV
Energy in the October 19, 2012, petition for reconsideration.
Specifically, EPA agrees that NV Energy may not have had an adequate
opportunity to comment on the final compliance date for the
NOX emission limits because we had proposed a 5-year period
for compliance. Therefore, EPA is granting the petition for
reconsideration from NV Energy.
EPA is proposing to extend the compliance date based on our review
of the supplemental information NV Energy provided to EPA by letter
dated January 31, 2013. The information NV Energy submitted justifies
our proposed finding that compliance by January 2015 is not achievable,
and we are proposing to extend the compliance date for meeting the
NOX emission limits on Units 1, 2 and 3 at RGGS to June 30,
2016.
A. Justification for Proposing To Extend Compliance Date
In its letter dated January 31, 2013, NV Energy sets forth its
plans to install multiple control technologies to meet emission limits
for NOX established as BART. NV Energy will install new
advanced low-NOX burners coupled with over fire air (LNB/
OFA), new selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) systems, and a new
neural network control system, as well as modify the existing burner
management system and combustion control system (BMS/CCS). NV Energy
has contracted with Sargent and Lundy (S&L), an engineering firm, to
develop and manage the installation of this BART air pollution control
project to reduce emissions of NOX at RGGS.
This project, as documented in a Gantt chart created by S&L and
submitted to EPA by NV Energy, requires detailed engineering,
procurement, construction, commissioning, tuning, and testing of the
new control technologies, as well as regulatory approvals from the
Nevada Public Utilities Commission and Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection (NDEP).
NV Energy states that, if all necessary activities were conducted
in sequence, final installation and operation of the new air pollution
controls would require 77 months (over six years); however, NV Energy
and S&L have developed a compressed 42-month (three and one-half year)
schedule set forth in the Gantt chart in order to complete the project
by June 30, 2016. In its letter, NV Energy states that as of December
31, 2012, it has invested $1.9 million on the project for engineering
and design, and intends to initiate engineering and procurement of the
LNB/OFA in early 2013.
The LNB/OFA combustion controls reduce the amount of NOX
formed during combustion by controlling the airflow and temperature
during combustion.\12\ As such, the design of LNB/OFA must occur before
the design of the SNCR, a post-combustion control that requires
detailed fluid dynamic modeling of combustion to ensure that the
placement of nozzles to inject the ammonia or urea occurs at the most
appropriate locations (where the flue gas is within a prescribed
temperature range) to optimize emission reductions of
NOX.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, for example, EPA's Technical Bulletin on
NOX formation and control, available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/fnoxdoc.pdf.
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NV Energy further states that modifications to the existing BMS/CCS
first require a completed design for the LNB/OFA, and the
specifications for the neural network require knowledge of what
modifications will be made to the existing BMS/CCS. This information
means that, although some tasks can be conducted simultaneously, many
tasks are dependent on the completion of other tasks and must be staged
sequentially.
The information provided by NV Energy shows that the design,
procurement, and fabrication of the multiple air pollution controls are
scheduled to occur from 2013 through 2015. Construction of controls on
Units 1, 2 and 3 is scheduled to be staged over 2015 and 2016,
including three to six months of pre-outage construction for each unit,
two-month outages for each unit, four-month periods for tuning, and
one-month periods for testing for each of the three units.
In total, NV Energy expects to complete the installation of all air
pollution controls to meet the BART limits in 42 months, an average of
14 months per unit. The Institute of Clean Air Companies estimates that
the installation of SNCR typically requires 10 to 13 months, and
typical deployment of LNB requires six to eight months.\14\ The
combination of LNB and SNCR may then be expected to require 16 to 21
months. Based on the schedule provided by NV Energy and the anticipated
timeframe requiring an average of 14 months per unit for the design,
procurement, construction, commissioning, and testing of LNB/OFA, SNCR,
a neural network, and modifications to the BMS/CCS, EPA considers the
42-month schedule for RGGS to comply with the BART limits for
NOX to be as expeditious as practicable, and a deadline of
January 1, 2015 to be not practically achievable.\15\ Therefore, EPA is
proposing to extend the compliance timeframe for compliance with the
NOX limits of 0.20 lb/MMBtu at RGGS by 18 months, from
January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Institute of Clean Air Companies, Typical Installation
Timelines for NOX Emissions Control technologies on
Industrial Sources, December 4, 2006.
\15\ Pursuant to CAA sections 169A(b)(2)(A and (g)(4), sources
must procure, install, and operate BART as expeditiously as
practicable, but in no event later than five years after the date of
approval of a SIP or promulgation of a FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere With Attainment or
Reasonable Further Progress
The CAA requires that any revision to an implementation plan shall
not be approved by the Administrator ``if the revision would interfere
with any
[[Page 18283]]
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress * * * or any other applicable requirement of [the CAA].'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See section 110(l) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has promulgated health-based standards, known as the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), for seven pollutants, including
NO2, a component of NOX, and pollutants such as
ozone and particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 2.5
micrometers (PM2.5), that are formed in the atmosphere from
reactions between NOX and other pollutants.\17\ Using a
process that considers air quality data and other factors, EPA
designates areas as ``nonattainment'' if those areas cause or
contribute to violations of a NAAQS. Reasonable further progress, as
defined in section 171 of the CAA, is related to attainment and means
``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air
pollutant * * * for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the
applicable [NAAQS].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The other pollutants are sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide,
lead, and PM10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RGGS is located in Clark County, Nevada. Portions of Clark County
(the Las Vegas Valley) have previously been designated nonattainment
for PM10, carbon monoxide, and the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. Clark County is now in attainment with the NAAQS for carbon
monoxide and ozone.\18\ RGGS is not located in the nonattainment areas
for PM10. The plans developed by Clark County, in part to
satisfy a requirement for redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment, and approved by EPA, do not rely on additional emission
reductions of NOX at RGGS to ensure continued attainment
with the carbon monoxide or the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Therefore,
an 18-month extension, from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016, in the
compliance date for RGGS to meet the BART limit for NOX will
not interfere with attainment or reasonable further progress for any
air quality standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See: ``Determination of Attainment for PM10 for
the Las Vegas Valley Nonattainment Area, NV,'' 75 FR 45485 (August
3, 2012); ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of
Nevada; Redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to Attainment for the
Carbon Monoxide Standard,'' 75 FR 59090 (September 27, 2010); and
``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Nevada;
Redesignation of Clark County to Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour
Ozone Standard,'' 78 FR 1149 (January 8, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere With Any Other
Applicable Requirement of the CAA
The other requirements of the CAA that are applicable to RGGS are
the visibility protection requirements for class I Federal areas under
section 169A, i.e., BART and a long-term strategy for making reasonable
progress toward meeting the national goal of restoring visibility at
class I Federal areas to natural conditions.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ CAA section 169A(b)(2)(A) and (B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAA requires that the procurement, installation, and operation
of BART be as expeditious as practicable but in no event later than
five years after the date of approval of a SIP or promulgation of a
FIP.\20\ Based on the information described in section II.B of this
notice, EPA is proposing to determine that a date of June 30, 2016, to
comply with the NOX limits previously determined as BART for
RGGS is as expeditious as practicable and within five years of the
effective date of EPA's FIP for RGGS.\21\ Therefore, the 18-month
extension we are proposing today will not interfere with the BART
compliance requirement of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ CAA sections 169A(b)(2)(A) and (g)(4).
\21\ The effective date of the final FIP is September 24, 2012.
See 77 FR 50936 (August 23, 2012). Five years after the effective
date is September 24, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada's Regional Haze SIP included a long-term strategy for making
reasonable progress toward restoring visibility at the Jarbidge
Wilderness Area to natural conditions by 2064. The CAA defines long-
term as 10 to 15 years and Nevada's long-term strategy, submitted to
EPA in 2009, includes emission reductions and visibility improvements
that are expected by 2018.\22\ Because the proposed compliance date of
June 30, 2016, occurs within the period of the first long-term
strategy, i.e., prior to 2018, the 18-month extension we are proposing
will not interfere with the long-term strategy requirement of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See CAA section 169A(b)(2)(B) and Section 7 of the Nevada
Regional Haze SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 13563
This action proposes to extend the compliance date for a single
source. This type of action is exempt from review under Executive
Orders (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and EO 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Because the proposed action
merely extends a compliance date, it does not impose an information
collection burden and the Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of this proposed action on
small entities, I certify that this proposed action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The owner of the affected units at Reid Gardner Generating Station,
Nevada Energy, also known as Nevada Power Company, is not a small
entity and the extended compliance date being proposed today reduces
the burden on this entity in general. See Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative,
Inc. v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (DC Cir. 1985). We continue to be interested
in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and
welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2
U.S.C. 1531-1538, requires Federal agencies, unless otherwise
prohibited by law, to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on
State, local, and tribal
[[Page 18284]]
governments and the private sector. Federal agencies must also develop
a plan to provide notice to small governments that might be
significantly or uniquely affected by any regulatory requirements. The
plan must enable officials of affected small governments to have
meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates and must
inform, educate, and advise small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
This proposed rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for state, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one
year. This rule merely proposes an 18-month extension of a compliance
date. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 or 205 of UMRA.
This proposed rule is also not subject to the requirements of
section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This proposed
rule does not impose regulatory requirements on any government entity.
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 in the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action proposes an 18-month
extension of a compliance date. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action
from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), EPA
may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications, that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by
statute, unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or EPA
consults with tribal officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation and develops a tribal summary impact statement.
EPA has concluded that this proposed rule may have tribal
implications because the Reid Gardner Generating Station is located
adjacent to reservation lands of the the Moapa Band of Paiute Indians.
However, it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on
tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law.
EPA consulted with tribal officials early in the process of
developing regulations related to Reid Gardner Generating Station to
permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development.
During the comment period for prior EPA actions related to the Nevada
Regional Haze SIP and EPA's FIP for RGGS, the Moapa Band of Paiute
Indians has raised concerns to EPA about the environmental impacts of
this facility. For those previous rulemakings, EPA consulted the Moapa
Band regarding these concerns and visited the reservation and the
facility. Additional details of our consultation with the Moapa Band
are provided in section IV.F of our final rulemaking published on
August 23, 2012 (77 FR 50936). For this proposed action to extend the
compliance date for NOX at RGGS by 18 months, we will
continue to consult with the Moapa Band as we proceed with this action.
EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed
action from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks,
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO
13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended
to mitigate health or safety risks. This proposed action addresses
regional haze and visibility protection.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is exempt under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub L. No. 104-113, 12 (10) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by the VCS bodies.
The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to
OMB, with explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable VCS.
This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this proposed rule, if finalized, will not
have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This proposed rule does not change any applicable emission
limit for the Reid Gardner Generating Station. This proposed rule
merely extends the compliance date for a single pollutant by 18 months.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen Dioxide.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: March 15, 2013.
Bob Perciasepe,
Acting Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 18285]]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In section Sec. 52.1488 revise paragraph (f)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1488 Visibility protection.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) Compliance date. The owners and operators subject to this
section shall comply with the emission limitations and other
requirements of this section by June 30, 2016, and thereafter.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-06756 Filed 3-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P