76328 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01, 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD which guides the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment because it 

simply promulgates the operating 

regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

2. Revise § 117.661 to read as follow: 

§ 117.661 Duluth Ship Canal (DuluthSuperior Harbor). 

The draw of the Duluth Ship Canal 

Aerial bridge, mile 0.25 at Duluth, shall 

open on signal; except that, from the 

Friday before Memorial Day through the 

Tuesday after Labor Day each year, 

between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 p.m., 

seven days a week, the drawbridge shall 

open on the hour and half-hour for 

vessels under 300 gross tons, if needed; 

and the bridge will open on signal for 

all vessels from 9 p.m. to 7 a.m., seven 

days a week, and at all times for 

Federal, State, and local government 

vessels, vessels in distress, commercial 

vessels engaged in rescue or emergency 

salvage operations, commercial-assist 

towing vessels engaged in towing or 

port operations, vessels engaged in pilot 

duties, vessels seeking shelter from 

severe weather, and all vessels 300 gross 

tons or greater. From January 1 through 

March 15, the draw shall open on signal 

if at least 12 hours notice is given. The 

opening signal is one prolonged blast, 

one short blast, one prolonged blast, one 

short blast. If the drawbridge is 

disabled, the bridge authorities shall 

give incoming and outgoing vessels 

timely and dependable notice, by tug 

service if necessary, so that the vessels 

do not attempt to enter the canal. 

Dated: November 23, 2010. 

M.N. Parks, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, 

Ninth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30739 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–1134] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Vessels Carrying 

Hazardous Cargo, Sector Columbia 

River Captain of the Port Zone 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes the 

establishment of a 500 yard security 

zone around vessels carrying hazardous 

cargo, as determined by the Captain of 

the Port (COTP) Columbia River, when 

such vessels are located in the Sector 

Columbia River COTP Zone as defined 

in 33 CFR 3.65–15 and the COTP 

Columbia River determines that a 

security zone is necessary and 

enforcement of that security zone is 

practicable. The security zones will help 

ensure the security of the vessels 

themselves as well as the maritime 

public due to the hazardous nature of 

the cargo on board. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before March 8, 2011. Requests for 

public meetings must be received by the 

Coast Guard on or before January 24, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2009–1134 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail MST1 Jaime Sayers, 

Waterways Management Division, Coast 

Guard Sector Columbia River; telephone 

503–240–9319, e-mail 

Jaime.A.Sayers@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2009–1134), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online(via http:// 

www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or 

mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a phone number in the body 

of your document so that we can contact 

you if we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu 

select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert 

‘‘USCG–2009–1134’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the 

balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. 

If you submit your comments by mail or 

hand delivery, submit them in an 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 76329 

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 

11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit 

comments by mail and would like to 

know that they reached the Facility, 

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period and we may 

change the rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2009– 

1134’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. You may also visit the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation to use 

the Docket Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act, system of records notice regarding 

our public dockets in the January 17, 

2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 

FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one on or before January 24, 2011 

using one of the four methods specified 

under ADDRESSES. Please explain why 

you believe a public meeting would be 

beneficial. If we determine that one 

would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 

one at a time and place announced by 

a later notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

Vessels carrying hazardous cargo 

occasionally operate in the Sector 

Columbia River COTP Zone. Examples 

of hazardous cargoes include, but are 

not limited to, liquefied petroleum gas, 

ammonium nitrate and associated 

mixtures, anhydrous ammonia, and 

chlorine. The security zones that would 

be created by this rule will help ensure 

the security of the vessels themselves as 

well as the maritime public in general 

by prohibiting all persons or vessels 

from coming within 500 yards of such 

vessels while located in Sector 

Columbia River COTP Zone. In the past, 

the COTP Columbia River has issued 

temporary security zones to cover 

certain vessels carrying hazardous 

cargo. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes the 

establishment of a 500 yard security 

zone around any vessel carrying 

hazardous cargo, as determined by the 

COTP Columbia River, when such a 

vessel is located in the Sector Columbia 

River COTP Zone as defined in 33 CFR 

3.65–15 and the COTP Columbia River 

determines that a security zone is 

necessary and enforcement of that 

security zone is practicable. 

All persons and vessels would be 

prohibited from entering or remaining 

in the security zone unless authorized 

by the COTP Columbia River. The 

maritime public will be notified when a 

security zone is effective via the 

presence of one or more Coast Guard 

vessels to enforce the zone and a local 

broadcast notice to mariners. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. The Coast Guard has made this 

determination based on the fact that the 

security zones created by this rule will 

only be in effect during the limited 

periods of time when vessels carrying 

hazardous cargo, as determined by the 

COTP Columbia River, are located in the 

Sector Columbia River COTP Zone. In 

addition, maritime traffic will be able to 

transit around the security zones or, if 

necessary, may be allowed to transit 

through the security zones with 

permission from the COTP Columbia 

River. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This proposed rule may affect the 

following entities, some of which may 

be small entities: The owners or 

operators of vessels intending to operate 

in an area covered by a security zone 

created by this rule. The security zones 

created by this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

however, because they will only be in 

effect during the limited periods of time 

when vessels carrying hazardous cargo, 

as determined by the COTP Columbia 

River, are located in the Sector 

Columbia River COTP Zone. In 

addition, maritime traffic will be able to 

transit around the security zones or, if 

necessary, may be allowed to transit 

through the security zones with 

permission from the COTP Columbia 

River. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the proposed rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance, please contact 

MST1 Jaime Sayers, Waterways 

Management Division, Coast Guard 

Sector Columbia River at telephone 

503–240–9319. The Coast Guard will 

not retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this 

proposed rule or any policy or action of 

the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
76330 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or Tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

Tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian Tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes. 

We invite your comments on how this 

proposed rule might impact Tribal 

governments, even if that impact may 

not constitute a ‘‘Tribal implication’’ 

under the Order. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.1D, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. This proposed rule 

involves the establishment of a security 

zone. Therefore, this rule would be 

categorically excluded under Figure 2– 

1, paragraph (34) (g) of Commandant 

Instruction M16475.1D, which 

addresses regulations establishing, 

disestablishing, or changing regulated 

navigable areas and security or safety 

zones. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Add § 165.1335 to read as follows: 

§ 165.1335 Security Zone; Vessels 

Carrying Hazardous Cargo, Sector 

Columbia River Captain of the Port Zone. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

security zone: All waters within 500 

yards, in all directions, of any vessel 

carrying hazardous cargo, as determined 

by the Captain of the Port (COTP) 

Columbia River, while such a vessel is 

located in the Sector Columbia River 

COTP Zone as defined in 33 CFR 3.65– 

15 and the COTP Columbia River 

determines that a security zone is 

necessary and enforcement of the 

security zone is practicable. 

(b) Regulations. (1) In accordance 

with the general regulations in 33 CFR 

part 165, subpart D, no person or vessel 

may enter or remain in a security zone 

created by this section without the 

permission of the COTP Columbia River 

or his/her designated representative. 

Designated representatives are Coast 

Guard personnel authorized by the 

COTP Columbia River to grant persons 

or vessels permission to enter or remain 

in a security zone created by this 

section. Subpart D of 33 CFR part 165 

contains additional provisions 

applicable to a security zone created by 

this section. 

(2) To request permission to enter a 

security zone created by this section, 

contact Coast Guard Sector Columbia 

River at telephone number 503–861– 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 76331 

6212 or via VHF channel 16 (156.8 

MHz) or VHF channel 22 (157.1 MHz). 

(c) Notification. When a security zone 

is created by this section, one or more 

Coast Guard vessels will be present to 

enforce the security zone and the COTP 

Columbia River will issue a local 

broadcast notice to mariners. 

Dated: November 5, 2010. 

D.E. Kaup, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Sector Columbia River. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30738 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 49 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0683; FRL–9235–3] 

Extension of Public Comment Period 

and Postponement of Public Hearings 

for Source Specific Federal 

Implementation Plan for Implementing 

Best Available Retrofit Technology for 

Four Corners Power Plant: Navajo 

Nation 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of extended public 

comment period and postponed public 

hearings. 

SUMMARY: On October 19, 2010, EPA 

published in the Federal Register our 

proposed determination of the Best 

Available Retrofit Technology (BART) 

for the Four Corners Power Plant and 

requested comment by December 20, 

2010. EPA is extending the public 

comment period until March 18, 2011, 

for our proposed BART determination. 

EPA is also postponing the open houses 

and public hearings announced in the 

Federal Register on November 12, 2010 

and will provide additional notice and 

details of the rescheduled hearings at a 

later time. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted no 

later than March 18, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2010–0683, by one of the 

following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

E-mail: r9air_fcppbart@epa.gov. 

Mail or deliver: Anita Lee (Air-3), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX, 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 http://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 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://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 email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions please contact Anita 

Lee, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3958, 

r9air_fcppbart@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

October 19, 2010, the Region 9 Office of 

the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a 

Source Specific Federal Implementation 

Plan to implement the Best Available 

Retrofit Technology for Four Corners 

Power Plant, located on the Navajo 

Nation (75 FR 64221). The Clean Air 

Act’s Regional Haze Rule requires the 

use of Best Available Retrofit 

Technology (BART) at older coal-fired 

power plants to reduce haze and 

improve visibility. 

On November 12, 2010, EPA 

published in the Federal Register (75 

FR 69373) a notice of three sets of open 

houses and public hearings to be held 

at three locations in the Four Corners 

Area on December 6–9, 2010. EPA is 

postponing the open houses and public 

hearings and will provide additional 

notice and details of the rescheduled 

hearings at a later time. 

EPA published notices of open houses 

and public hearings, to be held 

December 7–9, 2010 in Shiprock, NM, 

Farmington, NM, and Durango, CO, in 

the Farmington Daily Times and the 

Durango Herald on November 3, 2010 

and the Navajo Times on November 4, 

2010. Notice of these hearings was 

additionally published in the Federal 

Register on November 12, 2010 (75 FR 

69373). On Thursday, November 11, 

2010, EPA published notice in the 

Navajo Times of an additional open 

house and public hearing to be held at 

the Nenahnezad Chapter House in 

Fruitland, NM. The public comment 

period for the proposal was scheduled 

to close on December 20, 2010. 

EPA proposed requiring the Four 

Corners Power Plant to meet a plantwide limit of 0.11 lb/MMBtu, 

representing an 80% reduction in 

emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) to 

achieve cleaner, healthier air while 

improving the visibility at sixteen of our 

most pristine national parks and 

wilderness areas. EPA’s proposal can be 

achieved by installing and operating 

selective catalytic reduction (SCR) on all 

five units. EPA is also proposing a 

particulate matter (PM) emission limit 

of 0.012 lb/MMBtu for the three smaller 

units that will require additional 

controls for fine particles, and is also 

requesting comment on whether BART 

can be met on the three smaller units by 

requiring an emission limit of 0.03 lb/ 

MMBtu with a 20% opacity limit. 

Reduction of fine particles may help 

reduce the visible secondary plume that 

is often emanating from these three 

units. For the two larger units at Four 

Corners Power Plant, EPA is proposing 

an emission limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu, 

achievable with proper operation of the 

existing baghouses. 

On November 9, 2010, EPA met with 

representatives from Arizona Public 

Service (APS), co-owner and operator of 

FCPP. APS discussed an alternative 

proposal that calls for shutting down 

Units 1–3 at FCPP by 2014 and 

installing SCR on Units 4 and 5 by 2018. 

APS claims this plan will result in 

larger emissions reductions than EPA’s 

proposal without layoffs at the facility. 

A record of this meeting has been 

posted to the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. APS plans to submit their 

alternative proposal and supporting 

analysis to EPA shortly. EPA will make 

this submittal from APS available from 

our docket when it is received. The link 

to the docket can be reached at the 

following Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ 

region9/air/navajo/ 

index.html#proposed or from http:// 

www.regulations.gov, identified by EPA 

Docket Number: EPA–R09–OAR–2010– 

0683. 

EPA is extending the public comment 

period for our proposal to March 18, 

2011 and postponing the scheduled 

open houses and public hearings to 

allow EPA and the public time to assess 

the alternative proposal submitted by 

APS. EPA may supplement our proposal 

with additional information following 

our analysis of APS’ submission. If EPA 

supplements our original proposal, we 

will publish the supplement in the 

Federal Register and provide 

supporting documentation in our 

docket. The dates for the rescheduled 

open houses and public hearings have 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS