Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41731 

Insurance, Special Handling, or Pickup 

on Demand Service (*see 3.5.13d) 

[Placeholder for revised Exhibit 

3.5.13a] 

* * * * * 

Exhibit 3.5.13b Merchandise Return 

Label With Registered Mail Service 

[Placeholder for revised Exhibit 

3.5.13b] 

* * * * * 

Exhibit 3.5.13c Merchandise Return 

Label With Mailing Acknowledgment 

(*see 3.5.13d) 

[Placeholder for revised Exhibit 

3.5.13c] 

* * * * * 

Exhibit 3.5.13d Merchandise Return 

Label With USPS Tracking/Delivery 

Confirmation Service 

[Placeholder for revised Exhibit 

3.5.13d] 

* * * * * 

700 Special Standards 

* * * * * 

705 Advanced Preparation and 

Special Postage Payment Systems 

* * * * * 

7.0 Combining Package Services and 

Parcel Select Parcels for Destination 

Entry 

7.1 Combining Parcels—DSCF and 

DDU Entry 

7.1.1 Qualification 

[Delete the last three sentences of 

7.1.1 in their entirety.] 

* * * * * 

708 Technical Specifications 

* * * * * 

5.0 Standards for Package and Extra 

Service Barcodes 

5.1 Intelligent Mail Package Barcode 

* * * * * 

5.1.7 Electronic File 

* * * Electronic files must include 

the following elements: 

* * * * * 

[Revise 5.1.7d as follows:] 

d. Version 1.6 (or subsequent 

versions) of the electronic shipping 

services manifest files including each 

destination delivery address or ZIP + 4 

Code. Effective January 25, 2015, 

shipping services manifests, or other 

approved electronic documentation, 

must include the destination delivery 

address or delivery point validated 

(DPV) 11-digit ZIP Code for each record 

in the file. 

[Delete the current 5.1.7e in its 

entirety and add a new 7e as follows:] 

e. Electronic shipping manifest files, 

or approved alternative electronic 

documentation, must include data 

identifying the mailing agent and mail 

owner, as applicable. 

* * * * * 

5.2 Other Package Barcodes 

5.2.1 Basic Standards for Postal 

Routing Barcodes 

[Revise the first sentence of 5.2.1 as 

follows:] 

A separate postal routing barcode may 

be used on parcels to provide routing 

information, when used in conjunction 

with an IMpb. 

* * * * * 

We will publish an appropriate 

amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect 

these changes if our proposal is 

adopted. 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16524 Filed 7–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 49 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0489; FRL–9830–5] 

Source Specific Federal 

Implementation Plan for Implementing 

Best Available Retrofit Technology for 

Four Corners Power Plant; Navajo 

Nation; Extension of Notification 

Deadline 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On August 24, 2012, EPA took 

final action to promulgate a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) to implement 

the Best Available Retrofit Technology 

(BART) requirement of the Regional 

Haze Rule for the Four Corners Power 

Plant (FCPP), located on the Navajo 

Nation. EPA’s final action required the 

owners of FCPP to choose between two 

strategies for compliance: compliance 

with the emission limits in EPA’s final 

BART determination; or compliance 

with an alternative to BART, originally 

put forth by the owners of FCPP, that 

included closure of Units 1, 2, and 3 at 

FCPP and installation of new air 

pollution controls to meet BART limits 

on Units 4 and 5. EPA’s final action 

required the owners of FCPP to provide 

notification to EPA by July 1, 2013, of 

its selection of which BART compliance 

strategy it would implement at FCPP. 

On June 19, 2013, Arizona Public 

Service (APS), the operator and a coowner of FCPP, requested that EPA 

extend the notification date from July 1 

to December 31, 2013, due to new 

uncertainties that complicate its 

decision related to BART compliance. 

These uncertainties result from a recent 

decision by the Arizona Corporation 

Commission to explore retail 

competition of the electricity market in 

Arizona. Because the basis provided by 

APS for an extended notification date is 

reasonable and justified given the 

uncertainties in the electrical market in 

Arizona, EPA is proposing to extend the 

date by which APS must notify EPA of 

its BART compliance strategy, from July 

1, 2013 to December 31, 2013. EPA is 

not proposing to amend any other 

requirements in the FIP for FCPP. 

DATES: Comments must be postmarked 

no later than August 12, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0489, by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

(2) Email: r9_airplanning@epa.gov. 

(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. 

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 

(e.g., maps, voluminous reports, 

copyrighted material), and some may 

not be publicly available in either 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41732 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1See 40 CFR 49.5512(i)(4). 

2See Letter from Susan Kidd, Director 

Environmental Policies and Programs, Arizona 

Public Service, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 9, dated December 31, 

2012. 

3APS received approval from the ACC on April 

24, 2012; from FERC on November 27, 2012; and 

from the Department of Justice/Federal Trade 

Commission on July 2, 2012. As discussed in our 

final rulemaking dated August 24, 2012, EPA 

already understood that the CPUC approved the 

sale of SCE’s shares of Units 4 and 5 at FCPP to 

APS on March 22, 2012. 

4See letter from Ann Becker, Vice President, 

Environmental and Chief Sustainability Officer, 

Arizona Public Service, to Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, dated June 

19, 2013. 

5http://www.azcc.gov/Divisions/Administration/ 

About/Letters/5-23- 

13%20Retail%20Competition%2013-0135.pdf. 

6Form 8–K was appended to the June 19, 2013 

letter from Ann Becker to Jared Blumenfeld. 

location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard 

copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anita Lee, EPA Region 9, (415) 972– 

3958, r9_airplanning@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Today’s Action 

III. Administrative Requirements 

I. Background 

FCPP is a privately owned and 

operated coal-fired power plant located 

on the Navajo Nation Indian Reservation 

near Farmington, New Mexico. Based on 

lease agreements signed in 1960, FCPP 

was constructed and has been operating 

on real property held in trust by the 

Federal government for the Navajo 

Nation. The facility consists of five coalfired electric utility steam generating 

units with a total capacity of 2060 

megawatts (MW). Units 1, 2, and 3 at 

FCPP are owned entirely by Arizona 

Public Service (APS) which serves as 

the facility operator, and are rated to 

170 MW (Units 1 and 2) and 220 MW 

(Unit 3). Units 4 and 5 are each rated to 

a capacity of 750 MW, and are co-owned 

by six entities: Southern California 

Edison (48 percent), APS (15 percent), 

Public Service Company of New Mexico 

(13 percent), Salt River Project (10 

percent), El Paso Electric Company (7 

percent), and Tucson Electric Power (7 

percent). 

On August 24, 2012, EPA 

promulgated a final rule that established 

limits for oxides of nitrogen (NOX) 

emissions from FCPP under the BART 

provision of the Regional Haze Rule (77 

FR 51620). The final rule required the 

owners of FCPP to choose between two 

strategies for BART compliance: (1) 

compliance with a plant-wide BART 

emission limit of 0.11 pounds of NOX

per million British Thermal Units of 

heat input (lb/MMBtu) by October 23, 

2017, or (2) retirement of Units 1, 2, and 

3 by January 1, 2014 and compliance 

with a BART emission limit of 0.098 lb/ 

MMBtu on Units 4 and 5 by July 31, 

2018. The second BART compliance 

strategy, involving retirement of Units 1, 

2, and 3, was based on a plan originally 

put forth by APS. This compliance 

strategy was proposed and finalized as 

an alternative emission control strategy 

that achieved greater reasonable 

progress than BART. For additional 

information regarding EPA’s analyses 

regarding BART and the alternative 

emission control strategy, see EPA’s 

BART proposal (75 FR 64221, October 

29, 2010), supplemental proposal (76 FR 

10530, February 25, 2011) and final rule 

(77 FR 51620, August 24, 2012). 

As discussed in our supplemental 

proposal published on February 25, 

2011, the choice to retire Units 1, 2, and 

3, and comply with BART emission 

limits on Units 4 and 5 is contingent 

upon the resolution of several issues, 

including a renewed site lease with the 

Navajo Nation, a renewed coal contract, 

and regulatory approvals from the 

Arizona Corporation Commission 

(ACC), California Public Utilities 

Commission (CPUC), and Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 

The ACC, CPUC, and FERC regulatory 

approvals were necessary because APS 

would purchase the 48 percent interest 

of Units 4 and 5 currently owned by 

Southern California Edison (SCE). 

Because the regulatory approvals, 

renewed site lease, and renewed coal 

contract were expected to require 

significant time and effort by APS, other 

owners, and the Navajo Nation, EPA’s 

final rule included requirements for the 

owner or operator of FCPP to (1) update 

EPA by January 1, 2013, on the status 

of lease negotiations and regulatory 

approvals, and (2) notify EPA, by July 1, 

2013, of the BART strategy it elects to 

implement, including a plan and 

schedule for compliance with its chosen 

strategy.1

On December 31, 2012, APS provided 

an update to EPA regarding the status of 

the approvals required for implementing 

the alternative emission control 

strategy.2 APS stated that on March 7, 

2011, APS and the Navajo Nation 

executed an agreement to extend the 

lease for FCPP to July 6, 2041. The lease 

renewal must be reviewed and approved 

by the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

which triggers review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), and other related reviews, 

including under Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act. NEPA review 

is underway and expected to conclude 

in time to allow for a Record of Decision 

by January 2015. EPA is a cooperating 

agency in the NEPA process. In its 

December 31, 2012 update letter, APS 

also stated that it is in on-going 

negotiation for a new coal supply 

agreement with its coal supplier. 

Finally, APS confirmed that it had 

obtained regulatory approvals to 

purchase SCE’s 48 percent interest of 

Units 4 and 5.3

However, in a letter dated June 19, 

2013, APS requested that EPA extend 

the date by which APS must provide 

notification of its BART implementation 

strategy for FCPP.4 APS explained that 

it had previously expected to meet the 

July 1, 2013 notification date because it 

had completed the processes to obtain 

regulatory approvals to purchase SCE’s 

shares of Units 4 and 5, and renewal of 

the lease and coal contract were 

underway. Then, unexpectedly, in May 

2013, the ACC voted to re-examine 

deregulation of the retail electric market 

in Arizona.5 In its June 19, 2013 letter, 

APS explains that, depending on its 

structure and reach, a deregulated retail 

electric market could significantly 

change the BART compliance strategy 

for FCPP. Thus, APS is no longer able 

to make an informed decision by July 1, 

2013. APS states that its decision 

requires more certainty regarding the 

likelihood of deregulation in Arizona. 

APS also filed a Form 8–K with the 

United States Securities and Exchange 

Commission disclosing the uncertainty 

caused by the ACC decision to examine 

deregulation.6

APS has requested that EPA extend 

the notification date for its selection of 

the BART compliance strategy to 

December 31, 2013. APS noted that the 

potential for deregulation of the retail 

electric market in Arizona was not 

foreseen at the time of our final 

rulemaking in 2012. APS also noted that 

extending the notification date by six 

months will not affect public health or 

the environment because the BART 

compliance dates, in 2017 or 2018, 

depending on the compliance strategy 

selected, are not linked to the 

notification date and remain unchanged. 

II. EPA’s Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to extend the date 

by which the owner or operator of FCPP 

must notify EPA of its selected BART 

compliance strategy from July 1, 2013 to 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41733 

7See section 110(l) of the CAA. 

8The other pollutants are sulfur dioxide, carbon 

monoxide, lead, and PM10. 

9See CAA section 169A(b)(2)(A) and our final 

rulemaking dated August 24, 2012 (77 FR 51620) for 

additional information related to the TAR. In our 

FCPP rulemaking, EPA did not propose or finalize 

a finding that it was necessary or appropriate under 

the TAR to promulgate a FIP to implement a longterm strategy for making reasonable progress toward 

the national visibility goal under section 

169A(b)(2)(B) of the CAA. 

December 31, 2013. This action 

proposes to revise one provision in the 

existing source-specific federal 

implementation plan for FCPP, codified 

at 40 CFR 49.5512(i). 

A. Justification for Proposing to Extend 

Notification Date 

EPA’s final rule required the owner or 

operator of FCPP to notify EPA by July 

1, 2013, regarding whether it would 

elect to comply with BART or the 

alternative emission control strategy. 

Specifically, 40 CFR 49.5512(i)(4) 

requires the owner and operator of FCPP 

to provide EPA with updates and 

additional information regarding the 

status of various approvals and 

processes that must be resolved in order 

for the owner and operator to determine 

which BART strategy it will implement 

to comply with the FIP. The notification 

date is not a substantive requirement of 

our BART determination, nor is it a 

requirement related to the emission 

limit constituting BART or the 

timeframe for BART compliance, as 

defined in the CAA or the Regional 

Haze Rule. EPA notes that the FIP 

continues to require FCPP to meet the 

emission limits required under BART or 

the alternative emission control strategy 

by the compliance dates specified in our 

final rulemaking, codified at 40 CFR 

49.5512(i)(2) and (3), regardless of the 

extension of the notification date in 

(i)(4). 

EPA recognizes that the potential reexamination of a competitive retail 

electric market in Arizona represents 

new uncertainties for APS and the other 

owners of FCPP regarding decisions 

related to the closure of Units 1, 2, and 

3, and capital investments to install new 

air pollution controls to meet BART 

limits for Units 4 and 5. EPA 

understands that the ACC has opened a 

docket to accept comments on 

deregulation until August 16, 2013, and 

plans to convene an Open Meeting, after 

it has reviewed written comments, to 

discuss issues and information filed to 

the docket. EPA recognizes that 

uncertainty may still exist after the 

Open Meeting, depending on the 

direction the ACC takes regarding 

further examination of deregulation. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to find that 

a December 31, 2013 notification date is 

necessary to provide APS with the 

needed flexibility in determining 

whether to implement BART or the 

alternative emission control strategy to 

reduce FCPP’s NOX emissions by 80–87 

percent. 

B. Notification 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 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress . . . or any other applicable 

requirement of [the CAA].’’ 7

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.8 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].’’ 

FCPP is located on the Navajo Nation, 

in the northeastern corner of New 

Mexico. This area is not designated 

nonattainment with any NAAQS. 

Regardless of the decision to implement 

BART or the alternative emission 

control strategy, emissions of NOX from 

FCPP will be reduced as a result of 

EPA’s FIP implementing the BART 

provisions of the Regional Haze Rule. 

EPA’s proposed extension of the 

notification date does not affect the 

compliance dates associated with BART 

or the alternative emission control 

strategy. Therefore, a six-month 

extension of the notification date will 

not interfere with attainment or 

reasonable further progress for any air 

quality standard. 

C. Notification Date Extension Does Not 

Interfere With Any Other Applicable 

Requirement of the CAA 

The other requirement of the CAA 

that is applicable to FCPP is the BART 

provision under the visibility protection 

requirements for class I Federal areas 

under section 169A(b)(2)(A). In our final 

rulemaking in August 24, 2012, EPA 

promulgated a finding, under the Tribal 

Authority Rule (TAR), that it was 

necessary or appropriate to promulgate 

a source-specific FIP for FCPP to 

achieve emission reductions required by 

the BART provision of the CAA.9 As 

stated previously, the notification 

requirements included in our final FIP 

do not affect or change the compliance 

dates for BART or the alternative 

emission control strategy. Therefore, the 

six-month extension of the notification 

date that we are proposing will not 

interfere with the BART 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 

This action proposes to extend the 

date for a single source to notify EPA 

regarding its decision to implement 

BART or an alternative emission control 

strategy. This type of action for a single 

source 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 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41734 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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-forprofit 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 owners of 

FCPP are not a small entities. See MidTex Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC, 

773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985). 

Additionally, the extended notification 

date being proposed today was 

requested by the operator and co-owner 

of FCPP. 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 

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 

a six-month extension of a notification 

date in an existing federal 

implementation plan for FCPP. 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 a six-month extension of a 

notification 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 Four Corners Power Plant is 

located on reservation lands of the 

Navajo Nation. 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 BART 

regulations for the Four Corners Power 

Plant to permit them to have meaningful 

and timely input into its development. 

During the comment period for prior 

EPA actions related to the EPA’s BART 

FIP for FCPP, the Navajo Nation raised 

concerns to EPA about the potential 

economic impacts of our BART 

determination on the Navajo Nation. 

EPA consulted the Navajo Nation 

regarding these concerns. Additional 

details of our consultation with the 

Navajo Nation are provided in sections 

III.H and IV.F of our final rulemaking 

published on August 24, 2012 (77 FR 

51620). For this proposed action to 

extend the notification date by six 

months, we will consult with the Navajo 

Nation if requested as we proceed with 

this action. EPA notified the Navajo 

Nation Environmental Protection 

Agency regarding the request from APS 

to extend the notification date on June 

25, 2013. 

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), Public Law 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, 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41735 

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 FCPP. This proposed 

rule merely extends a notification date 

by six months. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 49 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Indians, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

Dioxide. 

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

Dated: June 25, 2013. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 9. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, Title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 49—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 49 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 49.5512, revise paragraph (i)(4) 

to read as follows: 

§ 49.5512 Federal Implementation Plan 

Provisions for Four Corners Power Plant, 

Navajo Nation. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(4) By January 1, 2013, the owner or 

operator shall submit a letter to the 

Regional Administrator updating EPA of 

the status of lease negotiations and 

regulatory approvals required to comply 

with paragraph (i)(3) of this section. By 

December 31, 2013, the owner or 

operator shall notify the Regional 

Administrator by letter whether it will 

comply with paragraph (i)(2) of this 

section or whether it will comply with 

paragraph (i)(3) of this section and shall 

submit a plan and time table for 

compliance with either paragraph (i)(2) 

or (3) of this section. The owner or 

operator shall amend and submit this 

amended plan to the Regional 

Administrator as changes occur. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–16078 Filed 7–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0698; FRL–9831–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the Indiana Portion of 

the Louisville Area to Attainment of the 

1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On June 16, 2011, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for EPA to approve the 

redesignation of the Indiana portion of 

the Louisville (KY–IN) (Madison 

Township, Jefferson County and Clark 

and Floyd Counties) nonattainment area 

to attainment of the 1997 annual 

standard for fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5). EPA is proposing to determine 

that the entire Louisville area has 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard, based on the most recent three 

years of certified air quality data. EPA 

is proposing to approve, as revisions to 

the Indiana state implementation plan 

(SIP), the state’s plan for maintaining 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or 

standard) through 2025 in the area. EPA 

is proposing to approve the 2008 

emissions inventory for the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville area as meeting 

the comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act). Indiana’s maintenance plan 

submission includes motor vehicle 

emission budgets (MVEBs) for the 

mobile source contribution of PM2.5 and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the Louisville 

area for transportation conformity 

purposes; EPA is proposing to approve 

the MVEBs for 2015 and 2025 into the 

Indiana SIP for transportation 

conformity purposes. In this proposal, 

EPA is also proposing to approve a 

supplement to the emission inventories 

previously submitted by the state. EPA 

is proposing that the inventories for 

ammonia and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), in conjunction with 

the inventories for NOX, direct PM2.5,

and sulfur dioxide (SO2) that EPA 

previously proposed to approve, meet 

the comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirement of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 12, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0698, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section (AR– 

18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Regional 

Office normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2011– 

0698. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received 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 information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. 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. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional instructions 

on submitting comments, go to section 

I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS