The EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, signed the following proposed rule on 6/25/13, and EPA is submitting it for publication in

the Federal Register (FR). While we have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this Internet version of the rule, it is not the official version of

the rule for purposes of public comment. Please refer to the official version in a forthcoming FR publication, which will appear on the

Government Printing Office's FDsys website (http://fdsys.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action) and on Regulations.gov

(http://www.regulations.gov) in Docket No. EPA‐R09‐OAR‐2013‐0489. Once the official version of this document is published in the FR, this

version will be removed from the Internet and replaced with a link to the official version.

6560-50-P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 49 

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0489; FRL-] 

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: (1) 

compliance with the emission limits in EPA’s final BART 

determination, or (2) 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, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 2 of 22 

2013, Arizona Public Service (APS), the operator and a co-owner 

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 on the proposed extension of the BART strategy 

notification date must be postmarked no later than [insert date 

30 days from publication in the Federal Register]. 

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) E-mail: r9_airplanning@epa.gov. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 3 of 22 

(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 e-mail. 

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 e-mail 

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. 

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 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 4 of 22 

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 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 coal-fired electric 

utility steam generating units with a total capacity of 2060 

megawatts (MW). Units 1, 2, and 3 at FCPP are owned entirely by 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 5 of 22 

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 1, 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, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 6 of 22 

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, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 7 of 22 

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

 

                                                           

1

 See 40 CFR 49.5512(i)(4). 

2

 See Letter from Susan Kidd, Director Environmental Policies and 

Programs, Arizona Public Service, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 9, dated December 31, 2012.

3

 APS 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 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 8 of 22 

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 

                                                                                                                                                                                               

that the CPUC approved the sale of SCE’s shares of Units 4 and 5 

at FCPP to APS on March 22, 2012. 

4

 See 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. 

5

 http://www.azcc.gov/Divisions/Administration/About/Letters/5-

23-13%20Retail%20Competition%2013-0135.pdf 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 9 of 22 

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 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. 

                                                           

6

 Form 8-K was appended to the June 19, 2013 letter from Ann 

Becker to Jared Blumenfeld.
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 10 of 22 

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 re-examination 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 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 11 of 22 

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

                                                           

7

 See section 110(l) of the CAA.

8

 The other pollutants are sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, lead, 

and PM10. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 12 of 22 

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 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 13 of 22 

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 sourcespecific 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) 

                                                           

9

 See 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 long-term strategy 

for making reasonable progress toward the national visibility 

goal under section 169A(b)(2)(B) of the CAA.
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 14 of 22 

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, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 15 of 22 

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 Mid-Tex 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 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 16 of 22 

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 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 17 of 22 

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. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 18 of 22 

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-
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 19 of 22 

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 document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 20 of 22 

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 FCPP. This proposed 

rule merely extends a notification date by six months. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 49 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 21 of 22 

 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Indians, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen Dioxide. 

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

June 25, 2013 /s/ 

Dated: 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. Part 49 is amended by revising §49.5512 Federal 

Implementation Plan Provisions for Four Corners Power Plant, 

Navajo Nation, subparagraph (i)(4), to read as follows: 

§ 49.5512 Federal Implementation Plan Provisions for Four 

Corners Power Plant, Navajo Nation. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by the EPA Acting Regional Administrator, Alexis Strauss, on

06/25/2013. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official version.

Page 22 of 22 

(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 (i)(3) of this 

section. The owner or operator shall amend and submit this 

amended plan to the Regional Administrator as changes occur.