[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 134 (Thursday, July 13, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39574-39579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6125]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[Docket  R10-OAR-2005-ID-0001; FRL-8191-6 ]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plan; 
Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) is taking 
final action to approve the nonattainment and maintenance plan for 
particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 
ten micrometers (PM-10) for the Portneuf Valley, PM-10 nonattainment 
area in Idaho. EPA is also granting Idaho's request to redesignate the 
Portneuf Valley PM-10 nonattainment area to attainment for the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM-10.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket 
, R10-OAR-2005-ID-0001. All documents in the docket are listed 
on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 
index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g. 
confidential business information or other information whose disclosure 
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at EPA Region 10, Office of Air Waste and Toxics (AWT-
107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA. EPA requests that if possible you 
contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section, to schedule an appointment. Region 10 official business hours 
are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Body, Office of Air, Waste and 
Toxics (AWT-107), EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle WA, 98101; 
telephone number: (206) 553-0782; fax number: (206) 553-0110; e-mail 
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we'', 
``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Information is organized 
as follows:

I. Background Information
    A. What are we approving in this action?
    B. What comments did we receive on the proposal to approve the 
Plan and what are our responses?
    C. What action are we taking on redesignation?
II. Summary of Final Action To Approve the State Submittal and Grant 
the State's Redesignation Request
III. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

I. Background Information

A. What are we approving in this action?

    Under the authority of the Federal Clean Air Act (Clean Air Act or 
Act), EPA is taking final action to approve the State's moderate area 
nonattainment plan and the maintenance plan for the Portneuf Valley PM-
10 nonattainment area for the 24 hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS. We are 
also granting the State's request to redesignate the area from 
nonattainment to attainment for PM-10.
    On June 30, 2004, the Director of the Idaho Department of 
Environmental Quality (IDEQ) submitted plans to bring the Portneuf 
Valley PM-10 nonattainment area into attainment, and maintain 
attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 
PM-10 for an additional 10 years. The State also requested 
redesignation of the area to attainment for PM-10. The attainment plan, 
the maintenance plan, and the redesignation request are collectively 
referred to as the ``State Submittal.''
    On May 20, 2005, EPA proposed to approve the nonattainment area 
plan and the maintenance plan and to grant the redesignation request. 
See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 70 FR 29243. As explained in the 
proposal, the State Submittal satisfies the Clean Air Act nonattainment 
and maintenance planning requirements, as well as the redesignation 
requirements. See the proposed action for a full description of the 
State submission and our evaluation of the Clean Air Act requirements.

B. What comments did we receive on our proposal to approve the ``State 
Submittal''?

    We received one comment letter on our proposed action to approve 
the State Submittal. The commenter, J.R. Simplot Company, requested 
that the State Submittal be revised to correct and clarify technical 
data and information related to the J.R. Simplot fertilizer facility 
(the Don Plant) located near Pocatello, Idaho and the shutdown of the 
Astaris (FMC) facility, located immediately adjacent to the J.R. 
Simplot, Don plant. In general the commenter requests that EPA revise 
the State Submittal before approving it. As explained below, EPA has 
the authority to review and take appropriate action on a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted to it. Revisions, if any, to a SIP 
submitted to EPA are made by the State, rather than EPA. After revision 
the State may resubmit the SIP to EPA for approval. Each specific 
comment and our response is summarized below:
    Comment: The commenter requests that the emission inventory in the 
State Submittal be revised prior to EPA approval so that the plan 
accurately reflects the emission reductions that have occurred at the 
Don Plant and at the Astaris (formerly FMC) facility. J.R.

[[Page 39575]]

Simplot Company says that over the past two decades, emissions from 
their Don Plant have been reduced by 15,000 tons/year. The commenter 
indicates that reductions of both primary and precursor emissions since 
2001 from both the Don Plant and Astaris (FMC) facility are 6,880 tons/
year. This reduction is primarily from the shutdown of the Astaris 
(FMC) facility in 2001, which accounts for 6,465 tons/year.
    Response: The SIP air quality planning process is lengthy. It can 
take several years to develop the technical information and analysis 
needed to support a nonattainment or maintenance plan. Therefore, 
generally a State establishes a `base year', usually the calendar year 
prior to initiation of the planning effort, as the starting point. This 
allows for the collection, verification, and use of complete annual 
data and information in the plan. The plan then contains consistent and 
comparable data, information, analyses, and measures as a basis for 
developing control measures and emission reductions needed to 
demonstrate attainment in the future attainment and maintenance years. 
Constantly changing conditions (meteorology, voluntary emission 
reductions, economic conditions, etc.) that occur after the base-year 
are not considered in the base year. The demonstration that the plan is 
adequate for attaining and maintaining the standard takes into 
consideration changes in allowable emissions that occur after the base 
year, including new enforceable and permanent emission limitations and 
facility shut-downs. The demonstration of attainment and maintenance in 
future years is based on allowable emissions.
    The base year is 2000 for the State Submittal for the Portneuf 
Valley nonattainment area. The 2000 base year technical analysis in the 
State Submittal is based on air quality data, actual emissions from all 
sources, and meteorology collected in 2000. As explained in the 
proposal, the attainment emissions inventory for 2000 describes the 
level of emissions in the nonattainment area sufficient to attain the 
NAAQS.
    Projected emissions in the State Submittal for the future years of 
2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020, were based on allowable emissions. 
Allowable emissions were developed from enforceable emission limits in 
permits for the industrial sources, included the reduction in emissions 
associated with the Astaris shutdown, and estimated reasonable worst 
case emissions from area sources such as residential wood combustion 
and road dust. If a source installed controls and achieved emission 
reductions on a voluntary basis after the 2000 base year, these 
reductions were not considered in the State Submittal because future 
year air quality maintenance demonstrations must be based on permanent 
and enforceable emission limitations, not voluntary reductions.
    The State developed the 2000 base year and future year emission 
estimates to demonstrate attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, using 
EPA issued guidance and procedures. Future year emissions in the State 
Submittal for industrial sources were based on the permanent and 
enforceable emission limitations contained in permits and reflect the 
shutdown of the Astaris facility. The future year emissions in the 
State Submittal, for sources identified by J.R. Simplot in Table 1 of 
their comment letter, are based on allowable emissions and the shutdown 
of the Astaris facility, rather than emission reductions as presented 
in Table 1 of the comment letter. The allowable emissions are 
accurately accounted for in the State's future year allowable emission 
inventories.
    The 2000 base year and future year emission inventories are 
comprehensive and accurate. The State has adequately demonstrated that 
the Portneuf Valley area has attained and will continue to maintain the 
PM-10 NAAQS at the projected emission levels. Even if actual emissions 
and concentrations are lower, as the commenter contends, it would not 
affect our finding that the area attains and the plan is adequate to 
maintain the standard.
    Comment: The demonstration analysis provided in the Plan is 
conservative, meaning that projected air quality levels in future years 
may be over estimated and that actual measurements will be lower than 
predicted. The commenter believes that the speciated roll-back model 
overestimates the concentrations of PM-10 for future ambient air 
quality. The commenter believes that the Portneuf Valley area airshed 
could accommodate emissions greater than those relied on in the 
inventory of allowable emissions and still meet the PM-10 NAAQS. The 
commenter requests that the State Submittal be adjusted to allow for 
additional emissions.
    Response: The Clean Air Act provides EPA with authority to review 
and take appropriate action on SIPs that a State submits to it. 
Therefore, if revisions to a SIP submission are necessary, such 
revisions would be made by the State, rather than by EPA, and then the 
revised plan resubmitted to EPA for approval.
    As explained in the proposal and the TSD accompanying the proposed 
action, EPA determined that, based on air quality data for the area 
since the attainment date, control measures, speciated linear rollback 
modeling as well as dispersion modeling, trend analysis, chemical mass 
balance source apportionment and emission data the State adequately 
demonstrated that the area has attained and will maintain the PM-10 
NAAQS in the future. See 70 FR 29248-49. Even if a commenter can 
demonstrate that the analysis for the Portneuf Valley area is 
conservative, is based on overestimated future year emissions, and 
could be revised to allow for additional emissions in the airshed, the 
analysis provided by the State still demonstrates attainment and 
maintenance of the NAAQS. Therefore, regardless of whether or not the 
emissions and concentrations are over-predicted in the State's 
analysis, the area still demonstrates attainment and maintenance of the 
standard. Concerns about the level of allowable emissions should be 
addressed to the State.
    Comment: The commenter requests that EPA, prior to approval of the 
plan, correct the emission inventory to accurately reflect 
NOX emissions and eligible emission reduction credits.
    Response: As explained above, the State would need to make the 
requested revisions and resubmit the plan according to administrative 
procedures. We have reviewed the inventory of emissions of oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX) for base year 2000 and the future years. The 
results of that review are explained in the TSD and proposal associated 
with this action. We believe the base year inventory is comprehensive, 
current (at the time of development), and accurate as required by the 
Act. Future year emission estimates are based on enforceable emission 
limitations for industrial sources as provided in the permits included 
in the State Submittal. In this instance, the emission inventory 
considers, among other things, the emissions associated with the limits 
in the J.R. Simplot Don Plant permit, but does not consider the 
voluntary emission reductions achieved by the facility. Thus the State 
Submittal correctly uses enforceable emission limits for future year 
emissions for industrial sources.
    For clarification, should in the future, Idaho create emission 
credits, these emission credits would need to be included in the future 
year allowable emissions. Emission credits could be created, for 
example, if Idaho lowered an enforceable emission limitation, thus 
creating emissions credits based on the difference between the old and 
new

[[Page 39576]]

emission limits. But, these emission credits are allowable emissions 
that could be emitted at some future date. Therefore, they would need 
to be identified and included in future year allowable emission 
inventories and taken into account in any attainment or maintenance 
demonstrations.
    The proposed future year NOX emission inventories are 
correct.
    Comment: EPA did not provide in the proposal the specific language 
to be added in the regulations (40 CFR part 52) for the Portneuf Valley 
Plan. The commenter requests that the public and regulated community 
have the opportunity to review and comment on the specific language to 
be added to the Code of Federal Regulations before EPA approval of the 
SIP/Portneuf Air Plan.
    Response: EPA believes that it is not necessary to include this 
language in the proposal. Idaho submitted the J.R. Simplot Don Plant 
operating permit as part of the State Submittal. EPA evaluated the 
emission limits, for each emission unit emitting PM-10 or precursors, 
as meeting RACT. (See the TSD accompanying the proposal.) The permit 
and the TSD are available for public review as part of the Docket for 
the proposal. These documents identify which emission units and 
emission limits are RACT and become part of the Federally enforceable 
SIP. Final approval of the State Submittal means that the permit for 
the J.R. Simplot Don Plant, included in the State Submittal, is 
Federally enforceable. EPA may, as appropriate, incorporate by 
reference enforceable emission limitations in the SIP. Regardless of 
whether the exact incorporation language is included in the Federal 
Register notice, the applicable permit provisions become incorporated 
into the Idaho SIP and are Federally enforceable. Providing the exact 
incorporation by reference language in the proposal is unnecessary.
    We are incorporating by reference only those provisions in the 
operating permits that Idaho determined represent RACT as presented in 
Table 6-3 of the State Submittal. Those provisions are emission unit 
and pollutant specific and include any measurement techniques specified 
for determining compliance.
    Conclusion based on comments received and EPA response:
    After review of all comments provided during the public comment 
period, EPA has determined that the State's attainment and maintenance 
plan meets all the nonattainment and maintenance planning obligations 
provided in the Clean Air Act.

C. What action are we taking on redesignation?

    EPA is approving the Portneuf Valley, Idaho PM-10 attainment and 
maintenance plan as submitted to EPA on June 30, 2004.
    After review of all comments provided during the public comment 
period, EPA has evaluated the State's redesignation request and 
determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act. See Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, 70 FR 29250-52. Approval of the redesignation request 
changes the official designation of the Portneuf Valley, Idaho area 
from nonattainment to attainment for the PM-10 standard.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under State law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045A, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks 
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 11, 2006. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be

[[Page 39577]]

challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See 
section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National Parks and 
Wilderness areas.

    Due to the Regional Administrator's recusal in matters involving 
the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, this decision has been 
delegated to the Deputy Regional Administrator.

    Dated: June 28, 2006.
Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 10.

0
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as 
follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart N--Idaho

0
2. Section 52.670 is amended as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (c) by adding the following entries to the end of the 
table.
0
b. In paragraph (d) by adding the following entries to the end of the 
table.


Sec.  52.670  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

    Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) Chapter 58, Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho,
                             Previously Codified at IDAPA Chapter 39 (Appendix A.3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            58.01.01--Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           City and County Ordinances
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Pocatello Ordinance 2450.  Residential wood           01/12/94  07/13/06 [Insert     (Portneuf Valley
                                    combustion                           page number where    Nonattainment Area
                                    curtailment                          the document         Plan and
                                    ordinance.                           begins].             Maintenance Plan).
City of Pocatello Ordinance 2726.  Revised air quality        09/18/03  07/13/06 [Insert     (Portneuf Valley
                                    curtailment levels.                  page number where    Nonattainment Area
                                                                         the document         Plan and
                                                                         begins].             Maintenance Plan).
City of Chubbuck Ordinance 403...  Residential wood           11/23/93  07/13/2006 [Insert   (Portneuf Valley
                                    combustion                           page number where    Nonattainment Area
                                    curtailment                          the document         Plan and
                                    ordinance.                           begins].             Maintenance Plan).
City of Chubbuck Ordinance 582...  Revised air quality         12/9/03  07/13/06 [Insert     (Portneuf Valley
                                    curtailment levels.                  page number where    Nonattainment Area
                                                                         the document         Plan and
                                                                         begins].             Maintenance Plan).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                               EPA-Approved Idaho Source-Specific Requirements \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          Name of source              Permit number     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
J.R. Simplot, Pocatello, Idaho...  Air Pollution             04/5/2004  07/13/2006 [Insert   The following
                                    Operating Permit                     page number where    conditions:
                                    No. T1-9507-114-1;                   the document        Cover page,
                                    Facility Number                      begins].             facility
                                    No. 077-00006.                                            identification
                                                                                              information only,
                                                                                             300
                                                                                              Sulfuric Acid
                                                                                              Plant, Permit
                                                                                              Conditions 16.1,
                                                                                              16.10, 16.11,
                                                        ..............                       400
                                                                                              Sulfuric Acid
                                                                                              Plant, Permit
                                                                                              Condition 17.1,
                                                                                              17.7, 17.10,
                                                                                              17.11,
                                                        ..............                       Phosphoric acid
                                                                                              plant, Permit
                                                                                              Condition 12.3,
                                                                                              12.13,
                                                        ..............                       Granulation No. 3
                                                                                              Process, Permit
                                                                                              Condition 9.2.1,
                                                                                              Granulation No. 3
                                                                                              stack, 9.17
                                                                                              (except 9.17.1
                                                                                              through 9.17.6),

[[Page 39578]]

 
                                                        ..............                       Reclaim Cooling
                                                                                              Towers, Permit
                                                                                              Condition 14.2,
                                                                                              14.6.1,
                                                        ..............                       Babcock&Wilcox
                                                                                              Boiler, Permit
                                                                                              Condition 6.4,
                                                                                              6.12,
                                                        ..............                       HPB&W Boiler,
                                                                                              Permit Condition
                                                                                              5.3, 5.13 through
                                                                                              5.18, 5.21.
J.R. Simplot, Pocatello, Idaho...  Compliance               04/16/2004  07/13/2006 [Insert   The following
                                    Agreement &                          page number where    conditions:
                                    Voluntary Order                      the document        No. 300 Sulfuric
                                    Idaho Code 39-116A.                  begins].             Acid Plant;
                                                                                              Condition 8 and 9.
                                                                                             No. 400 Sulfuric
                                                                                              Acid Plant;
                                                                                              Condition 10, 11,
                                                                                              and 12.
                                                                                             Granulation No.1
                                                                                              Plant; Condition
                                                                                              14.
                                                                                             Granulation No.2
                                                                                              Plant; Condition
                                                                                              15.
                                                                                             Compliance and
                                                                                              Performance
                                                                                              Testing; Condition
                                                                                              16.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA does not have the authority to remove these source-specific requirements in the absence of a
  demonstration that their removal would not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, violate any
  prevention of significant deterioration increment or result in visibility impairment. Idaho Department of
  Environmental Quality may request removal by submitting such a demonstration to EPA as a SIP revision.

* * * * *

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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


0
4. In Sec.  81.313, the table entitled ``Idaho--PM10'' is amended by 
revising the entry for ``Eastern Idaho IntraState AQCR 61: Power-
Bannock Counties, part of (Pocatello). State Lands-Portneuf Valley 
Area'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.313  Idaho.

* * * * *

                                                                      Idaho--PM-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Designation                                          Classification
              Designated area               ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Date                       Type                        Date                       Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Idaho IntraState AQCR 61:               08/14/06  Attainment.
    Power-Bannock Counties, part of:
     (Pocatello)
State Lands-Portneuf Valley Area:
    T.5S, R.34E Sections 25-36
    T.5S, R.35E Section 31
    T.6S, R.34E Sections 1-36
    T.6S, R.35E Sections 5-9, 16-21, 28-33,
     plus the west \1/2\ of sections 10,
     15, 22, 27, 34
    T.7S, R.34E Sections 1-4, 10-14, and 24
    T.7S, R.35E Sections 4-9, 16-21, 28-33,
     plus the west \1/2\ of sections 3, 10,
     15, 22, 27, 34
    T.8S, R.35E Section 4 plus the west \1/
     2\ of section 3
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 39579]]

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 06-6125 Filed 7-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P