[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18280-18285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06756]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0148; FRL-9793-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Nevada; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan; Reconsideration of 
BART Compliance Date for Reid Gardner Generating Station

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; Notice of Reconsideration of Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is granting reconsideration of the compliance date for the 
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) emission limits for oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX) at the Reid Gardner Generating Station (RGGS) 
promulgated in a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) on August 23, 2012. 
EPA is also proposing to extend the compliance date for the 
NOX emission limits applicable to Units 1, 2, and 3 at RGGS 
by 18 months from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. We seek comment 
only on the aspects of the FIP specifically identified in this notice. 
We are not opening for reconsideration any other provisions of our FIP 
for RGGS or our partial approval of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP.

DATES: Comments must be submitted no later than May 28, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2013-0148, by one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    (2) Email: [email protected].
    (3) Mail or Deliver: Anita Lee (Air-2), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, 
including any personal information provided, unless the comment 
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you 
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as 
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. 
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not 
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the 
body of your comment. If you send an email directly to EPA, your email 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be 
able to consider your comment.
    Hearings: EPA intends to hold one or more public hearings to accept 
oral and written comments on the proposed rulemaking. EPA will provide 
notice and additional details related to the hearings in the Federal 
Register, on our Web site, and in the docket.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available 
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 9, 
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While documents in the 
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly 
available only at EPA Region 9

[[Page 18281]]

(e.g., maps, voluminous reports, copyrighted material), and some may 
not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect 
the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal 
business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Lee, EPA Region 9, (415) 972-
3958, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we'', ``us'', 
and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Summary of Relevant EPA Actions
    B. Petition for Reconsideration
    C. Supplemental Information
II. EPA's Proposed Action
    A. Justification for Proposing to Extend Compliance Date
    B. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere with Attainment 
or Reasonable Further Progress
    C. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere with Any Other 
Applicable Requirement of the CAA
III. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 
13563
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. Background

A. Summary of Relevant EPA Actions

    On December 13, 2011, EPA signed a final rule approving all aspects 
of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP except for the state's BART 
determination for reducing NOX emissions at RGGS.\1\ Due to 
delays associated with publication of this final rule in the Federal 
Register, the rule was not published until March 26, 2012.\2\ However, 
an unofficial copy of the final rule was provided to all interested 
parties soon after signature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Regional Haze Rule (RHR), BART, and the Nevada Regional 
Haze SIP are described elsewhere in greater detail. See, for 
example, EPA's proposed approval of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP on 
June 22, 2011 (76 FR 36450).
    \2\ 77 FR 17334.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 22, 2012, the state of Nevada indicated by letter that it 
intended to submit a SIP revision to EPA in September 2012, including 
provisions to reduce the emission limit for Unit 3 at RGGS from 0.28 
pounds of NOX per million British thermal units (lb/MMBtu) 
to 0.20 lb/MMBtu and to require installation of controls on or before 
June 30, 2016.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See letter dated March 22, 2012 from Michael Elges, Deputy 
Administrator of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to 
Deborah Jordan, Director of the Air Division at EPA Region 9, re: 
Proposed Amendment to Nevada's 2009 Regional Haze State 
Implementation Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 12, 2012, EPA proposed to partially approve and partially 
disapprove the remaining portion of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP, i.e., 
Nevada's BART determination for reducing NOX emissions at 
RGGS.\4\ EPA proposed approval of the NOX emission limit of 
0.20 lb/MMBtu for Units 1 and 2. Because the state's intended SIP 
revision to reduce the emission limit for Unit 3 had not yet been 
submitted to EPA, we proposed, among other things, disapproval of the 
NOX emission limit of 0.28 lb/MMBtu for Unit 3. EPA 
concurrently proposed a FIP, generally consistent with the state's 
intentions, including an emission limit for Unit 3 of 0.20 lb/MMBtu. 
EPA's proposed FIP included a provision requiring compliance with the 
BART emission limits within five years from promulgation of the final 
rule. EPA held two public hearings on May 3, 2012 to take comment on 
our proposed FIP. The comment period closed on June 4, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 77 FR 21896.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 23, 2012, EPA promulgated our final rule to approve in 
part, disapprove in part, and implement a FIP for the disapproved 
portions of the Nevada BART determination for RGGS.\5\ The preamble to 
the final rule discusses in more detail our final action and the 
comments we received during the comment period for our proposal. Based 
on comments from EarthJustice, representing a consortium of eight non-
governmental organizations, that a 5-year compliance timeframe to meet 
the NOX emission limit of 0.20 lb/MMBtu was excessive,\6\ 
EPA reevaluated the compliance date for our final rulemaking. 
Notwithstanding an inaccurate statement in section I of the preamble to 
our final rule,\7\ EPA noted in section II.K of the preamble that our 
March 26, 2012 approval of the portions of the Nevada Regional Haze SIP 
included the portion of the Nevada Administrative Code (NAC 
445B.22096(2)(a)) requiring compliance with BART emission limits on 
three power plants, including RGGS, ``[o]n or before January 1, 2015; 
or (2) [n]ot later than 5 years after approval of Nevada's state 
implementation plan for regional haze by the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency Region 9, whichever comes first.'' \8\ 
Therefore, consistent with the compliance dates in the Nevada Regional 
Haze SIP that EPA approved on March 26, 2012, EPA finalized a 
compliance date in the FIP of January 1, 2015.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 77 FR 50936.
    \6\ See letter dated June 4, 2012 from Suma Peesapati, 
EarthJustice, to Thomas Webb, EPA Region 9, re: Approval and 
Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Nevada; 
Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-
2011-0130).
    \7\ In section I of the preamble to the final rule, EPA 
incorrectly stated that we did not take action on the schedules for 
compliance for RGGS in our March 26, 2012 final rulemaking. See 77 
FR 50936 (August 23, 2012).
    \8\ EPA's final rulemaking on March 26, 2012 approved portions 
of the NAC, including ``445B.22096, excluding the NOX 
emission limits and control types in sub-paragraph (1)(c).'' See 
Table 1 in 40 CFR 52.1470(c).
    \9\ On October 11, 2012, the Nevada State Environmental 
Commission adopted a revised regulation from the Nevada Division of 
Environmental Protection that, among other things, extended the 
compliance date for achieving BART emission limits for 
NOX at RGGS from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. See 
information available at http://www.sec.nv.gov/main/hearing_1012.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Petition for Reconsideration

    On October 19, 2012, Nevada Energy (NV Energy, also known as Nevada 
Power Company) filed a petition to the Administrator for 
reconsideration of our August 23, 2012, final rule pursuant to section 
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA.\10\ The petition addresses one issue and 
requests that EPA reconsider the compliance date of January 1, 2015, 
for meeting the final NOX emission limits of 0.20 lb/MMBtu 
on Units 1, 2 and 3 at RGGS. NV Energy asserts that (1) EPA erroneously 
adopted a January 1, 2015, deadline for Reid Gardner Generating 
Station, (2) EPA's decision to set the January 1, 2015, compliance date 
without having proposed it deprived NV Energy of the ability to comment 
on a shorter compliance period, and (3) EPA's adoption of the January 
1, 2015, compliance date was arbitrary and capricious because EPA 
failed to consider the impact of administrative

[[Page 18282]]

delays in issuing the final rule before setting the compliance 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See letter dated October 19, 2012 from Samuel Boxerman, 
Sidley Austin LLP representing Nevada Energy, to Lisa P. Jackson, 
Administrator, US EPA, re: Petition for Reconsideration of EPA's 
Final Rule entitled, ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality 
Implementation Plans; Nevada; Regional Haze State and Federal 
Implementation Plans; BART Determination for Reid Gardner Generating 
Station.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Supplemental Information

    In a letter dated January 31, 2013, NV Energy submitted 
supplemental information to EPA describing the steps necessary to 
comply with the BART emission limits for NOX on Units 1, 2 
and 3 at RGGS, including required regulatory approvals, design, 
procurement, construction, commissioning, and testing of the new air 
pollution controls that NV Energy would need to install to comply with 
BART.\11\ Based on the amount of time required for the necessary steps, 
NV Energy states that the January 1, 2015 deadline originally included 
in the Nevada Regional Haze SIP, and finalized in EPA's FIP for RGGS, 
is not achievable, but demonstrates that the affected units at RGGS 
could meet the BART emission limits for NOX by June 30, 
2016, based on an expeditious and compressed schedule for compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See letter dated January 31, 2013 from Starla Lacy, 
Executive, Environmental, Health, and Safety at NV Energy to Anita 
Lee, US EPA Region 9, re: Nevada Regional Haze State Implementation 
Plan, Compliance Deadline for Units 1, 2, & 3 at Reid Gardner 
Generating Station.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Proposed Action

    In today's action, EPA is granting reconsideration of the 
compliance date in our FIP for achieving the NOX emission 
limits at RGGS and proposing to extend the compliance date by 18 months 
from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016. EPA is granting reconsideration 
of the compliance date based on one of the arguments provided by NV 
Energy in the October 19, 2012, petition for reconsideration. 
Specifically, EPA agrees that NV Energy may not have had an adequate 
opportunity to comment on the final compliance date for the 
NOX emission limits because we had proposed a 5-year period 
for compliance. Therefore, EPA is granting the petition for 
reconsideration from NV Energy.
    EPA is proposing to extend the compliance date based on our review 
of the supplemental information NV Energy provided to EPA by letter 
dated January 31, 2013. The information NV Energy submitted justifies 
our proposed finding that compliance by January 2015 is not achievable, 
and we are proposing to extend the compliance date for meeting the 
NOX emission limits on Units 1, 2 and 3 at RGGS to June 30, 
2016.

A. Justification for Proposing To Extend Compliance Date

    In its letter dated January 31, 2013, NV Energy sets forth its 
plans to install multiple control technologies to meet emission limits 
for NOX established as BART. NV Energy will install new 
advanced low-NOX burners coupled with over fire air (LNB/
OFA), new selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) systems, and a new 
neural network control system, as well as modify the existing burner 
management system and combustion control system (BMS/CCS). NV Energy 
has contracted with Sargent and Lundy (S&L), an engineering firm, to 
develop and manage the installation of this BART air pollution control 
project to reduce emissions of NOX at RGGS.
    This project, as documented in a Gantt chart created by S&L and 
submitted to EPA by NV Energy, requires detailed engineering, 
procurement, construction, commissioning, tuning, and testing of the 
new control technologies, as well as regulatory approvals from the 
Nevada Public Utilities Commission and Nevada Division of Environmental 
Protection (NDEP).
    NV Energy states that, if all necessary activities were conducted 
in sequence, final installation and operation of the new air pollution 
controls would require 77 months (over six years); however, NV Energy 
and S&L have developed a compressed 42-month (three and one-half year) 
schedule set forth in the Gantt chart in order to complete the project 
by June 30, 2016. In its letter, NV Energy states that as of December 
31, 2012, it has invested $1.9 million on the project for engineering 
and design, and intends to initiate engineering and procurement of the 
LNB/OFA in early 2013.
    The LNB/OFA combustion controls reduce the amount of NOX 
formed during combustion by controlling the airflow and temperature 
during combustion.\12\ As such, the design of LNB/OFA must occur before 
the design of the SNCR, a post-combustion control that requires 
detailed fluid dynamic modeling of combustion to ensure that the 
placement of nozzles to inject the ammonia or urea occurs at the most 
appropriate locations (where the flue gas is within a prescribed 
temperature range) to optimize emission reductions of 
NOX.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See, for example, EPA's Technical Bulletin on 
NOX formation and control, available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/fnoxdoc.pdf.
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NV Energy further states that modifications to the existing BMS/CCS 
first require a completed design for the LNB/OFA, and the 
specifications for the neural network require knowledge of what 
modifications will be made to the existing BMS/CCS. This information 
means that, although some tasks can be conducted simultaneously, many 
tasks are dependent on the completion of other tasks and must be staged 
sequentially.
    The information provided by NV Energy shows that the design, 
procurement, and fabrication of the multiple air pollution controls are 
scheduled to occur from 2013 through 2015. Construction of controls on 
Units 1, 2 and 3 is scheduled to be staged over 2015 and 2016, 
including three to six months of pre-outage construction for each unit, 
two-month outages for each unit, four-month periods for tuning, and 
one-month periods for testing for each of the three units.
    In total, NV Energy expects to complete the installation of all air 
pollution controls to meet the BART limits in 42 months, an average of 
14 months per unit. The Institute of Clean Air Companies estimates that 
the installation of SNCR typically requires 10 to 13 months, and 
typical deployment of LNB requires six to eight months.\14\ The 
combination of LNB and SNCR may then be expected to require 16 to 21 
months. Based on the schedule provided by NV Energy and the anticipated 
timeframe requiring an average of 14 months per unit for the design, 
procurement, construction, commissioning, and testing of LNB/OFA, SNCR, 
a neural network, and modifications to the BMS/CCS, EPA considers the 
42-month schedule for RGGS to comply with the BART limits for 
NOX to be as expeditious as practicable, and a deadline of 
January 1, 2015 to be not practically achievable.\15\ Therefore, EPA is 
proposing to extend the compliance timeframe for compliance with the 
NOX limits of 0.20 lb/MMBtu at RGGS by 18 months, from 
January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Institute of Clean Air Companies, Typical Installation 
Timelines for NOX Emissions Control technologies on 
Industrial Sources, December 4, 2006.
    \15\ Pursuant to CAA sections 169A(b)(2)(A and (g)(4), sources 
must procure, install, and operate BART as expeditiously as 
practicable, but in no event later than five years after the date of 
approval of a SIP or promulgation of a FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere With Attainment or 
Reasonable Further Progress

    The CAA requires that any revision to an implementation plan shall 
not be approved by the Administrator ``if the revision would interfere 
with any

[[Page 18283]]

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress * * * or any other applicable requirement of [the CAA].'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See section 110(l) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has promulgated health-based standards, known as the national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), for seven pollutants, including 
NO2, a component of NOX, and pollutants such as 
ozone and particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 2.5 
micrometers (PM2.5), that are formed in the atmosphere from 
reactions between NOX and other pollutants.\17\ Using a 
process that considers air quality data and other factors, EPA 
designates areas as ``nonattainment'' if those areas cause or 
contribute to violations of a NAAQS. Reasonable further progress, as 
defined in section 171 of the CAA, is related to attainment and means 
``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air 
pollutant * * * for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the 
applicable [NAAQS].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The other pollutants are sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, 
lead, and PM10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RGGS is located in Clark County, Nevada. Portions of Clark County 
(the Las Vegas Valley) have previously been designated nonattainment 
for PM10, carbon monoxide, and the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard. Clark County is now in attainment with the NAAQS for carbon 
monoxide and ozone.\18\ RGGS is not located in the nonattainment areas 
for PM10. The plans developed by Clark County, in part to 
satisfy a requirement for redesignation from nonattainment to 
attainment, and approved by EPA, do not rely on additional emission 
reductions of NOX at RGGS to ensure continued attainment 
with the carbon monoxide or the 1997 8-hour ozone standards. Therefore, 
an 18-month extension, from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2016, in the 
compliance date for RGGS to meet the BART limit for NOX will 
not interfere with attainment or reasonable further progress for any 
air quality standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See: ``Determination of Attainment for PM10 for 
the Las Vegas Valley Nonattainment Area, NV,'' 75 FR 45485 (August 
3, 2012); ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and 
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of 
Nevada; Redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to Attainment for the 
Carbon Monoxide Standard,'' 75 FR 59090 (September 27, 2010); and 
``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation 
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Nevada; 
Redesignation of Clark County to Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour 
Ozone Standard,'' 78 FR 1149 (January 8, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Compliance Date Extension Does Not Interfere With Any Other 
Applicable Requirement of the CAA

    The other requirements of the CAA that are applicable to RGGS are 
the visibility protection requirements for class I Federal areas under 
section 169A, i.e., BART and a long-term strategy for making reasonable 
progress toward meeting the national goal of restoring visibility at 
class I Federal areas to natural conditions.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ CAA section 169A(b)(2)(A) and (B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA requires that the procurement, installation, and operation 
of BART be as expeditious as practicable but in no event later than 
five years after the date of approval of a SIP or promulgation of a 
FIP.\20\ Based on the information described in section II.B of this 
notice, EPA is proposing to determine that a date of June 30, 2016, to 
comply with the NOX limits previously determined as BART for 
RGGS is as expeditious as practicable and within five years of the 
effective date of EPA's FIP for RGGS.\21\ Therefore, the 18-month 
extension we are proposing today will not interfere with the BART 
compliance requirement of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ CAA sections 169A(b)(2)(A) and (g)(4).
    \21\ The effective date of the final FIP is September 24, 2012. 
See 77 FR 50936 (August 23, 2012). Five years after the effective 
date is September 24, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nevada's Regional Haze SIP included a long-term strategy for making 
reasonable progress toward restoring visibility at the Jarbidge 
Wilderness Area to natural conditions by 2064. The CAA defines long-
term as 10 to 15 years and Nevada's long-term strategy, submitted to 
EPA in 2009, includes emission reductions and visibility improvements 
that are expected by 2018.\22\ Because the proposed compliance date of 
June 30, 2016, occurs within the period of the first long-term 
strategy, i.e., prior to 2018, the 18-month extension we are proposing 
will not interfere with the long-term strategy requirement of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See CAA section 169A(b)(2)(B) and Section 7 of the Nevada 
Regional Haze SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 13563

    This action proposes to extend the compliance date for a single 
source. This type of action is exempt from review under Executive 
Orders (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and EO 13563 (76 FR 
3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Because the proposed action 
merely extends a compliance date, it does not impose an information 
collection burden and the Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government 
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed action on 
small entities, I certify that this proposed action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The owner of the affected units at Reid Gardner Generating Station, 
Nevada Energy, also known as Nevada Power Company, is not a small 
entity and the extended compliance date being proposed today reduces 
the burden on this entity in general. See Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative, 
Inc. v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (DC Cir. 1985). We continue to be interested 
in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and 
welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 
U.S.C. 1531-1538, requires Federal agencies, unless otherwise 
prohibited by law, to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on 
State, local, and tribal

[[Page 18284]]

governments and the private sector. Federal agencies must also develop 
a plan to provide notice to small governments that might be 
significantly or uniquely affected by any regulatory requirements. The 
plan must enable officials of affected small governments to have 
meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory 
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates and must 
inform, educate, and advise small governments on compliance with the 
regulatory requirements.
    This proposed rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may 
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for state, local, and 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one 
year. This rule merely proposes an 18-month extension of a compliance 
date. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 
202 or 205 of UMRA.
    This proposed rule is also not subject to the requirements of 
section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that 
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This proposed 
rule does not impose regulatory requirements on any government entity.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or in the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action proposes an 18-month 
extension of a compliance date. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 
apply to this action.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local 
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action 
from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), EPA 
may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications, that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by 
statute, unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to 
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or EPA 
consults with tribal officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation and develops a tribal summary impact statement.
    EPA has concluded that this proposed rule may have tribal 
implications because the Reid Gardner Generating Station is located 
adjacent to reservation lands of the the Moapa Band of Paiute Indians. 
However, it will neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on 
tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law.
    EPA consulted with tribal officials early in the process of 
developing regulations related to Reid Gardner Generating Station to 
permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. 
During the comment period for prior EPA actions related to the Nevada 
Regional Haze SIP and EPA's FIP for RGGS, the Moapa Band of Paiute 
Indians has raised concerns to EPA about the environmental impacts of 
this facility. For those previous rulemakings, EPA consulted the Moapa 
Band regarding these concerns and visited the reservation and the 
facility. Additional details of our consultation with the Moapa Band 
are provided in section IV.F of our final rulemaking published on 
August 23, 2012 (77 FR 50936). For this proposed action to extend the 
compliance date for NOX at RGGS by 18 months, we will 
continue to consult with the Moapa Band as we proceed with this action.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed 
action from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying 
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, 
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the 
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO 
13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended 
to mitigate health or safety risks. This proposed action addresses 
regional haze and visibility protection.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)), because it is exempt under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub L. No. 104-113, 12 (10) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards 
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures and 
business practices) that are developed or adopted by the VCS bodies. 
The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to 
OMB, with explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 
applicable VCS.
    This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. 
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any VCS.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule, if finalized, will not 
have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. This proposed rule does not change any applicable emission 
limit for the Reid Gardner Generating Station. This proposed rule 
merely extends the compliance date for a single pollutant by 18 months.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen Dioxide.

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

    Dated: March 15, 2013.
Bob Perciasepe,
Acting Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as 
follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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


[[Page 18285]]


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


0
2. In section Sec.  52.1488 revise paragraph (f)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1488  Visibility protection.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (3) Compliance date. The owners and operators subject to this 
section shall comply with the emission limitations and other 
requirements of this section by June 30, 2016, and thereafter.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-06756 Filed 3-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P