[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10306-10307]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05201]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC19-67-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp, Cedar Springs Transmission LLC.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization Under Section 203
of the Federal Power Act, et al. of PacifiCorp, et al.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5265.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG19-70-000.
    Applicants: Buckleberry Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Buckleberry Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: EG19-71-000.
    Applicants: CCP-PL Lessee III, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of CCP-PL Lessee III, LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5097.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER19-73-001.
    Applicants: Conemaugh Power Pass-Through Holders LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing to be
effective 12/14/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5213.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-74-001.
    Applicants: Keystone Power Pass-Through Holders LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational filing to be
effective 12/14/2018.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-603-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to and Request for
Shortened Comment in ER19-603 re: Effective Date to be effective 5/13/
2019.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-837-001.
    Applicants: C.P. Crane LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to New to be effective 1/
19/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5223.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1280-000.
    Applicants: Broadlands Wind Farm LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rate Application
to be effective 5/13/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5204.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1281-000.
    Applicants: Lexington Chenoa Wind Farm LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rate Application
to be effective 5/13/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5214.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1282-000.
    Applicants: Paulding Wind Farm IV LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Market-Based Rate Application
to be effective 5/13/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5221.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1283-000.
    Applicants: Exelon Corporation, Exelon Generation Company, LLC.
    Description: Conditional Request for Waiver of Exelon Corporation,
on behalf of its subsidiary Exelon Generation Company, LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20190313-5241.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1293-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-03-14_SA 3265 Johnson
Junction-Morris Line Upgrade MPFCA (J493 J526) to be effective 2/28/
2019.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5032.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1297-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 1276R19 KCPL NITSA NOA to be
effective 3/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5042.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1298-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Wholesale Fuel Protocols
Update-- 3/1/19 to be effective 3/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5071.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1299-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Concurrence to APS Rate
Schedule No. 212 to be effective 3/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1300-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Third Revised ISA, SA No.
2960; Queue No. AD1-052 to be effective 2/12/2019.
    Filed Date: 3/14/19.
    Accession Number: 20190314-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 14, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-05201 Filed 3-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 94 (Monday, May 18, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 23113]
[FR Doc No: E9-11561]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG 2009-0327]

Safety Zone; Vallejo Fourth of July Fireworks, Vallejo, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Vallejo Fourth of July
Fireworks Display safety zone for the city of Vallejo, from 8 p.m.
through 10 p.m. on July 4, 2009, in the Mare Island Straight in
position 38[deg]5'46'' N, 122[deg]15'54'' W (NAD83). This action is
necessary to control vessel traffic and to ensure the safety of event
participants and spectators. During the enforcement period,
unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or anchoring in the safety zone, unless authorized
by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191 will be enforced from 8 p.m.
through 10 p.m. on July 4, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or e-mail Lieutenant Junior Grade Simone Mausz, Sector San
Francisco Waterways Safety Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 415-
399-7442, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone
for the annual Vallejo Fourth of July Fireworks in 33 CFR 165.1191 on
July 4, 2009, from 8 p.m. through 10 p.m. The fireworks launch site is
on the shore line of Mare Island in Vallejo, CA and will be launched
from position 38[deg]5'46'' N, 122[deg]15'54'' W (NAD83).
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or
vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or
anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and
times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM. Additionally, each
person who receives notice of a lawful order or direction issued by an
official patrol vessel shall obey the order of direction. The PATCOM is
empowered to forbid and control the regulated area. The PATCOM shall be
designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San Francisco. The
PATCOM may, upon request, allow the transit of commercial vessels
through regulated areas when it is safe to do so.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.1191 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance
notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to
Mariners.
    If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need
not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, he or she
may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to
enter the regulated area.

    Dated: May 1, 2009.
P.M. Gugg,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Sector San Francisco.
[FR Doc. E9-11561 Filed 5-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


have a SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely affect other states
in ways contemplated in the statute. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains
four distinct requirements related to the impacts of interstate
transport. The SIP must prevent sources in the state from emitting
pollutants in amounts which will: (1) Contribute significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS in other states; (2) interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS in other states; (3) interfere with provisions
to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in other states; or
(4) interfere with efforts to protect visibility in other states. With
respect to establishing that emissions from sources in the State would
not interfere with measures in other states to protect visibility--
which is the subject of this particular comment--the 2006 Guidance
recommended that states make a submission indicating that it was
premature, at that time, to determine whether there would be any
interference with measures in the applicable SIP for another state
designed to ``protect visibility'' until the submission and approval of
regional haze SIPs.
    On December 17, 2007, EPA approved Nebraska's SIP revisions for
addressing the ``good neighbor'' provisions of the CAA in a direct
final rulemaking. 72 FR 71245. EPA did not receive any comments on the
2007 SIP action. In today's action, EPA is not re-opening the 2007
approval of Nebraska's SIP as it relates to the CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). Today's action also does not serve as an approval or
disapproval of any of Nebraska's section 110(a) infrastructure SIP
submittals as they pertain to any NAAQS; those actions are not relevant
to today's action and will be addressed in separate rulemakings as
appropriate.
    Even if the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), as it
relates to the 1997 NAAQS and EPA's 2007 approval action, were relevant
to this rulemaking, the requirements of the Act and the regional haze
rule are satisfied by an approved SIP, a promulgated FIP, or a
combination of a SIP and FIP. The control measures approved and
promulgated for Nebraska in today's action will serve to prevent
sources in Nebraska from emitting pollutants in amounts that will
interfere with efforts to protect visibility in other states and thus
satisfy the ``interference with visibility protection'' sub-element of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Although the SIP is deficient as described elsewhere in
today's action, the partial FIP addresses those deficiencies, and no
further action is needed to address the visibility requirements.
However, Nebraska may revise its SIP and submit the revision to us,
to address the requirements covered by the FIP. Should such a
revision meet CAA requirements, we would replace our FIP with
Nebraska's SIP revision. We encourage the State to revise its SIP to
address these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

N. Technical Corrections

    Comment 49: OPPD pointed out an error in the Nebraska City Unit 1
p.m. potential to emit in Table 1 of our proposal, ``Facilities with
BART-Eligible Units in Nebraska.'' OPPD stated that the listed
potential to emit for PM (43,792 tons per year) is too high, and
estimated it to be 3,415 tons per year.
    Response 49: Table 1 is a listing of the units in Nebraska which
are BART-eligible based on source category, date, and emissions. The
43,792 figure came from Appendix 10.1 of the SIP. In response to this
comment, we checked with the State, who confirmed that the figure was
too high, and estimated the potential to emit to be 2,968 tons per
year.\39\ Changing this figure does not change the determination that
Unit 1 at Nebraska City Station is BART-subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Email from Shelley Schneider, NDEQ to Chrissy
Wolfersberger, EPA, dated May 17, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 50: NPS commented that Table 5 of the Technical Support
Document, ``BART subject facilities in Nebraska,'' contained a
numerical error. Impacts should read less than 0.5 dv rather than less
than 0.05 dv.
    Response 50: The table is corrected to read as follows:

                                  Table 5--BART-Subject Facilities in Nebraska
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         CALPUFF modeled impacts > 0.5 dv
           Facility                  Units         Class I area  -----------------------------------------------
                                                                       2001            2002            2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPPD Nebraska City Station...  1...............  Hercules Glades           0.933           0.556         < 0.5
                                                 Wichita                 < 0.5           < 0.5             0.686
                                                  Mountains.
NPPD Gerald Gentleman Station  1 & 2...........  Badlands.......           2.845           2.828           3.121
                                                 Wind Cave......           2.452           2.591           2.127
                                                 Wichita                   1.032           1.206           1.392
                                                  Mountains.
                                                 Rocky Mountain.           1.136           1.246           1.053
                                                 Hercules Glades           0.826           0.616           0.594
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Text

    EPA proposed a FIP relying on the Transport Rule as an alternative
to BART for SO2 emissions from GGS. Accordingly, EPA
proposed to revise 40 CFR Part 52, Subpart CC to reflect EPA's proposed
determination that the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e) with respect to
emissions of SO2 from NPPD, GGS Units 1 and 2 will be met by
40 CFR 52.1429, the Transport Rule FIP requirements for SO2
emissions in Nebraska. In today's action, EPA made minor clarifying
changes to the FIP language in 40 CFR 52.1435 to better set forth the
scope and applicability of EPA's disapproval and FIP.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Requirements

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

    This action will apply to one facility and is therefore not a rule
of general applicability. In addition, this rule does not impose new
mandates, because EGUs in Nebraska are subject to the requirements of
the Transport Rule independently of this action. Therefore, this action
is not a ``significant regulatory action.'' This type of action is
exempt from review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October
4, 1993) and 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.).

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 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 final action on
small entities, I certify that this final action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The FIP for the NPPD Units being finalized today does not impose any
new requirements on small entities. The partial approval of the SIP
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. See Mid-
Tex Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the
CAA, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute Federal
inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The CAA
forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union
Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.
7410(a)(2).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more, adjusted for inflation, for
state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. EPA has determined that the approval action
proposed does not include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to either state, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. Thus,
this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of
the UMRA.
    This 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 rule contains
regulatory requirements that apply to two units at one coal-fired power
plant in Nebraska.

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 on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, because it merely addresses the
state not fully meeting its obligation to adopt a SIP that meets the
regional haze requirements under the CAA. 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 solicited comments on
the proposed rule from state and local officials.

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

    This rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, because the action EPA is taking neither imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempts
tribal law. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as defined
under Executive Order 12866; and (2) concerns an environmental health
or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. EPA interprets EO 13045 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 implements specific standards
established by Congress in statutes.

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 not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action.
Today's action does not require the public to perform activities
conducive to the use of VCS. This action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.

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.
    We have determined that this rule will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it increases the level of environmental
protection for all affected populations without having any
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on any population, including any minority or low-income
population. This rule does not impose any new mandates, because EGUs in
Nebraska are subject to the requirements of the Transport Rule
independently of this action. See 77 FR 33642, for an analysis of the
implications of Executive Order 12898 in relation to EPA's final rule,
``Regional Haze: Revisions to Provisions Governing Alternatives to
Source-Specific Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART)
Determinations, Limited SIP Disapprovals, and Federal Implementation
Plans'' (June 7, 2012). The partial approval of the SIP merely approves
state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types
of rules (1) rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required
to submit a rule report regarding today's action under section 801
because this is a rule of particular applicability.

L. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 4, 2012. Pursuant to CAA section
307(d)(1)(B), this action is subject to the requirements of CAA section
307(d) as it promulgates a FIP under CAA section 110(c).
    Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this
final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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 challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. See CAA section
307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protections, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 15, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
    Title 40, chapter I, 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.

0
2. Sec.  52.1420 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the heading for paragraph (d) and the heading for the table
in paragraph (d);
0
b. In paragraph (d), adding entries (3) and (4) to the table in
numerical order; and
0
c. In paragraph (e), adding entry (25) to the table in numerical order
to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1420  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) EPA-approved state source-specific requirements.

                               EPA-Approved Nebraska Source-Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         State effective
         Name of source                Permit No.             date         EPA approval date      Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
(3) Nebraska Public Power        CP07-0050............           5/11/10  7/6/2012, [Insert   EPA has only
 District, Gerald Gentleman                                                Federal Register    approved the
 Station.                                                                  citation].          elements of the
                                                                                permit pertaining
                                                                                to NOX
                                                                                requirements.
(4) Omaha Public Power           CP07-0049............           2/26/09  7/6/2012, [Insert   ..................
 District, Nebraska City                                                   Federal Register
 Station.                                                                  citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (e) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Nebraska Nonregulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable
   Name of nonregulatory SIP         geographic or       State submittal   EPA approval date      Explanation
           provision               nonattainment area         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
(25) Regional haze plan for the  Statewide............           6/30/11  7/6/2012, [Insert   The plan was
 first implementation period.                                              Federal Register    approved except
                                                                           citation].          for that portion
                                                                                pertaining to SO2
                                                                                BART for Nebraska
                                                                                Public Power
                                                                                District, Gerald
                                                                                Gentleman Units 1
                                                                                and 2, and the
                                                                                portion of the
                                                                                long- term
                                                                                strategy
                                                                                addressing the
                                                                                SO2 BART measures
                                                                                for these Units.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. Section 52.1437 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1437  Visibility protection.

    (a) Regional Haze. The requirements of section 169A of the Clean
Air Act are not met because the regional haze plan submitted by
Nebraska on July 13, 2011, does not include approvable measures for
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3) and 51.308(e) with
respect to emissions of SO2 from Nebraska Public Power
District, Gerald Gentleman Station, Units 1 and 2. EPA has disapproved
the provisions of the July 13, 2011 SIP pertaining to the
SO2 BART determination for this facility, including those
provisions of the long-term strategy addressing the SO2 BART
measures for these units.
    (b) Measures Addressing Partial Disapproval Associated with SO2.
The deficiencies associated with the SO2 BART determination
for Nebraska Public Power District, Gerald Gentleman Station, Units 1
and 2 identified in EPA's partial disapproval of the regional haze plan
submitted by Nebraska on July 13, 2011, are satisfied by Sec.  52.1429.

[FR Doc. 2012-15192 Filed 7-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P