[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38557-38566]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15873]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0141; FRL-9694-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to
the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Stationary Source Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of
revisions to the applicable state implementation plan for the State of
Nevada. The submitted revisions include new or amended State rules
governing applications for, and issuance of, permits for stationary
sources, but not including review and permitting of major sources and
major modifications under parts C and D of title I of the Clean Air
Act. EPA is proposing this action under the Clean Air Act obligation to
take action on State submittals of revisions to state implementation
plans. The intended effect of the limited approval and limited
disapproval action is to update the applicable state implementation
plan with current State rules with respect to permitting, and to set
the stage for remedying deficiencies in the permitting rules with
respect to certain new or revised national ambient air quality
standards. If finalized as proposed, this limited disapproval action
would not trigger sanctions under section 179 of the Clean Air Act but
would trigger an obligation on EPA to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan unless the State of Nevada corrects the
deficiencies, and EPA approves the related plan revisions within two
years of the final action.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 30, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0141, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (AIR-3), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 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 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., 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: Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (AIR-3), San Francisco, CA 94105, phone number (415)
972-3534, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,''
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittals
    A. Which rules did the state submit?
    B. What is the regulatory history of the Nevada SIP?
    C. What are the existing Nevada rules governing NSR in the
Nevada SIP?
    D. What is the purpose of this proposed rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    1. Previous Deficiencies in Prior-Submitted NSR Rules
    2. New Deficiencies in NSR Rules
    3. Conclusion
III. Public Comment and Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittals

A. Which rules did the state submit?

    On January 24, 2011, the Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection (NDEP) submitted a revision to the Nevada State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to EPA for approval or disapproval under
section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''). NDEP's submittal
includes certain new or amended State rules [i.e., certain sections of
Nevada Administrative Code (NAC)] that govern applications for, and
issuance of, permits for stationary sources [a process referred to
herein as ``New Source Review'' (NSR) and rules referred to herein as
``NSR rules''].\1\ NDEP's January 24, 2011 submittal also includes a
rescission of one definition from the existing SIP (the definition of
``special mobile equipment''). In addition to the NSR rules, NDEP's
January 24, 2011 submittal contains evidence of public notice and
adoption of the rules, or amendments to the rules, since March 2006.
Evidence of public notice and adoption of the NSR rules or amendments
that predate March 2006 were previously submitted by NDEP in SIP
revision submittals dated February 16, 2005 and January 12, 2006. By
letter dated February 17, 2011, we found that the January 24, 2011
submittal fulfills the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We note that the stationary source permitting rules that are
the subject of this proposed rule are not intended to satisfy the
requirements for pre-construction review and permitting of major
sources or major modifications under part C (``Prevention of
Significant Deterioration of air quality'') or part D (``Plan
requirements for nonattainment areas'') of title I of the Clean Air
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 9, 2011, NDEP replaced one of the NSR rules, that had
been submitted on January 24, 2011 (NAC 445B.3457) and that had been
submitted as a temporary regulation, with the version of the rule that
had been adopted by the State Environmental Commission (SEC) as a
permanent regulation, and enclosed the related evidence of public
notice and adoption for the permanent regulation.
    On May 21, 2012, NDEP submitted a small set of additional NSR-
related rules [and one definition from the Nevada Revised Statutes
(NRS)] to supplement the NSR rules submitted on January 24, 2011 and
November 9, 2011. NDEP's May 21, 2012 submittal also includes certain
clarifications concerning the previously-submitted NSR rules, and
documentation supporting the selection

of emissions-based thresholds for triggering the public notice
requirements for draft permits for certain source modifications.
    Table 1 below lists the rules (and one statutory definition) that
were submitted by NDEP on January 24, 2011, November 9, 2011, and May
21, 2012 and on which EPA is proposing action in this document.

Table 1--Submitted Rules (and Statutory Definition) Governing NSR for Stationary Sources Under NDEP Jurisdiction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Submittal
          Submitted rule                              Title                        Adoption date         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAC 445B.003......................  ``Adjacent properties'' defined..........  11/03/93............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.0035.....................  ``Administrative revision to a Class I     08/19/04............     01/24/11
                                     operating permit'' defined.
NAC 445B.007......................  ``Affected state'' defined...............  11/03/93............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.013......................  ``Allowable emissions'' defined..........  10/04/05............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.014......................  ``Alteration'' defined...................  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.016......................  ``Alternative operating scenarios''        10/03/95............     01/24/11
                                     defined.
NAC 445B.019......................  ``Applicable requirement'' defined.......  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.035......................  ``Class I-B application'' defined........  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.036......................  ``Class I source'' defined...............  08/19/04............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.037......................  ``Class II source'' defined..............  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.038......................  ``Class III source'' defined.............  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.0423.....................  ``Commence'' defined.....................  03/18/08............     05/21/12
NAC 445B.044......................  ``Construction'' defined.................  10/04/05............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.046......................  ``Contiguous property'' defined..........  09/16/76............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.054......................  ``Dispersion technique'' defined.........  10/04/05............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.064......................  ``Excessive concentration'' defined......  10/04/05............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.066......................  ``Existing stationary source'' defined...  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.068......................  ``Facility'' defined.....................  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.069......................  ``Federally enforceable'' defined........  03/18/08............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.070......................  ``Federally enforceable emissions cap''    11/03/93............     01/24/11
                                     defined.
NAC 445B.082......................  ``General permit'' defined...............  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.083......................  ``Good engineering practice stack          10/04/05............     01/24/11
                                     height'' defined.
NAC 445B.087......................  ``Increment'' defined....................  11/03/93............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.093......................  ``Major modification'' defined...........  08/19/04............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.094......................  ``Major source'' defined.................  05/10/01............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.0945.....................  ``Major stationary source'' defined......  08/19/04............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.099......................  ``Modification'' defined.................  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.104......................  ``Motor vehicle'' defined................  05/10/01............     01/24/11
NRS 485.050.......................  ``Motor vehicle'' defined................  As amended in 2003..     05/21/12
NAC 445B.107......................  ``Nearby'' defined.......................  10/04/05............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.108......................  ``New stationary source'' defined........  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.117......................  ``Offset'' defined.......................  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.123......................  ``Operating permit'' defined.............  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.124......................  ``Operating permit to construct'' defined  11/19/02............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.1345.....................  ``Plantwide applicability limitation''     06/17/10............     01/24/11
                                     defined.
NAC 445B.138......................  ``Potential to emit'' defined............  10/05/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.142......................  ``Prevention of significant deterioration  11/03/93............     01/24/11
                                     of air quality'' defined.
NAC 445B.147......................  ``Program'' defined......................  11/03/93............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.154......................  ``Renewal of an operating permit''         11/03/93............     01/24/11
                                     defined.
NAC 445B.156......................  ``Responsible official'' defined.........  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.157......................  ``Revision of an operating permit''        08/19/04............     01/24/11
                                     defined.
NAC 445B.179......................  ``Special mobile equipment'' defined.....  10/05/10 (repealed).     01/24/11
NAC 445B.187......................  ``Stationary source'' defined............  10/05/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.194......................  ``Temporary source'' defined.............  05/10/01............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.200......................  ``Violation'' defined....................  11/03/93............     05/21/12
NAC 445B.287......................  Operating permits: General requirements;   06/17/10............     01/24/11
                                     exception; restriction on transfers.
NAC 445B.287(2)...................  [Provision addressing the operating        06/17/10............     05/21/12
                                     permit requirements for certain types of
                                     Class I sources].
NAC 445B.288......................  Operating permits: Exemptions from         03/18/08............     01/24/11
                                     requirements; insignificant activities.
NAC 445B.295......................  Application: General requirements........  09/06/06............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.297......................  Application: Submission; certification;    03/08/06............     01/24/11
                                     additional information.
NAC 445B.298......................  Application: Official date of submittal..  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.305......................  Operating permits: Imposition of more      06/17/10............     01/24/11
                                     stringent standards for emissions.
NAC 445B.308......................  Prerequisites and conditions for issuance  03/18/08............     01/24/11
                                     of certain operating permits; compliance
                                     with applicable state implementation
                                     plan.
NAC 445B.310......................  Environmental evaluation: Applicable       09/06/06............     01/24/11
                                     sources and other subjects; exemption.
NAC 445B.311......................  Environmental evaluation: Contents;        10/05/10............     01/24/11
                                     consideration of good engineering
                                     practice stack height.
NAC 445B.313......................  Method for determining heat input: Class   10/05/10............     01/24/11
                                     I sources.
NAC 445B.3135.....................  Method for determining heat input: Class   11/19/02............     01/24/11
                                     II sources.
NAC 445B.314......................  Method for determining heat input: Class   11/19/02............     01/24/11
                                     III sources.

NAC 445B.315......................  Contents of operating permits: Exception   03/08/06............     01/24/11
                                     for operating permits to construct;
                                     required conditions.
NAC 445B.318......................  Operating permits: Requirement for each    03/08/06............     01/24/11
                                     source; form of application; issuance or
                                     denial; posting.
NAC 445B.319......................  Operating permits: Administrative          08/19/04............     01/24/11
                                     amendment.
NAC 445B.325......................  Operating permits: Termination, reopening  06/17/10............     01/24/11
                                     and revision, revision, or revocation
                                     and reissuance.
NAC 445B.331......................  Request for change of location of          09/06/06............     01/24/11
                                     emission unit.
NAC 445B.3361.....................  General requirements.....................  06/17/10............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3363.....................  Operating permit to construct:             12/09/09............     01/24/11
                                     Application.
NAC 445B.33637....................  Operating permit to construct for          08/19/04............     01/24/11
                                     approval of plantwide applicability
                                     limitation: Application.
NAC 445B.3364.....................  Operating permit to construct: Action by   12/09/09............     01/24/11
                                     Director on application; notice; public
                                     comment and hearing.
NAC 445B.3365.....................  Operating permit to construct: Contents;   03/08/06............     01/24/11
                                     noncompliance with conditions.
NAC 445B.33656....................  Operating permit to construct for          03/08/06............     01/24/11
                                     approval of plantwide applicability
                                     limitation: Contents; noncompliance with
                                     conditions.
NAC 445B.3366.....................  Expiration and extension of operating      09/06/06............     01/24/11
                                     permit to construct; expiration and
                                     renewal of plantwide applicability
                                     limitation.
NAC 445B.3368.....................  Additional requirements for application;   12/09/09............     01/24/11
                                     exception.
NAC 445B.3375.....................  Class I-B application: Filing requirement  09/06/06............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3395.....................  Action by Director on application;         03/18/08............     01/24/11
                                     notice; public comment and hearing;
                                     objection by Administrator; expiration
                                     of permit.
NAC 445B.340......................  Prerequisites to issuance, revision or     03/18/08............     01/24/11
                                     renewal of permit.
NAC 445B.342......................  Certain changes authorized without         10/04/05............     01/24/11
                                     revision of permit; notification of
                                     authorized changes.
NAC 445B.3425.....................  Minor revision of permit.................  08/19/04............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.344......................  Significant revision of permit...........  11/19/02............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3441.....................  Administrative revision of permit to       09/06/06............     01/24/11
                                     incorporate conditions of certain
                                     permits to construct.
NAC 445B.3443.....................  Renewal of permit........................  11/12/08............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3447.....................  Class I general permit...................  11/19/02............     05/21/12
NAC 445B.3453.....................  Application: General requirements........  03/08/06............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3457.....................  Action by Director on application;         10/05/11............     11/09/11
                                     notice; public comment and hearing;
                                     expiration of permit.
NAC 445B.346......................  Required contents of permit..............  10/03/95............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3465.....................  Application for revision.................  10/04/05............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3473.....................  Renewal of permit........................  11/12/08............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3477.....................  Class II general permit..................  03/18/08............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3485.....................  Application: General requirements........  09/06/06............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3487.....................  Action by Director on application;         09/06/06............     01/24/11
                                     expiration of permit.
NAC 445B.3489.....................  Required contents of permit..............  09/06/06............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3493.....................  Application for revision.................  09/18/01............     01/24/11
NAC 445B.3497.....................  Renewal of permit........................  11/12/08............     01/24/11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What is the regulatory history of the Nevada SIP?

    On April 17, 2007 (72 FR 19144), we proposed to disapprove a
previous version of essentially the same set of NSR rules that we are
taking action on today. In that proposed rule, we described in detail
the evolution of the Nevada SIP from 1972 through the mid-1980's.
Please see our April 17, 2007 proposed rule (at page 19145) for
additional details on the evolution of the Nevada SIP during that
period. In more recent years, NDEP has submitted various updates to the
Nevada SIP, and EPA has over time taken a number of actions to approve
(or in a few cases, disapprove) these SIP updates. See, e.g., 71 FR
51766 (August 31, 2006) (approval of updated statutory provisions); 71
FR 71486 (December 11, 2006)(approval of updated monitoring and
volatile organic compound rules); and 72 FR 25971 (May 8, 2007)
(approval of updated visible emissions and particulate matter rules).
We finalized our April 17, 2007 proposed disapproval of the previous
version of the NSR rules on April 16, 2008 (73 FR 20536). Today's
proposal continues the process of updating the Nevada SIP by proposing
action on a new set of NSR rules submitted by NDEP that reflect a
number of revisions relative to the previous set of NSR rules that EPA
disapproved in 2008.

C. What are the existing Nevada rules governing NSR in the Nevada SIP?

    Table 2 lists the existing rules in the Nevada SIP governing NSR
for sources under NDEP jurisdiction (i.e., other than those related to
nonattainment NSR). As shown in table 2, these rules were approved into
the SIP at various times in the 1970's and 1980's. The rules in table 2
would be replaced in, or otherwise deleted from, the SIP by the
submitted set of rules (and one statutory provision) listed in table 1
if EPA were to take final action as proposed herein.

            Table 2--Existing SIP Rules Governing NSR for Stationary Sources Under NDEP Jurisdiction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Nevada Air Quality Regulations (NAQR) or Nevada
               Administrative Code (NAC)                        Fed. reg. citation and EPA  approval date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAQR article 1.36--Commenced...........................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.42--Construction........................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.43--Contiguous property.................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.72--Existing facility...................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.104--Major stationary source............  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.109--Modification.......................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.111--Motor vehicle......................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAC 445.559--``Operating permit'' defined..............  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAQR article 1.182--Special mobile equipment...........  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAQR article 1.187--Stationary source..................  43 FR 36932 (August 21, 1978).
NAC 445.649--``Violation'' defined.....................  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAQR article 3.1.6--[``Application forms for requesting  43 FR 1341 (January 9, 1978).
 the issuance of either a registration certificate or
 an operating permit can be obtained from the
 Director.''].
NAC 445.704--Registration certificates and operating     49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
 permits required.
NAC 445.705--Exemptions................................  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAC 445.706(1)--Application date; payment of fees......  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAC 445.707--Registration certificates: Prerequisite;    49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
 application; fee; issuance, denial; expiration.
NAC 445.712--Operating permits: Prerequisite;            49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
 application; fee; issuance, denial; posting.
NAC 445.713--Operating permits: Renewal................  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAC 445.714--Operating permits: Replacement of lost or   49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
 damaged permits.
NAC 445.715--Operating permits: Revocation.............  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAC 445.716--Operating permits: Change of location.....  49 FR 11626 (March 27, 1984).
NAQR article 13.1--(``General Provisions for the Review  46 FR 21758 (April 14, 1981).
 of New Sources''), subsection 13.1.3(1).
NAQR article 13.1--(``General Provisions for the Review  40 FR 13306 (March 26, 1975).
 of New Sources''), subsections 13.1.4, 13.1.5, 13.1.6,
 and 13.1.7.
NAQR article 13.2--[applicability thresholds for         47 FR 27070 (June 23, 1982).
 environmental evaluations (EEs)], subsections 13.2.3
 and 13.2.4.
NAQR article 13.3--[content requirements for EEs],       47 FR 27070 (June 23, 1982).
 subsection 13.3.1, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>\2\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. What is the purpose of this proposed rule?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ NDEP's NSR SIP retains certain nonattainment NSR provisions
including the definition of the term, ``lowest achievable emission
rate'' (LAER), and NAQR article 13.1.3(2) in the SIP. NAQR article
13.1.1 establishes an environmental evaluation (EE) requirement, and
NAQR article 13.1.3(2) establishes the LAER requirement. LAER is
defined to apply to applicants who are required to submit EEs, and
such applicants are identified by emissions-based threshold values
in article 13.2, 13.2.1, and 13.2.2, submitted on July 24, 1979 and
approved on June 23, 1982 (47 FR 27070). Thus, the existing SIP
definition for LAER, NAQR articles 13.1.1, 13.2, 13.2.1, and 13.2.2
must be retained in the SIP to properly interpret and apply the
major source nonattainment requirements in NAQR article 13.1.3(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of this proposed rule is to present our evaluation
under the CAA and EPA's regulations of the new and amended NSR rules
submitted by NDEP on January 24, 2011, November 9, 2011, and May 21,
2012. We provide our reasoning in general terms below but provide more
detailed analysis in the technical support document (TSD) that has been
prepared for this proposed rulemaking.

II. EPA's Evaluation

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    EPA has reviewed the rules submitted on January 24, 2011, November
9, 2011, and May 21, 2012 by NDEP governing NSR for stationary sources
under NDEP jurisdiction for compliance with the CAA requirements for
SIPs in general set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2), for compliance with
EPA regulations for stationary source permitting programs in 40 CFR
part 51, sections 51.160 through 51.164, and also for compliance with
CAA requirements for SIP revisions in CAA section 110(l).\3\ As
described below, EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited
disapproval of the submitted NSR rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CAA section 110(l) requires SIP revisions to be subject to
reasonable notice and public hearing prior to adoption and submittal
by States to EPA and prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision
that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    As to procedural requirements for SIPs and SIP revisions, we find
that, based on our review of the public participation documentation
included in the January 24, 2011 and November 9, 2011, as well as the
earlier NSR SIP submittals dated February 16, 2005 and January 12,
2006, NDEP has provided sufficient evidence of public notice and
opportunity for comment and hearing prior the adoption and submittal to
EPA for the rules that are the subject of today's proposed action.
    As to the substantive requirements, we have used our comprehensive
review of the previous set of NSR rules that formed the basis for our
April 17, 2007 proposed rule as the starting point for the analysis of
the current set of NSR rules. In our April 17, 2007 proposed rule, we
found that, in general, the submitted NSR rules that were the subject
of that proposed action met the relevant CAA and regulatory criteria,
but we proposed to disapprove the rules on the basis of 10 specific
deficiencies that we found in the rules. Following our final
disapproval action published on April 16, 2008 (73 FR 20536), the SEC
adopted revisions to the NSR rules to address the deficiencies that EPA
had identified, and NDEP re-submitted the rules, which are the subject
of today's action. As explained further below, we have found that the
amended rules now sufficiently address all of the deficiencies that EPA
had found in the prior set of NSR rules, but that we have identified
certain new deficiencies that prevent full approval of the rules. The
new deficiencies relate to new requirements that were not in effect at
the time of EPA's April 2008 final rule.
1. Previous Deficiencies in Prior-Submitted NSR Rules
    In the following paragraphs, we cite the deficiencies that we
identified in 2007, describe how the rules have been amended by the
SEC, and evaluate whether the revisions fully resolve the

issues previously raised by EPA. In a separate subsection, we describe
the new deficiencies in the NSR rules.
    First, we found that certain submitted rules used undefined terms,
contained incorrect citations, or relied on rules or statutory
provisions that had not been submitted for approval as part of the SIP,
or that multiple versions of the same rule were included in the same
submittal; and thus were unnecessarily ambiguous. Specifically, we
found that:
     NAC 445B.3366 (``Expiration and extension of operating
permit to construct; expiration and renewal of plantwide applicability
limitation'') relied on the term, ``commence,'' that is not defined in
the SIP for contexts outside of CAA section 111 (Standards of
performance for new stationary sources)(i.e., not defined for NSR
purposes);
     NAC 445B.069 (``Federally enforceable'' defined) included
incorrect citations to EPA regulations;
     The following submitted rules relied on rules or statutory
provisions that hade not been submitted: NAC 445B.287 [which cited
subsection (2) but did not include subsection (2)], NAC 445B.104
(citing NRS 485.050), NAC 445B.179 (citing NRS 482.123), and NAC
445B.311 (citing NAC 445B.083); and
     Multiple versions of the following rules were submitted:
NAC 445B.308, NAC 445B.3363, and NAC 445B.3364.
    To address these issues:
     SEC adopted a rule (NAC 445B.0423) that defines
``commence'' for NSR purposes and NDEP submitted the rule on May 21,
2012.
     SEC amended NAC 445B.069 (``Federally enforceable''
defined) to correct the citations to EPA regulations and NDEP re-
submitted the rule on January 24, 2011.
     NDEP submitted NAC 445B.287, subsection (2), and NRS
485.050 on May 21, 2012; SEC amended the rules such that the NSR
program no longer relies on NRS 482.123 (``Special mobile equipment'');
and NDEP submitted NAC 445B.083 on January 24, 2011.
     The current submittals evaluated herein, dated January 24,
2011, November 9, 2011, and May 21, 2012 do not contain multiple
versions of the same rule.
    Second, we concluded that the definition of ``potential to emit''
in submitted rule NAC 445B.138 must be revised to require effective
limits and to include criteria by which a limit is judged to be
practicably enforceable by NDEP. In response, SEC amended the rule to
allow certain physical or operational limitations on the capacity of a
stationary source to emit pollutants to be treated as part of its
design for the purposes of determining its potential to emit if the
limitations are ``federally enforceable,'' a term that is appropriately
defined in NAC 445B.069. This revision fully addresses the issue that
EPA had identified in the previous version of the rule. NDEP included
the revised rule NAC 445B.187 in its January 24, 2011 SIP submittal.
    Third, we found that NDEP's stationary source program may not be as
inclusive as required under the CAA depending upon whether the
exclusion of ``special mobile equipment'' from the definition of
``stationary source'' in submitted rule NAC 445B.187 extends to engines
and vehicles that are not considered to be ``nonroad.'' In response,
SEC amended NAC 445B.187 to delete the exclusion for ``special mobile
equipment,'' and NDEP included the revised rule NAC 445B.138 in its
January 24, 2011 SIP submittal.
    Fourth, we found that the method for determining heat input for
class I sources \4\ in submitted rule NAC 445B.313 must be amended to
require that combustion sources make applicability determinations based
on the maximum heat input. In response, SEC amended NAC 445B.313
accordingly, and NDEP included the revised rule NAC 445B.313 in its
January 24, 2011 SIP submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA generally refers to stationary sources with potentials
to emit 100 tons per year or more of criteria pollutants (those for
which national ambient air quality standards have been promulgated,
such as, e.g., ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter) as
``major sources'' and such sources with potentials to emit less than
100 tons per year as ``minor sources.'' Generally, speaking, the NSR
program adopted by the Nevada SEC relies on the term ``class I''
sources to refer to ``major sources'' and ``class II'' and ``class
III'' sources to refer to ``minor sources.'' In Nevada's NSR
program, generally speaking, ``class III'' sources are non-exempt
sources with potentials to emit of less than 5 tons per year of
criteria pollutants, while ``class II'' sources are those sources
that are covered under the NSR rules but that are neither ``class
I'' or ``class III'' sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fifth, we concluded that NAC 445B.331 (``Request for change of
location of emission unit'') must be amended to limit its applicability
to location changes within the confines of the existing stationary
source at which the emission unit is originally permitted. NDEP
explained that NAC 445B.331 relates to temporary sources and that such
sources must choose between two types of permits: A normal stationary
source operating permit \5\ or a general operating permit. If the
former is chosen, the normal permitting process occurs, and if the
latter is chosen, the owner or operator must obtain a general operating
permit and request to operate at the selected location within the
constraints of the general operating permit. Either way, an
environmental evaluation (EE) is performed to ensure compliance with
the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) (with the exception
of NAAQS that have been added or revised in recent years--see II.B.2 of
this document). NDEP further explained that the request for approval of
a specific location under NAC 445B.331 simply allows the NDEP to
evaluate the owner or operator's proposal to ensure that the proposal
complies with the terms and conditions of the general operating permit.
Based on NDEP's explanation, we believe that no further changes in this
rule are required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Nevada's NSR program uses the term ``operating permit to
construct'' or just ``operating permit'' to refer to permits that
EPA generally cites as ``construction'' permits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sixth, we found that submitted rule NAC 445B.3477 (``Class II
general permit'') must be amended to identify the requirements for
general permits, the public participation requirements for issuing such
permits, and the criteria by which stationary sources may qualify for
such a permit. NDEP has explained that, under Nevada's regulations, a
``general permit'' is a type of operating permit (one issued by the
Director to cover numerous similar stationary sources) and that
requirements for a general permit and the criteria by which sources may
qualify for a general permit are found in the general permit. In
addition, NDEP has explained that class II general permits are subject
to requirements that are similar to those for class II operating
permits, and that NDEP performs a worst-case environmental evaluation
to ensure that the terms and conditions of the class II general
operating permit will ensure compliance with the NAAQS (with the
exception of NAAQS that have been added or revised in recent years--see
II.B.2 of this document). We find this explanation satisfactory. As to
public participation, SEC amended the rule to establish public
participation requirements for issuing class II general permits, and
NDEP submitted the revised rule on January 24, 2011. We have reviewed
these new requirements and find them acceptable.
    Seventh, we found that submitted rule NAC 445B.311 (``Environmental
evaluation: Required information'') allows for NDEP to authorize use of
a modification or substitution of an EPA-approved model specified in
appendix W of 40 CFR part 51 without EPA approval and must be amended
accordingly to comply with 40 CFR 51.160(f). In response, SEC has
amended the rule to require written approval by EPA for the use of
modified or

substitute model, and to require public participation prior to
authorization of the use of such a modified or substitute model. NDEP
submitted the revised rule on January 24, 2011.
    Eighth, to comply with 40 CFR 51.161 (``Public availability of
information''), we concluded that the NSR rules must be amended to
provide for adequate public review of new or modified class II sources;
for notification to the air pollution control agencies for Washoe
County or Clark County for those sources proposed to be constructed or
modified in Washoe County or Clark County, respectively; and to provide
for public participation for new or modified sources of lead with
potential to emit 5 tons per year or more.
    In response, the SEC has amended the rule to require public
participation prior to issuance of all new class II permits and prior
to issuance of revisions to class II permits for which allowable
emissions would increase in excess of specified thresholds; to require
notification to the relevant county air agencies; and to provide for
public participation for new or modified sources of lead with
potentials to emit 5 tons per year or more. NDEP submitted the revised
rule on November 9, 2011. See NAC 445B.3457, subsections (5) and (6).
    The emission-based thresholds that the SEC has established in NAC
445B.3457 to identify class II permit revisions that are subject to the
public participation requirement are 40 tons per year for carbon
monoxide, volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur
dioxide; 15 tons per year for particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to a nominal ten microns
(PM10); and 0.6 tons per year for lead (Pb). In its
submittal dated May 21, 2012, NDEP included documentation that
indicates that selected thresholds capture more than 80 percent of the
emissions associated with stationary sources.
    EPA regulations in 40 CFR 51.160(e) allow State NSR programs to
exclude new minor sources and minor modifications from the NSR program
so long as such sources and modifications are not environmentally
significant, consistent with the de minimis exemption criteria set
forth in Ala. Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323, at 360-361 (D.C. Cir.
1979).\6\ Given that 40 CFR 51.160(e) allows for sources and
modifications that are not environmentally significant to be excluded
entirely from the NSR program, it follows that a State or local agency
can choose to exempt some new sources or modifications subject to
permitting from public participation requirements, but, it must do so
consistent with the de minimis principles and by application of well-
defined objective criteria. Thus, EPA believes that 40 CFR 51.161(a)
allows for the tailoring of the public participation process for less
environmentally significant sources and modifications. See, generally,
60 FR 45530, at 45548-45549 (August 31, 1995). In this instance, we
believe that the emissions-based thresholds represent well-defined
objective criteria and, based on NDEP's documentation of the extent to
which overall stationary source emissions are covered by sources
subject to mandatory public participation, we find that the thresholds
established in NAC 445B.3457 are reasonably calculated to exclude from
mandatory public participation only less environmentally significant
sources and modifications. This is acceptable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ While the Alabama Power court discusses the de minimis
principle in the context of a Federal administrative agency's
authority in promulgating rules to satisfy statutory requirements,
the same principle can be applied where a State promulgates rules to
satisfy requirements by a Federal administrative agency. With
regards to the de minimis principle, the Alabama Court writes:
``Determination of when matters are truly de minimis naturally will
turn on the assessment of particular circumstances, and the agency
will bear the burden of making the required showing. But we think
most regulatory statutes, including the Clean Air Act, permit such
agency showings in appropriate cases. While the difference is one of
degree, the difference of degree is an important one. Unless
Congress has been extraordinarily rigid, there is likely a basis for
an implication of de minimis authority to provide exemption when the
burdens of regulation yield a gain of trivial or no value. That
implied authority is not available for a situation where the
regulatory function does provide benefits, in the sense of
furthering the regulatory objectives, but the agency concludes that
the acknowledged benefits are exceeded by the costs. For such a
situation any implied authority to make cost-benefit decisions must
be based not on a general doctrine but on a fair reading of the
specific statute, its aims and legislative history.'' See Ala. Power
Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323, at 360-361 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, with respect to public participation associated with
permits for new class II sources and for class II modifications, we
note that the SEC has also revised NAC 445B.3457 to provide for
notification to the public through means (a state Web site and mailing
list) other than through the traditional newspaper notice. EPA believes
that the requirement to provide the required notice by ``prominent
advertisement'' in 40 CFR 51.161(b)(3) for new or modified minor
sources (other than synthetic minor sources) is media neutral and can
be met by means other than, or in combination with, the traditional
newspaper notice.\7\ See Memorandum dated April 17, 2012 from Janet
McCabe, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, EPA Office of Air and
Radiation, to Regional Administrators, Regions 1-10, titled ``Minor New
Source Review Program Public Notice Requirements under 40 CFR
51.161(b)(3).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As noted in footnote 4, above, ``minor sources'' are sources
that have the potential to emit regulated NSR pollutants in amounts
that are less than the applicable major source thresholds. Synthetic
minor sources are those sources that have the potential to emit
regulated NSR pollutants at or above the major source thresholds,
but that have taken enforceable limitations to restrict their
potential to emit below such thresholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsection (6) of NAC 445B.3457 provides two means of providing
public notice. Paragraph (b) of subsection (6) requires a copy of the
notice to be published ``on an Internet Web site designed to give
general public notice,\8\ '' and paragraph (c) of subsection (6)
requires notification through a mailing list developed to include
individuals that have requested to be included on such a list. We
believe that such notification, with one exception, satisfies the
requirement to provide the public with notice through ``prominent
advertisement'' in the area affected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ NDEP has clarified in its submittal dated May 21, 2012 that
NDEP's own Web site is the ``Internet Web site'' referred to in NAC
445B.3457. The submittal refers to the wording ``state Web site''
which was included in the January 24, 2011 submittal, rather than
``Internet Web site'' of the November 9, 2011 submittal for NAC
445B.3457, but we believe the clarification is the same for either
term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While EPA believes that notice of permitting actions may be made by
means other than traditional newspaper notice for most types of minor
sources, EPA also believes that, with respect to synthetic minor
sources, an exception should be made to the use of electronic means as
the sole means to notify the general public of proposed permitting
actions. For synthetic minor sources, i.e., sources that have taken
enforceable limitations to restrict their potential to emit below major
source thresholds, we believe that the traditional means of
notification (i.e., newspaper notice) should be included as one of the
means for notifying the general public of proposed permit actions on
the grounds that such sources should be treated for public
participation purposes as major sources for which such notice is
required. See 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iii).
    NAC 445B.3457 does not provide for traditional newspaper notice of
class II sources that constitute synthetic minor sources, but although
we recognize that there may be instances where a proposed new synthetic
minor source

would not be subject to newspaper notice because, under Nevada's
regulations, it is considered a class II source subject to NAC
445B.3457, rather than a class I source subject to NAC 445B.3364 (for
which newspaper notice is required), we anticipate that such instances
would be few in number. This is because, with very few exceptions,
Nevada's NSR rules apply to sources in ``attainment'' or
``unclassified'' areas \9\ where the major source thresholds (for the
purposes of NSR) are 250 tons per year for most types of sources
whereas the requirements for class I sources under NAC 445B.3364 (under
which newspaper notice is required) apply to sources with potentials to
emit 100 tons per year or more. Thus, most synthetic minor sources
under Nevada's regulations would be considered ``class I'' sources (and
subject to traditional newspaper notice), because they would have
potentials to emit at least 100, but less than 250, tons per year,
although still considered ``minor sources'' for the purposes of NSR.
Therefore, we do not find that the deficiency in Nevada's public notice
requirements with respect to synthetic minor sources to be significant.
Nonetheless, we recommend that the SEC amend the public notice
regulations to ensure that the general public is notified of new
synthetic minor sources by traditional (newspaper) means, at a minimum,
or, preferably, in combination with electronic means.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 40 CFR 81.329 for the designations of air quality
planning areas in the State of Nevada. As shown in the tables
codified at 40 CFR 81.329, other than certain areas within Clark and
Washoe Counties, air quality planning areas in Nevada are designated
as attainment or unclassifiable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ninth, we found that the affirmative defense provision in submitted
rule NAC 445B.326 (``Operating permits: Assertion of emergency as
affirmative defense to action for noncompliance'') was not approvable
under CAA section 110(a)(2) as written because it could be applied to
technology-based emission limitations approved into the SIP. NDEP did
not include NAC 445B.326 in the revised sets of NSR rules submitted to
EPA for action as a SIP revision. Furthermore an affirmative defense
provision, such as that provided for in NAC 445B.326, is not required
to be included in a SIP NSR program; therefore, the previously-
identified deficiencies in NAC 445B.326 do not need to be considered
further in the context of action on the submitted NSR rules.
    Lastly, while the submitted rules include a specific prohibition on
approving a permit for any source where the degree of emission
limitation required is affected by that amount of the stack height as
exceeds good engineering practice stack height or any other dispersion
technique, we found that the relevant provision (i.e., 445B.308(3))
includes director's discretion (* * * if ``the Director determines'' *
* *), which must be removed in order for EPA to approve the rules as
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.164. In response, the SEC amended
the rule to clarify that the Director's discretion in this instance is
limited by the additional procedural requirements set forth in
subsection (3) of NAC 445B.311. We have reviewed the additional
procedural requirements in subsection (3) of NAC 445B.311 and find that
they are consistent with the related requirements in 40 CFR 51.164.
NDEP submitted the revised rule on January 24, 2011.
    In conclusion, based on our point-by-point evaluation of the
previous deficiencies in the previously-submitted NSR rules, as
described above and in further detail in our TSD, we find that Nevada
has adequately addressed all of the previously-identified deficiencies
by submittal of appropriately amended rules and supporting
documentation.
2. New Deficiencies in NSR Rules
    While we believe that Nevada has adequately addressed the
previously-identified deficiencies in the NSR rules, we now find that
the State's NSR rules fail to address certain new requirements that
were not in effect in 2008 when EPA last took action on them.
    Under 40 CFR 51.160, in connection with NSR, each SIP must set
forth legally enforceable procedures that enable the State or local
agency to determine whether the construction or modification of a
facility, building, structure or installation or combination of these
will result in, among other impacts, interference with attainment or
maintenance of a national standard in the state in which the proposed
source (or modification) is located or in a neighboring State.
    To address this requirement, NAC 445B.310 and 445B.311 require
permit applicants to prepare environmental evaluations (EE) that
contain dispersion analyses showing the effect of the source on the
quality of the ambient air. As explained below, NAC 445B.308, 445B.310,
and 445B.311 represent a legally enforceable procedure that enables
NDEP to make the necessary determinations under 40 CFR 51.160 with
respect to the national ambient air quality standards, circa 1991, but
not with respect to the new or revised national standards promulgated
by EPA since that time.
    Subsection (2) of NAC 445B.308 prohibits the issuance of an
operating permit or revision thereto for any stationary source if the
EE shows that the stationary source would ``prevent the attainment and
maintenance of the state or national ambient air quality standards. For
the purposes of this paragraph, only those ambient air quality
standards that have been established in NAC 445B.22097 need to be
considered in the environmental evaluation.''
    NAC 445B.22097 in turn lists the Nevada ambient air quality
standards (``Nevada standards'') and national ambient air quality
standards (``National standards'' or NAAQS).\10\ With respect to the
NAAQS, NAC 445B.22097 has not been updated since 1991 and thus does not
include the new, revised, or revoked NAAQS since that time. Moreover,
NAC 445B.22097 includes a note that states: ``The Director shall use
the Nevada standards in considering whether to issue a permit for a
stationary source and shall ensure that the stationary source will not
cause the Nevada standards to be exceeded in areas where the general
public has access.'' The Nevada ambient air quality standards are equal
to the NAAQS (i.e., as of 1991) for those pollutants for which both
Nevada and EPA have established ambient standards, but, because the
Nevada standards do not reflect the changes in the NAAQS since 1991,
reliance on them for permitting purposes does not ensure protection of
the new or revised NAAQS established since then as NDEP reviews permit
applications for new or modified stationary sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ EPA approved NAC 445B.22097 (``Standards of quality for
ambient air'') as part of the Nevada SIP in a separate rulemaking.
See 71 FR 15040 (March 27, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the ozone NAAQS, we therefore encourage the SEC to
update NAC 445B.22097 to take into account the replacement of the 1-
hour ozone standard (0.12 ppm) with an 8-hour ozone standard (0.075
ppm), although we do not consider the failure to update the rule for
ozone as a significant deficiency because, given the regional nature of
ambient ozone concentrations, applicants for permits for new or
modified stationary sources are not required to show, through
dispersion modeling techniques, that the ozone precursor emissions from
the source or modification would not violate the standard.
    With respect to PM2.5, we recognize that NDEP submitted
``infrastructure''

SIPs \11\ on February 26, 2008 and September 15, 2009 to address the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
respectively. In both such PM2.5 ``infrastructure'' SIPs,
NDEP indicated that the NSR requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS
were to be met by evaluating new and modified sources for compliance
with the PM10 standard. At the time these ``infrastructure''
SIPs were submitted, EPA's policy allowed States to permit new or
modified PM2.5 sources using the PM10 NSR program
requirements as a surrogate for PM2.5. We also recognize
that we did not take timely action on the two ``infrastructure'' SIP
submittals, and, as a result of the passage of time, the ``surrogate''
policy has lapsed (since May 16, 2011). As a result, States must now
evaluate PM2.5 emissions from new or modified sources
directly to determine whether such sources would violate the 24-hour
(35 [micro]g/m\3\) or annual (15 [micro]g/m\3\) PM2.5
standards. See 40 CFR 51.166(a)(6)(i) and 73 FR 28321, at 28344 (May
16, 2008). The submitted NSR rules evaluated herein do not yet address
PM2.5, and given the now-current requirements for
PM2.5 and the lapse of the surrogate policy, we cannot now
fully approve the submitted NSR rules. In response, the State
Environmental Commission must revise the NSR rules to ensure protection
of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the issuance of permits for new or
modified sources or EPA must promulgate a FIP within two years of final
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ``Infrastructure SIPs'' refer to SIPs submitted in response
to EPA's promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS and include
provisions necessary to comply with the SIP content requirements set
forth in CAA section 110(a)(2), other than those arising from
designation of any area within a state as ``nonattainment'' for the
new or amended NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to lead (Pb), we recognize that NDEP submitted an
``infrastructure'' SIP on October 12, 2011 to address the 2008 Pb NAAQS
and that we have not yet taken action on it. Furthermore, we recognize
that, at the time NDEP submitted the Pb ``infrastructure'' SIP, the
deadline for States to submit the necessary NSR-related changes to
address the 2008 Pb NAAQS had not yet passed. Now, however, with the
passage of time, the deadline for such NSR-related changes has passed,
and we must evaluate the submitted NSR requirements against the now-
current NSR requirements. Thus, similar to the approach we are taking
for PM2.5, we find that the submitted NSR rules do not
address the new rolling 3-month average Pb NAAQS (0.15 [micro]g/m\3\)
and thus we cannot now fully approve the submitted NSR rules. See 73 FR
66964, 67034-67041 (November 12, 2008). In response, the State
Environmental Commission must revise the NSR rules to ensure protection
of the Pb NAAQS in the issuance of permits for new or modified sources
or EPA must promulgate a FIP within two years of final action.
    With respect to new or revised NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide and
sulfur dioxide, and based on the promulgation dates of these new or
revised NAAQS, the State still has additional time to amend its NSR
rules to address the revised NAAQS for these pollutants, and thus we do
not view the failure to update NAC 445B.22097 to address the 2010 1-
hour nitrogen dioxide standard and the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide
standard as precluding approval of the submitted NSR rules at this
time. See 75 FR 6474, at 6523-6525 (February 9, 2010) (NSR SIP
revisions for the 1-hour nitrogen dioxide NAAQS are due on January 22,
2013); and 75 FR 35520, at 35573-35580 (June 22, 2010) (NSR SIP
revisions for the 1-hour sulfur dioxide NAAQS are due on June 2, 2013).
We encourage the SEC to make any necessary revisions to the NSR rules
to address these revised NAAQS, and we encourage NDEP to adopt and
submit the revised NSR rules as a SIP revision prior to the upcoming
deadlines.
3. Conclusion
    For the reasons stated above, we find that the State has adequately
addressed all of the previously-identified deficiencies in the NSR
rules but new deficiencies related to the new or revised
PM2.5 and Pb NAAQS prevent us from proposing a full approval
of the rules. Therefore, we are proposing a limited approval and
limited disapproval of the submitted NSR rules. We do so based also on
our finding that, while the rules do not meet all of the applicable
requirements, the rules would represent an overall strengthening of SIP
by clarifying and enhancing the NSR permitting requirements.

III. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    Pursuant to section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act, and for the
reasons provided above, EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited
disapproval of revisions to the Nevada SIP that govern applications
for, and issuance of, permits for stationary sources under the
jurisdiction of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection,
excluding review and permitting of major sources and major
modifications under parts C and D of title I of the Clean Air Act.
Specifically, EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited
disapproval of the new or amended sections of the Nevada Administrative
Code (and one section of the Nevada Revised Statutes) listed in table
1, above as a revision to the Nevada SIP.
    EPA is proposing this action because, although we find that the new
or amended rules meet most of the applicable requirements for such NSR
programs and that the SIP revisions improve the existing SIP, we have
also found certain deficiencies that prevent full approval. Namely, the
submitted NSR rules do not address the new or revised national ambient
air quality standards for PM2.5 and lead (Pb) and must be
revised accordingly.
    The intended effect of this limited approval and limited
disapproval action is to update the applicable state implementation
plan with current State rules with respect to permitting,\12\ and to
set the stage for remedying deficiencies in the permitting rules with
respect to new or revised national ambient air quality standards for
PM2.5 and Pb. If finalized as proposed, this limited
approval action would not trigger mandatory sanctions under section 179
of the Clean Air Act because sanctions apply to nonattainment areas and
no areas within the State of Nevada have been designated as
nonattainment for the national PM2.5 or Pb standards.
However, this limited disapproval action would trigger an obligation on
EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan unless the State of
Nevada corrects the deficiencies, and EPA approves the related plan
revisions within two years of the final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Final approval of the rules (and statutory provision) in
table 1 would supersede the rules listed in table 2, above, in the
existing Nevada SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We will accept comments from the public on this proposed limited
approval and limited disapproval for the next 30 days.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12988, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 128665, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''

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).

C. Regulatory Reduction Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals or disapprovals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because this proposed limited approval/
limited disapproval action does not create any new requirements, I
certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of
the Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of State action. The Clean Air Act 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

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the limited approval/limited disapproval
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. This
Federal action proposed to approve and disapprove pre-existing
requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism 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 State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule 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 proposes to approve and disapprove 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. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 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 Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it proposes to
approve and disapprove a State rule implementing a Federal standard.

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (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.

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

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 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 lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this proposed rulemaking. In reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA's role is to approve or disapprove state choices, based on the
criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely proposes
a limited approval/limited disapproval of certain State requirements
for inclusion into the SIP under section 110 and subchapter I, part D
of the Clean Air Act and will not in-and-of itself create any new
requirements. Accordingly, it does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate
human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally
permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.

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

    Dated: June 20, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-15873 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 235 (Monday, December 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 78859]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26801]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-0026]

Issuance of Priority Review Voucher; Rare Pediatric Disease
Product

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
issuance of a priority review voucher to the sponsor of a rare
pediatric disease product application. The Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), as amended by the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), authorizes FDA to award priority
review vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric disease product
applications that meet certain criteria. FDA is required to publish
notice of the award of the priority review voucher. FDA has determined
that DANYELZA (naxitamab-gqgk) manufactured by Y-mAbs Therapeutics,
Inc., (Cato Research LLC., US Agent) meets the criteria for a priority
review voucher.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Althea Cuff, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, FAX: 301-
796-9856, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the issuance of a priority
review voucher to the sponsor of an approved rare pediatric disease
product application. Under section 529 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360ff), which was added by FDASIA, FDA will award priority review
vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric disease product
applications that meet certain criteria. FDA has determined that
DANYELZA (naxitamab-gqgk) manufactured by Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Inc.,
(Cato Research LLC., US Agent), meets the criteria for a priority
review voucher.
    DANYELZA (naxitamab-gqgk) indicated, in combination with
granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), for the
treatment of pediatric patients 1 year of age and older and adult
patients with relapsed or refractory high-risk neuroblastoma in the
bone or bone marrow who have demonstrated a partial response, minor
response, or stable disease to prior therapy.
    For further information about the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority
Review Voucher Program and for a link to the full text of section 529
of the FD&C Act, go to http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/RarePediatricDiseasePriorityVoucherProgram/default.htm. For further
information about DANYELZA (naxitamab) go to the ``[email protected]'' website
at http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/.

    Dated: December 1, 2020.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-26801 Filed 12-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5518-5519]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2443]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL 9627-1]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; Request for public comment

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby
given of a proposed consent decree to settle a lawsuit filed by
WildEarth Guardians in the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado: WildEarth Guardians v. Jackson, Case No. 1:11-cv-
02227-WJM-KLM (D. Colo.). Plaintiff filed this suit to compel the
Administrator to respond to an administrative petition requesting that
EPA object to a CAA Title V operating permit issued by the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Division, to
CF&I Steel, d/b/a EVRAZ Rocky Mountain Steel, to operate its
steelmaking facility in Pueblo, Colorado. Under the terms of the
proposed consent decree, EPA agrees to respond to the petition by May
31, 2012, or within 30 days of the entry date of the consent decree by
the court, whichever is later.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by March 5, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2012-0094, online at www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method);
by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to
EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be
formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters
and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melina Williams, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    This proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit alleging that
the Administrator failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty to grant or
deny, within 60 days of submission, an administrative petition to
object to a CAA Title V permit issued by the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Division, to CF&I Steel,
d/b/a EVRAZ Rocky Mountain Steel, to operate its steelmaking facility
in Pueblo, Colorado. Under the terms of the proposed consent decree,
EPA agrees to respond to the petition by May 31, 2012, or within 30
days of the entry date of the consent decree by the court, whichever is
later. In addition, the proposed consent decree provides that the
United States agrees to pay $2,535.00 as full settlement of all claims
for attorney's fees, costs, and expenses incurred in this lawsuit
through the date of lodging the consent decree. The proposed consent
decree also states that when EPA's obligations under Paragraphs 2 and
3, which include the aforementioned obligations to sign a response to
the administrative petition by a certain date and to pay attorney fees
and litigation costs, have been completed the case shall be terminated
and dismissed with prejudice.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines that consent to this consent decree should be
withdrawn, the terms of the consent decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the proposed consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2012-0094) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree.

The official public docket is available for public viewing at the
Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use the www.regulations.gov to submit or
view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and to access those documents in the public
docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in
the appropriate docket identification number then select ``search.''
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless
the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute are not
included in the official public docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including
copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed
in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do I submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
    Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail
(email) system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an
email comment directly to the Docket without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: January 27, 2012.
Patricia Embrey,
Acting Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012-2443 Filed 2-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [ EPA R03 OAR 2005 MD 0014; FRL ]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Amendments to the Control of VOC Emissions from Yeast Manufacturing AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan ( SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland. This revision pertains to the amendments of a regulation that controls volatile organic compound ( VOC) emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities. EPA is approving this SIP revision in accordance with the Clean Air Act ( CAA or Act).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on [ insert date 30 days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPAR03 OAR 2005 MD 0014. All documents in the docket are listed in the www. regulations. gov website. Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i. e.,

confidential business information ( CBI) 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 www. regulations. gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are 2 available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, ( 215) 814 2182, or by e mail at quinto. rose@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background On February 6, 2006 ( 71 FR 6028), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking ( NPR) for the State of Maryland. The NPR proposed approval of the amendments to control VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities, COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>. The formal SIP revision was submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment on October 31, 2005.

II. Summary of SIP Revision The amendments to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> are: ( 1) to reinstate the requirements for nonnutritional and specialty yeast installations to meet certain operational requirements to minimize VOC emissions, and ( 2) to clarify the 98 percent compliance demonstration is a 12 month rolling average.

Other specific requirements of COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> and the rationale for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR. 3 III. Final Action EPA is approving the amendments to the control of VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities, COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>, submitted on October 31, 2005, as a revision to the Maryland SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements 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 ( Public Law 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 4 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 requirement, 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 13045 " 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.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General 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 5 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. This rule is not a " major rule" as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 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 [ insert date 60 days from date of publication of this document in the Federal Register]. 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 pertaining to Maryland's amendments to the control of VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. ( See section 307( b)( 2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

___________ ___________________________ Dated: March 21, 2006 William Early, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 6 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52  [ AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart V  Maryland 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph ( c) is amended by revising the entry for COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> to read as follows:

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

( c)* * *

EPA APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP Code of Maryland administrative regulations ( COMAR) citation Title/ subject State effective date EPA approval date Additional explanation/ citation at 40 CFR § 52.1100 * * * * * * *

COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Sources * * * * * * *

COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Yeast Manufacturing 9/ 12/ 05 [ Insert Federal Register publication date] [ Insert page number where the document begins]

* * * * * * *

* * * * *


[Federal Register: March 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16139]
[DOCID:fr30mr06-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EF06-4011-000, et al.]

Southwestern Power Administration, et al.; Electric Rate and
Corporate Filings

March 22, 2006.
    The following filings have been made with the Commission. The
filings are listed in ascending order within each docket
classification.

1. Southwestern Power Administration

[Docket No. EF06-4011-000]

    Take notice that on February 3, 2006, the Deputy Secretary, U.S.
Department of Energy, pursuant to the authority vested on the Deputy
Secretary by Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00, effective December 6,
2001, and 00.001-00B, effective July 28, 2005, submitted to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission for confirmation and approval on a final
basis, the following Southwestern Power Administration (Southwestern)
Integrated System Rate Schedule for the period February 1, 2006,
through September 30, 2009.
    Rate Schedule P-05, Wholesale Rates for Hydro Peaking Power.
    Rate Schedule NFTS-05, Wholesale Rates for Non-Federal
Transmission/Interconnection Facilities Service.
    Rate Schedule EE-05, Wholesale Rate for Excess Energy.
    The document submitted by the Deputy Secretary states that the
System Rates will increase the annual revenue from $124,325,100 to
$133,342,029 primarily to recover increased expenditures in operation
and maintenance (O&M) and investment. In addition, the proposed rate
schedule indicates the need for an annual increase of $227,100 in
revenues received through the Purchased Power Adder to recover
increased purchased energy costs. The proposal also includes a
continuation of the Administrator's Discretionary Purchased Power Adder
Adjustment, to adjust the purchased power adder annually up to $0.0011
per kilowatthour annually. The adder will be $0.0029 per kWh beginning
February 1, 2006.
    Comment Date: April 3, 2006.

2. Midway Sunset Cogeneration Company

[Docket No. EL06-59-000]

    Take notice that on March 17, 2006, Midway Sunset Cogeneration
Company (MSCC) filed with the Commission a Petition for Declaratory
Order and Request for Expedited Consideration pursuant to Rule 207 of
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207
(2005).
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 17, 2006.

3. Indeck Energy Services of Silver Springs, Inc.

[Docket No. ER06-740-000]

    Take notice that on March 10, 2006, Indeck Energy Services of
Silver Springs, Inc. tendered for filing an application for market-
based rate authority.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 31, 2006.

4. BayCorp Holdings, Ltd.

[Docket No. PH06-30-000]

    Take notice that on March 17, 2006, BayCorp Holdings, Ltd. filed a
notice pursuant to 18 CFR 366.4(b)(1) claiming exemption from the
requirements of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005 pursuant
to 18 CFR 366.3(a) and 18 CFR 366.3(b).
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 7, 2006.

5. UniSource Energy Corporation; UniSource Energy Services, Inc.

[Docket No. PH06-31-000]

    Take notice that on March 16, 2006 UniSource Energy Corporation and
UniSource Energy Services, Inc. (collectively, Applicants) submitted
for filing a FERC-65B Waiver Notification. Applicants state that on
August 1, 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission granted
UniSource Energy Corporation in conjunction with its acquisition of the
Arizona electric and gas utility assets of Citizens Communications
Company exemptions under section 3(a)(1) from all provisions of the
Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 6, 2006.

6. Windpower Partners 1993, L.P.

[Docket No. QF85-561-005]

    Take notice that on March 17, 2006, Windpower Partners 1993, L.P.
submitted a notice of self-recertification to inform the Commission of
ownership changes to occur on or after March 20, 2006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 7, 2006.

Standard Paragraph

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-4597 Filed 3-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P