16102 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

(e) Required Actions 

Within 20 hours time-in-service: 

(1) Inspect the Airworthiness Limitations 

section of the applicable maintenance 

manual or Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness (ICA) and the component 

history card or equivalent record for TT strap 

P/N 2604067 and P/N 117–14110. Determine 

whether those records specify a life limit of 

25,000 flights or 10 years since the date of 

manufacture, whichever occurs first. 

(2) If the Airworthiness Limitations section 

of the applicable maintenance manual or ICA 

or the component history card or equivalent 

record do not specify a life limit for the TT 

strap, or if they specify a different life limit 

than in paragraph (e)(1), do the following: 

(i) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations 

section of the applicable maintenance 

manual or ICA by establishing a life limit of 

25,000 flights or 10 years since date of 

manufacture, whichever occurs first, for each 

TT strap P/N 2604067 and P/N 117–14110 by 

making pen-and-ink changes or by inserting 

a copy of this AD into the Airworthiness 

Limitations section of the maintenance 

manual or the ICA. For purposes of this AD, 

a flight would be counted anytime the 

helicopter lifts off into the air and then lands 

again regardless of the duration of the 

landing and regardless of whether the engine 

is shut down. 

(ii) Create a component history card or 

equivalent record for each TT strap P/N 

2604067 and P/N 117–14110, if one does not 

exist, and record a life limit of 25,000 flights 

or 10 years since date of manufacture, 

whichever occurs first. 

(3) Remove from service each TT strap that 

has reached or exceeded its life limit. 

(f) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits are prohibited. 

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Safety Management 

Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this 

AD. Send your proposal to Matt Fuller, 

Senior Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety 

Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, 

Texas 76177; telephone (817) 222–5110; 

email 9-ASW-FTW-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that 

you notify your principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office or 

certificate holding district office before 

operating any aircraft complying with this 

AD through an AMOC. 

(h) Additional Information 

(1) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service 

Bulletin ASB BO105LS–10A–013, Revision 0, 

dated March 9, 2015, which is not 

incorporated by reference, contains 

additional information about the subject of 

this AD. For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N. 

Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; 

telephone (972) 641–0000 or (800) 232–0323; 

fax (972) 641–3775; or at http://

www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub. You 

may review the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 

Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, 

TX 76177. 

(2) The subject of this AD is addressed in 

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 

No. 2015–0042, dated March 9, 2015. You 

may view the EASA AD on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov in the AD Docket. 

(i) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6200 Main Rotor System. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 16, 

2016. 

Scott A. Horn, 

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–06530 Filed 3–24–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army, Corps of 

Engineers 

33 CFR Part 334 

Disestablishment of Danger Zone for 

Meteorological Rocket Launching 

Facility, Shemya Island Area, AK 

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

DoD. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Air Force has 

requested that the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) disestablish the 

existing danger zone located in the 

Bering Sea near Shemya Island, Alaska. 

The danger zone was established on 

September 28, 1971. The purpose of the 

danger zone was to protect persons and 

property from dangers encountered in 

the area associated with the launching 

of weather rockets. The facility has not 

been used for this activity since the 

mid-1980s. As a result of the 

discontinued use of this area, the Air 

Force has requested the danger zone be 

disestablished. In the ‘‘Rules and 

Regulations’’ section of Federal 

Register, we are publishing the 

restricted area disestablishment as a 

direct final rule without prior proposal 

because we view this as a noncontroversial adjustment to our 

restricted area regulations and 

anticipate no adverse comment. We 

have explained our reasons for this 

approval in the preamble to the direct 

final rule. If we receive no adverse 

comment, we will not take further 

action on this rule and it will go into 

effect. If we receive adverse comment, 

we will withdraw the direct final rule 

and it will not take effect. We will 

address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. We will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so at this time. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by April 25, 2016. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

This document concerns the 

‘‘Disestablishment of Danger Zone for 

Meteorological Rocket Launching 

Facility, Shemya Island Area, AK.’’ For 

further information, including 

instructions on how to submit 

comments, please see the information 

provided in the direct final rule that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. 

Dated: March 18, 2016. 

Edward E. Belk, Jr., 

Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, 

Directorate of Civil Works. 

[FR Doc. 2016–06861 Filed 3–24–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[Docket No. EPA–R02–OAR–2016–0059; 

FRL–9944–21–Region] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plans; New Jersey, Carbon Monoxide 

Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the New Jersey 

Department of Environmental 

Protection. This revision will establish 

an updated ten-year carbon monoxide 

(CO) maintenance plan for the New 

Jersey portion of the New York-Northern 

New Jersey-Long Island (NYNNJLI) CO 

area which includes the following areas: 

Hudson, Essex, Bergen, and Union 

Counties, and the municipalities of 

Clifton, Passaic and Paterson in Passaic 

County. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the 2007 Attainment/Base Year 

CO emissions inventory. In addition, 

EPA proposes to approve the shutdown 

of 5 CO maintenance monitors in New 

Jersey. The New Jersey portion of the 

NYNNJLI CO area was redesignated to 

attainment of the CO National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) on 

August 23, 2002 and the maintenance 

plan was also approved at that time. By 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 16103 

this action, EPA is proposing to approve 

the second maintenance plan for this 

area because it provides for continued 

attainment for an additional ten years of 

the CO NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 25, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R02–OAR–2016–0059, at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Henry Feingersh feingersh.henry@

epa.gov for general questions, Raymond 

Forde forde.raymond@epa.gov for 

emissions inventory questions, or 

Matthew Laurita laurita.matthew@

epa.gov for mobile source related 

questions at the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Programs 

Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, NY 10007–1866, telephone 

number (212) 637–4249, fax number 

(212) 637–3901. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What is the nature of the EPA’s action? 

II. What is the Carbon Monoxide Limited 

Maintenance Plan for the New Jersey 

portion of the New York-Northern New 

Jersey-Long Island Carbon Monoxide 

area? 

III. What is included in a maintenance plan? 

A. Attainment Inventory 

B. Maintenance Demonstration 

C. Monitoring Network 

D. Verification of Continued Attainment 

E. Contingency Plan 

1. Control Measures 

2. Contingency Measures 

F. Conformity 

IV. What is the New Jersey Attainment/Base 

Year CO Inventory? 

V. Why is New Jersey shutting down 5 CO 

Maintenance Monitors? 

VI. What action is the EPA proposing to take? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the nature of the EPA’s 

action? 

The EPA is proposing to approve an 

updated ten-year carbon monoxide (CO) 

maintenance plan for the New Jersey 

portion of the New York–Northern New 

Jersey–Long Island (NYNNJLI) CO area. 

On August 23, 2002, the EPA approved 

a request from New Jersey to redesignate 

the New Jersey portion of the NYNNJLI 

CO area to attainment of the CO 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) (67 FR 54574). In addition, 

the EPA also approved at that time a 

ten-year CO maintenance plan for the 

area. The Clean Air Act (the Act) 

requires that an area redesignated to 

attainment of the CO NAAQS must 

submit a second ten-year CO 

maintenance plan to show how the area 

will continue to attain the CO standard 

for an additional ten years. On June 11, 

2015, New Jersey submitted a second 

ten-year CO maintenance plan for the 

New Jersey portion of the NYNNJLI CO 

area and requested that EPA approve the 

plan. This plan also included a request 

and the justification for shutting down 

4 CO maintenance monitors. On 

February 8, 2016, New Jersey submitted 

an addendum to the plan which 

provides additional information to 

justify the shutdown of one additional 

CO maintenance monitor. The following 

sections describe how the EPA made its 

determination proposing to approve the 

second ten-year maintenance plan. 

Additionally, the EPA is proposing to 

approve the 2007 Attainment/Base Year 

CO emissions inventory. Finally, the 

EPA proposes to approve the shutdown 

of 5 CO maintenance monitors in New 

Jersey. A more detailed discussion of 

the EPA’s review and proposed action is 

found in the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) available in the Docket 

for this action, and by contacting the 

individuals in the For Further 

Information Section. 

II. What is the Carbon Monoxide 

Limited Maintenance Plan for the New 

Jersey portion of the New York– 

Northern New Jersey–Long Island 

Carbon Monoxide area? 

A maintenance plan is a SIP revision 

that must demonstrate continued 

attainment of the applicable NAAQS in 

the maintenance area for at least ten 

years. The Act requires that a second 

ten-year plan be submitted in order to 

assure that the area will continue to stay 

in compliance with the relevant 

NAAQS. For the NYNNJLI CO area, the 

New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection is proposing 

to utilize EPA’s limited maintenance 

plan approach, as detailed in the EPA 

guidance memorandum, ‘‘Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option for 

Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment 

Areas’’ from Joseph Paisie, Group 

Leader, Integrated Policy and Strategies 

Group, Office of Air Quality and 

Planning Standards, dated October 6, 

1995. Pursuant to this approach, the 

EPA will consider the maintenance 

demonstration satisfied for areas if the 

monitoring data show the design value 

is at or below 7.65 parts per million 

(ppm), or 85 percent of the level of the 

8-hour CO NAAQS. The design value 

must be based on eight consecutive 

quarters of data. For such areas, there is 

no requirement to project emissions of 

CO over the maintenance period. EPA 

believes if the area begins the 

maintenance period at, or below, 85 

percent of the CO 8 hour NAAQS, the 

applicability of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

requirements, the control measures 

already in the SIP, and Federal 

measures, should provide adequate 

assurance of maintenance over the 10- 

year maintenance period. 

III. What is included in a maintenance 

plan? 

Section 175A of the Act sets forth the 

elements of maintenance plans for areas 

seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. The initial 

and subsequent ten-year plans must 

each demonstrate continued attainment 

of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten 

years after approval. EPA is proposing 

action on the second ten-year 

maintenance plan which covers the 

period from 2015 through 2024. The 

specific elements of a maintenance plan 

are: 

A. Attainment Inventory 

EPA’s October 6, 1995 Limited 

Maintenance Plan guidance states that 

for inventory purposes the state is only 

required to submit an attainment 

inventory to EPA that is based on 

monitoring data which shows 

attainment. There is no requirement to 

project emissions over the maintenance 

period. The calendar year inventory 

selected for the attainment inventory is 

2007. This means if 2007 is a calendar 

year which has monitoring data which 

demonstrates attainment of the 

standard, the 2007 base year inventory 

can be used as the attainment year 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16104 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1New Jersey has submitted subsequent 2012, 

2013, 2014, and 2015 Monitoring Network Plans. 

The EPA is only discussing the 2011 Plan because 

of its relevance to the CO Limited Maintenance 

Plan. 

inventory and no projection inventories 

are required over the years of the 

maintenance period. Only calendar year 

2007 summary emissions data (based on 

a winter season day) are required. In 

addition, the inventory should be 

consistent with EPA’s most recent 

guidance on emission inventories for 

nonattainment areas available at the 

time and should include emissions 

during the time period associated with 

the monitoring data showing 

attainment. 

New Jersey submitted a limited 

maintenance plan which included a 

2007 base year emissions inventory. The 

2007 inventory is also classified as the 

attainment year inventory for the 

limited maintenance plan. New Jersey 

has elected 2007 because it is the 

attainment base year that will be used 

for the limited maintenance plan and 

2007 represents one of the years of 

violation free monitored data in the 

area. The inventory included peak 

winter season daily emissions from 

stationary point, stationary area, nonroad mobile, and on-road mobile 

sources of CO. These emission estimates 

were prepared in accordance with EPA 

guidance. 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

CO inventory for Hudson, Essex, 

Bergen, and Union Counties, and the 

municipalities of Clifton, Passaic and 

Paterson in Passaic County. Details of 

the inventory review are located in 

section IV of this action. A more 

detailed discussion of how the emission 

inventory was reviewed and the results 

of EPA’s review are presented in the 

TSD. 

Table 1 presents a summary of the 

2007 CO peak winter season daily 

emissions estimates in tons per day for 

the NYNNJLI CO area. Again, under the 

Limited Maintenance Plan guidance, 

there is no requirement to project 

emissions over the maintenance period. 

TABLE 1—2007 BASE YEAR/ATTAINMENT EMISSIONS INVENTORY NYNNJLI CO AREA

[Tons/Peak Winter Season Day] 

County Point sources Area sources 

Onroad 

mobile 

sources 

Nonroad 

mobile 

sources 

Total 

Bergen .................................................................................. 1.82 14.75 346.29 139.60 502.47 

Essex ................................................................................... 5.52 12.93 198.99 75.20 292.64 

Hudson ................................................................................. 2.46 10.05 111.77 35.70 159.97 

Passaic ................................................................................. 0.32 6.52 144.70 42.30 193.84 

Union .................................................................................... 4.18 8.31 169.18 53.60 23.27 

Total .............................................................................. 14.30 52.56 970.93 346.50 1,384.19 

B. Maintenance Demonstration 

New Jersey has met the Limited 

Maintenance Plan air quality criteria 

requirement by demonstrating that its 

highest monitored design value is less 

than 85 percent (7.65 parts per million) 

of the CO standard of 9.0 parts per 

million. The highest monitored design 

value in the NYNNJLI CO area for the 

2013–2014 design year was 2.5 parts per 

million at two monitoring sites in New 

Jersey. In addition, New Jersey commits 

to continued implementation of all 

other Federal and State measures 

already implemented as part of its CO 

SIP. Thus, according to the Limited 

Maintenance Plan Guidance, emission 

projections are not required. 

C. Monitoring Network 

New Jersey continues to operate its 

CO monitoring network and will 

continue to work with the EPA through 

the air monitoring network review 

process as required by 40 CFR part 58 

to determine the adequacy of its 

network. 

On August 8, 2011, New Jersey 

submitted their ‘‘New Jersey Ambient 

Air Monitoring Network Plan 2011’’ to 

the EPA. This document described New 

Jersey’s ambient air monitoring network 

and also detailed proposed changes and 

the rationale for them.1 The reasoning 

behind the requested CO maintenance 

monitor shutdowns are included in that 

submittal. In a letter dated October 27, 

2011, the EPA told New Jersey that it 

will make a determination on New 

Jersey’s analysis in a revision to a CO 

SIP. Based on the EPA’s review, the EPA 

is proposing approval of these CO 

maintenance monitor shutdowns. The 

EPA’s review of the New Jersey analysis 

is included in the accompanying TSD 

and in Section V of this notice. 

New Jersey will continue annual 

reviews of its data in order to verify 

continued attainment of the NAAQS. As 

mentioned earlier, all of New Jersey’s 8- 

hour design values are well below the 

9.0 ppm 8-hour NAAQS for CO with the 

highest monitors in the New Jersey 

portion of the NYNNJLI reading 2.5 

ppm, as shown in Table 2. 

TABLE 2—DESIGN VALUES FOR CO IN

NEW JERSEY

[8-hour standard—9 parts per million] 

Monitoring location 

2013–2014 

Design value 

(parts per 

million) 

East Orange ......................... 2.5 

Camden Spruce Street ......... 1.2 

Elizabeth ............................... 2.2 

Elizabeth lab ......................... 1.8 

Jersey City ............................ 1.8 

Newark Firehouse ................ 2.5 

In its SIP revision, New Jersey 

submitted design values from 2006– 

2007 through 2012–2013. The EPA 

reviewed more recent data in addition 

to the submitted data and found the 

maximum 2013–2014 design value for 

New Jersey to be 2.5 ppm, which 

continues to show attainment of the 

NAAQS. 

D. Verification of Continued Attainment 

New Jersey will verify that the New 

Jersey portion of the NYNNJLI CO area 

continues to attain the CO NAAQS 

through an annual review of its 

monitoring data. If any design value 

exceeds 7.65 ppm, New Jersey will 

coordinate with EPA Region 2 to verify 

and evaluate the data and then, if 

warranted, develop a full maintenance 

plan for the affected maintenance area. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 16105 

E. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the Act requires 

that a maintenance plan include a 

contingency plan which includes 

contingency measures, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation 

of the area. Contingency measures do 

not have to be fully adopted at the time 

of redesignation. However, the 

contingency plan is considered to be an 

enforceable part of the SIP and should 

ensure that the contingency measures 

are adopted expeditiously once they are 

triggered by a specified event. In 

addition, the contingency plan includes 

a requirement that the State continue to 

implement all control measures used to 

bring the area into attainment. 

The triggers specified in New Jersey’s 

previous maintenance plan are included 

in this Limited Maintenance Plan. If 

design values in any maintenance area 

in New Jersey exceeds 7.65 parts per 

million (ppm), New Jersey will 

coordinate with the EPA to verify the 

validity of the data, evaluate the data, 

and analyze available air quality and 

meteorological data and related 

activities in the area. If design values 

show noncompliance with the 9 ppm 

standard, New Jersey will implement 

the appropriate contingency measures. 

1. Control Measures 

New Jersey has implemented a 

number of measures to control motor 

vehicle CO emissions. Emission 

reductions achieved through the 

implementation of these control 

measures are enforceable. These 

measures include the Federal Motor 

Vehicle Control Program, Federal 

reformulated gasoline, New Jersey’s pre1990 modifications to its inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) program, and local 

control measures relied on in the SIP. 

The State of New Jersey has 

demonstrated that actual enforceable 

emission reductions are responsible for 

the air quality improvement and that the 

CO emissions in the base year are not 

artificially low due to local economic 

downturn. The EPA finds that the 

combination of existing EPA approvedSIP and Federal measures contribute to 

the permanence and enforceability of 

reductions in ambient CO levels that 

have allowed the New Jersey portion of 

the NYNNJLI CO area to attain the 

NAAQS since 1995. 

New Jersey commits to continue 

implementation of all control measures 

used to bring the area into attainment. 

2. Contingency Measures 

The State plans to continue to use the 

contingency measure from the original 

maintenance plan. The plan included 

implementation of an enhanced I/M 

program. This program is fully 

operational and the State commits to 

meet the performance standard for an 

enhanced I/M program in an effort to 

maintain the CO NAAQS. Although the 

plan is currently in place, EPA guidance 

allows for it to act as a contingency 

measure. We approved this measure in 

the previous maintenance plan and are 

proposing to approve it in this action. If, 

in the future, it becomes necessary to 

reduce CO levels further, New Jersey 

will work with the local Transportation 

Planning Organizations or Metropolitan 

Planning Organizations to identify and 

implement transportation control 

measures such as Transportation 

Demand Management measures, signal 

improvement projects, bicycle projects, 

and various transit related projects as 

necessary. 

F. Conformity 

Section 176(c) of the Act defines 

conformity as meeting the SIP’s purpose 

of eliminating or reducing the severity 

and number of violations of the NAAQS 

and achieving expeditious attainment of 

such standards. The Act further defines 

conformity to mean that no Federal 

activity will: (1) Cause or contribute to 

any new violation of any standard in 

any area; (2) increase the frequency or 

severity of any existing violation of any 

standard in any area; or (3) delay timely 

attainment of any standard or any 

required interim emission reductions or 

other milestones in any area. 

The Federal transportation conformity 

rule, 40 CFR part 93 subpart A, sets 

forth the criteria and procedures for 

demonstrating and assuring conformity 

of transportation plans, programs and 

projects which are developed, funded or 

approved by the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, and by metropolitan 

planning organizations or other 

recipients of federal funds under Title 

23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws 

(49 U.S.C. chapter 53). The 

transportation conformity rule applies 

within all nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. As prescribed by the 

Rule, once an area has an applicable SIP 

with motor vehicle emissions budgets, 

the expected emissions from planned 

transportation activities must be 

consistent with (‘‘conform to’’) such 

established budgets for that area. 

In the case of the NYNNJLI, CO 

limited maintenance plan area, 

however, the emissions budgets may be 

treated as essentially not constraining 

for the length of this second 

maintenance period as long as the area 

continues to meet the limited 

maintenance criteria, because there is 

no reason to expect that these areas will 

experience so much growth in that 

period that a violation of the CO 

NAAQS would result. In other words, 

emissions from on-road transportation 

sources need not be capped for the 

maintenance period because it is 

unreasonable to believe that emissions 

from such sources would increase to a 

level that would threaten the air quality 

in this area for the duration of this 

maintenance period. Therefore, for the 

limited maintenance plan CO 

maintenance area, all Federal actions 

that require conformity determinations 

under the transportation conformity rule 

are not required to satisfy the regional 

emissions analysis requirements in 40 

CFR 93.118 or 93.119 of the rule (40 

CFR 93.109(e)). 

Since limited maintenance plan areas 

are still maintenance areas, however, 

transportation conformity 

determinations are still required for 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects. Specifically, for such 

determinations, transportation plans, 

transportation improvement programs, 

and projects must still demonstrate that 

they are fiscally constrained (40 CFR 

part 108) and must meet the criteria for 

consultation and Transportation Control 

Measure (TCM) implementation in the 

conformity rule (40 CFR 93.112 and 40 

CFR 93.113, respectively). In addition, 

projects in limited maintenance areas 

will still be required to meet the criteria 

for CO hot spot analyses to satisfy 

‘‘project-level’’ conformity 

determinations (40 CFR 93.116 and 40 

CFR 93.123) which must incorporate the 

latest planning assumptions and models 

that are available. All aspects of 

transportation conformity (with the 

exception of satisfying the emission 

budget test) will still be required. 

Approval of the limited maintenance 

plan does not supersede the current 

2014 motor vehicle emissions budget. 

However, conformity determinations 

conducted now and in the future would 

not need to conduct an emission budget 

test. 

If the area should monitor CO 

concentrations at or above the limited 

maintenance eligibility criteria or 7.65 

parts per million then that maintenance 

area would no longer qualify for a 

limited maintenance plan and would 

revert to a full maintenance plan. In this 

event, the limited maintenance plan 

would remain applicable for conformity 

purposes only until the full 

maintenance plan is submitted and the 

EPA has found its motor vehicle 

emissions budget adequate for 

conformity purposes or the EPA 

approves the full maintenance plan SIP 

revision. At that time regional emissions 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16106 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

analyses would resume as a 

transportation conformity criteria. 

On July 27, 2015, the EPA posted New 

Jersey’s CO limited maintenance plan 

on its Adequacy Review Web site: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/

stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. 

We did not receive any comments by 

the August 26, 2015, deadline. The EPA 

may now elect to proceed with finding 

the CO limited maintenance plan 

adequate for transportation conformity 

purposes either as part of the SIP’s final 

approval or in a separate notice of 

adequacy. The EPA’s adequacy review 

process is described in 40 CFR part 

93.118(f). 

In addition to transportation 

conformity, approval of the CO limited 

maintenance plan would have 

implications for general conformity (40 

CFR part 93 Subpart B). Federal actions 

subject to general conformity would be 

presumed to conform under a limited 

maintenance plan as actions in this area 

will automatically satisfy the budget test 

of 40 CFR 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A), as 

described in the October 1995 EPA 

memo ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan 

Option for Nonclassifiable CO 

Nonattainment Areas’’ from Joseph 

Paisie, Group Leader, Integrated Policy 

and Strategies Group, Office of Air 

Quality and Planning Standards. 

IV. What is the New Jersey Attainment/ 

Base Year CO Inventory? 

Section 182(a)(3) and 172(c)(3) of the 

Act requires the periodic submission of 

a base inventory for SIP planning 

processes to address the pollutants for 

the eight hour-ozone, PM2.5 and CO 

national ambient air quality standard. 

Identifying the base year gives certainty 

to states that requires submission of the 

ozone, PM2.5 and CO emission 

inventories periodically. These 

requirements allow the EPA, based on 

the states’ progress in reducing 

emissions, to periodically reassess its 

policies and air quality standards and 

revise them as necessary. Most 

important, the ozone, PM2.5 and CO 

inventories will be used to develop and 

assess new control strategies that the 

states will need to submit in their 

attainment demonstration SIPs for the 

new national ambient air quality 

standards for ozone, PM2.5 and for CO. 

The base year inventory may also serve 

as part of statewide inventories for 

purposes of regional modeling in 

transport areas. The base year inventory 

plays an important role in modeling 

demonstrations for areas classified as 

nonattainment and outside transport 

regions. For the reasons stated above, 

ideally the EPA would therefore 

emphasize the importance and benefits 

of developing a comprehensive, current, 

and accurate emission inventory 

(similar to the 1990 base year inventory 

effort). In this case, the 2007 base year 

has been selected as the inventory that 

will be used for planning purposes for 

the NYNNJLI CO area. 

There are specific components of an 

acceptable emission inventory. The 

emission inventory must meet certain 

minimum requirements for reporting 

each source category. Specifically, the 

source requirements are detailed below. 

The review process, which is 

described in the accompanying TSD, is 

used to determine that all components 

of the base year inventory are present. 

This review also evaluates the level of 

supporting documentation provided by 

the state, assesses whether the 

emissions were developed according to 

current EPA guidance, and evaluates the 

quality of the data. 

The review process is outlined here 

and consists of 8 points that the 

inventory must include. For a base year 

emission inventory to be acceptable, it 

must pass all of the following 

acceptance criteria: 

1. Evidence that the inventory was 

quality assured by the state and its 

implementation documented. 

2. The point source inventory was 

complete. 

3. Point source emissions were 

prepared or calculated according to the 

current EPA guidance. 

4. The area source inventory was 

complete. 

5. The area source emissions were 

prepared or calculated according to the 

current EPA guidance. 

6. Non-road mobile emissions were 

prepared according to the current EPA 

guidance for all of the source categories. 

7. The method (e.g., Highway 

Performance Monitoring System or a 

network transportation planning model) 

used to develop VMT estimates 

followed the EPA guidance. 

8. On-road mobile emissions were 

prepared according to the current EPA 

guidance. 

Based on the EPA’s review, New 

Jersey satisfied all of the EPA’s 

requirements for purposes of providing 

a comprehensive, accurate, and current 

inventory of actual emissions for CO 

areas. Where applicable, CO peak winter 

season daily emissions are provided for 

the CO nonattainment area. The 

inventory was developed in accordance 

with Emission Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and 

Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional 

Haze Regulation, dated August 2005. 

Using MOVES to Prepare Emission 

Inventories in State Implementation 

Plans and Transportation Conformity: 

Technical Guidance for MOVES2010, 

2010a and 2010b, April 2012, and 

Example Documentation Report for 

1990 Base Year for Ozone and CO SIP 

Emissions Inventories, March 1992. 

A summary of the EPA’s review is 

given below: 

1. The Quality Assurance (QA) plan 

was implemented for all portions of the 

inventory. The QA plan included a QA/ 

Quality control (QC) program for 

assessing data completeness and 

standard range checking. Critical data 

elements relative to the inventory 

sources were assessed for completeness. 

QA checks were performed relative to 

data collection and analysis, and double 

counting of emissions from point, area 

and mobile sources. QA/QC checks 

were conducted to ensure accuracy of 

units, unit conversions, transposition of 

figures, and calculations. The inventory 

is well documented. New Jersey 

provided documentation detailing the 

methods used to develop emissions 

estimates for each category. In addition, 

New Jersey identified the sources of 

data used in developing the inventory. 

2. The point source emissions are 

complete and in accordance with the 

EPA guidance. 

3. The point source emissions were 

prepared/calculated in accordance with 

the EPA guidance. 

4. The area source emissions are 

complete and in accordance with the 

EPA guidance. 

5. Area source emissions were 

prepared/calculated in accordance with 

the EPA guidance. 

6. Emission estimates for the non-road 

mobile source categories are correctly 

based on the latest non-road mobile 

model or other appropriate guidance 

and prepared in accordance with the 

EPA guidance. 

7. The method used to develop VMT 

estimates is in accordance with the EPA 

guidance and was adequately described 

and documented in the inventory 

report. 

8. The latest MOVES model was used 

in accordance with the EPA’s guidance. 

The 2007 base year inventory has 

been developed in accordance with EPA 

guidance. Therefore, EPA is proposing 

to approve the 2007 base year CO 

emission inventory. A more detailed 

discussion of how the emission 

inventory was reviewed and the results 

of the review are presented in the TSD. 

Detailed emission inventory 

development procedures can be found 

in the following document: Emission 

Inventory Guidance for Implementation 

of Ozone and Particulate Matter 

NAAQS and Regional Haze Regulation, 

dated August 2005; Using MOVES to 

Prepare Emission Inventories in State 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 16107 

Implementation Plans and 

Transportation Conformity: Technical 

Guidance for MOVES2010, 2010a and 

2010b, April 2012; and Example 

Documentation Report for 1990 Base 

Year for Ozone and CO SIP Emissions 

Inventories, March 1992. See Table 1 for 

a summary of 2007 CO peak winter 

season daily emission estimates by 

source sector and by county for the 

NYNNJLI CO area. 

V. Why is New Jersey shutting down 5 

CO Maintenance Monitors? 

In order to conserve resources, the 

State is seeking to discontinue 

monitoring in Burlington, Freehold, 

Morristown, Perth Amboy, and East 

Orange since current air quality levels 

do not warrant the additional expense of 

running CO monitors in those areas. The 

State has committed to continue CO 

monitoring in Camden and Elizabeth, 

and will reestablish CO monitoring in 

Burlington, Freehold, Morristown, Perth 

Amboy, and East Orange if air quality in 

Camden and Elizabeth degrade 

significantly. The Camden and Elizabeth 

sites have been judged to be 

representative of these 5 CO 

maintenance monitor sites and are thus 

acting as their surrogate sites. Starting in 

the early 1970’s, EPA has set national 

standards that have considerably 

reduced emissions of CO and other 

pollutants from motor vehicles, 

including tailpipe emissions, new 

vehicle technologies, and clean fuels 

programs. Because of this, the EPA 

believes that it is unlikely that the 

maintenance area will exceed the CO 

NAAQS again. Thus, we believe that the 

revisions that New Jersey has made to 

its maintenance plan will continue to 

protect the citizens of New Jersey from 

high CO concentrations, and also 

conserve resources. Additional detail 

can be seen in the accompanying TSD 

to this notice. 

VI. What action is the EPA proposing to 

take? 

The EPA has evaluated New Jersey’s 

submittals for consistency with the Act 

and Agency regulations and policy. The 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

Jersey’s CO limited maintenance plan 

because it meets the requirements set 

forth in section 175A of the Act and 

continues to demonstrate that the 

NAAQS for CO will continue to be met 

for the next ten years. The EPA is also 

proposing to approve the 2007 

Attainment/Base Year CO emissions 

inventory. Finally, the EPA also 

proposes to approve the shutdown of 5 

CO maintenance monitors in New 

Jersey, since CO monitoring will 

continue at other representative 

locations across the State. 

The EPA views the SIP revisions 

proposed in today’s proposal as 

separable actions. This means that if the 

EPA receives adverse comments on 

particular portions of this notice and not 

on other portions, the EPA may choose 

not to take final action at the same time 

in a single notice on all of these SIP 

revisions. Instead, the EPA may choose 

to take final action on these SIP 

revisions in separate notices. 

Interested parties may participate in 

the Federal rulemaking procedure by 

submitting written comments to the 

EPA Region 2 Office by the method 

discussed in the ADDRESSES section of 

this action. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide the 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 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and the EPA notes 

that it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 

does not apply to this action. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: March 14, 2016. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2016–06704 Filed 3–24–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 580 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0037] 

RIN 2127–AL39 

Odometer Disclosure Requirements 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This notice is being issued 

pursuant to the Moving Ahead for 

Progress in the 21st Century Act of 2012 

requiring NHTSA to prescribe 

regulations permitting States to adopt 

schemes for electronic odometer 

disclosure statements. To permit States 

to allow electronic odometer 

disclosures, NHTSA is proposing to 

amend the existing requirements to 

clarify that most of those requirements 

apply regardless of the technology used 

for the disclosure. NHTSA is further 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS