71060 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

DATES: This deviation is effective from

7 a.m. on December 1, 2000 through 5

p.m. on December 15, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Unless otherwise indicated,

documents referred to in this notice are

available for inspection or copying at

the office of the Eighth Coast Guard

District, Bridge Administration Branch,

Commander (ob), 501 Magazine Street,

New Orleans, Louisiana, 70130–3396.

The Bridge Administration Branch

maintains the public docket for this

temporary deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Phil

Johnson, Bridge Administration Branch,

telephone (504) 589–2965.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The State

Route 82, swing span bridge across

Sabine Lake, mile 10.2, near Port

Arthur, Texas, has a vertical clearance

of 9 feet above high water in the closedto-navigation position and unlimited

clearance in the open-to-navigation

position. Navigation on the waterway

consists primarily of fishing vessels, and

recreational craft, although the bridge is

occasionally transited by small tugs

with tows, transporting sand, gravel and

marine shells. The State of Texas,

Department of Transportation requested

a temporary deviation from the normal

operation of the drawbridge in order to

accommodate the maintenance work,

involving construction of a new

operator house and replacement of the

submarine power supply cable and

other electrical and mechanical repairs.

This maintenance is necessary for the

continued operation of the bridge. An

alternate route via the Gulf Intracoastal

Waterway is available.

This deviation allows the draw of the

State Route 82 Bridge swing span

drawbridge across Sabine Lake, mile

10.0, to remain closed to navigation

from 7 a.m. on December 1, 2000

through 5 p.m. on December 15, 2000.

Dated: November 14, 2000.

Paul J. Pluta,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

Eighth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 00–30392 Filed 11–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[NH–45–7172a; A–1–FRL–6906–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans and

Designations of Areas for Air Quality

Planning Purposes; State of New

Hampshire; Revision to the Carbon

Monoxide State Implementation Plan,

City of Nashua; Carbon Monoxide

Redesignation Request, Maintenance

Plan, Transportation Conformity

Budget, and Emissions Inventory for

the City of Nashua; Carbon Monoxide

Redesignation Request, Maintenance

Plan, Transportation Conformity

Budget, and Emissions Inventory for

the City of Manchester

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is redesignating the

Nashua, New Hampshire nonattainment

area to attainment for the carbon

monoxide (CO) air quality standard and

approving a maintenance plan that will

insure that the Nashua area remains in

attainment. The EPA is also

redesignating the Manchester, New

Hampshire nonattainment area to

attainment for the CO air quality

standard and approving a maintenance

plan that will insure that the

Manchester area remains in attainment.

Under the Clean Air Act, as amended in

1990 (the CAA), designations can be

revised if sufficient data are available to

warrant such revisions and the request

to redesignate shows that all of the

requirements of section 107(d)(E)(3) of

the CAA have been met. EPA is

approving the New Hampshire

maintenance plans and other

redesignation submittals because they

meet the maintenance plan and

redesignation requirements, and will

ensure that the two areas remains in

attainment. The approved maintenance

plans will become a federally

enforceable part of the New Hampshire

State Implementation Plan (SIP). In this

action, EPA is also approving the New

Hampshire 1990 baseline emission

inventories for both of these areas,

transportation conformity budgets for

both areas and a revision to the motor

vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/

M) SIP approved for the Nashua area.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

January 29, 2001 without further notice,

unless EPA receives adverse comment

by December 29, 2000. If adverse

comment is received, EPA will publish

a timely withdrawal of the direct final

rule in the Federal Register and inform

the public that the rule will not take

effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

David Conroy, Unit Manager, Air

Quality Planning, Office of Ecosystem

Protection (mail code CAQ), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, New

England office, One Congress Street,

Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114–2023.

Copies of the State’s redesignation

requests and other information

supporting this action and EPA’s

technical support document are

available for public inspection during

normal business hours, by appointment

at the Office of Ecosystem Protection,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

New England office, One Congress

Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA and Air

Resources Division, Department of

Environmental Services, 6 Hazen Drive,

P.O. Box 95, Concord, NH 03302–0095.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey S. Butensky, Environmental

Planner, Air Quality Planning Unit of

the Office of Ecosystem Protection (mail

code CAQ), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, New England office,

One Congress Street, Boston, MA

02114–2023, (617) 918–1665 or at

butensky.jeff@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of SIP Revisions

Why is EPA taking this action?

Why are we concerned about carbon

monoxide?

How did EPA establish Manchester and

Nashua as nonattainment for carbon

monoxide?

Why did New Hampshire initiate an

Inspection and Maintenance program in

the Nashua area?

What are the related Clean Air Act

requirements, and how does New

Hampshire meet them?

Why Is EPA Taking This Action?

On February 2, 1999, the State of New

Hampshire submitted formal CO

redesignation requests for the City of

Manchester and the City of Nashua.

These two submittals also included

maintenance plans, 1990 CO emission

inventories, and transportation

conformity budgets for both cities. Both

of these submittals are being approved

in today’s action. New Hampshire also

submitted a revision to the CO

attainment SIP for Nashua. This

submittal, dated February 1, 1999,

requests to replace the previously

implemented CO I/M program in the

Nashua area with controls consisting of

the existing federal Tier 1 emission

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 71061

1Tier 1 motor vehicle standards have been

implemented beginning with model year 1994. 2Reformulated gasoline has been sold since 1995

in the four southernmost counties of New

Hampshire (i.e., Merrimack, Hillsborough,

Rockingham, and Strafford). 3EPA defines the NAAQS as nine parts per

million averaged over an eight-hour period, and this

threshold cannot be exceeded more than once a

year or an area would be violating the NAAQS.

4Nashua, Hollis, Merrimack, Litchfield, Hudson,

Milford, Amherst, Pelham, Londonderry, Derry,

Windham, and Salem.

5House Bill 674, approved by the New

Hampshire State Legislature in 1993, terminated the

Motor Vehicle Inspection Program, effective January

1, 1995.

standards for new vehicles 1 and the

federal reformulated gasoline program

(RFG).2 This request is also being

approved in today’s action. Please note

that if EPA receives adverse comment

on an amendment, paragraph, or section

of this rule and if that provision may be

severed from the remainder of the rule,

EPA may adopt as final those provisions

of the rule that are not the subject of an

adverse comment.

Why Are We Concerned About Carbon

Monoxide?

Inhaling high levels of CO inhibits the

blood’s capacity to carry oxygen to

organs and tissues. Persons with heart

disease, children, and individuals with

respiratory diseases are particularly

sensitive to CO. Effects of CO on healthy

adults include impaired exercise

capacity, visual perception, manual

dexterity, learning functions, and ability

to perform complex tasks. As a result of

these potential health impacts, EPA

developed National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS), or the

level at which CO concentrations in the

ambient air become unhealthful.3 In

response to the NAAQS and pursuant to

CAA requirements, States have

developed programs to reduce CO to

levels that are below the NAAQS.

How Did EPA Establish Manchester and

Nashua as Nonattainment for Carbon

Monoxide?

The City of Manchester was

designated nonattainment on March 31,

1978 (43 FR 8962) and the City of

Nashua was designated nonattainment

on April 11, 1980 (45 FR 24869). On

November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 were enacted.

Public Law 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399,

codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Pursuant to Section 107(d)(1)(C) of the

CAA, the City of Manchester and the

City of Nashua retained their

designations of nonattainment for

carbon monoxide by operation of law.

See (56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991)).

At the same time, both areas were

classified as ‘‘not classified’’ since

ambient monitoring data for both areas

was showing attainment of the CO

NAAQS.

Because these areas were not

classified under the CAA, it is section

172 of the CAA that sets forth the

applicable requirements for these

nonattainment areas. The 1990 CAA

required such areas to achieve the

standard by November 15, 1995, and

both Manchester and Nashua have

fulfilled this requirement.

On February 1, 1999, the State of New

Hampshire sent EPA a CO attainment

plan revision request for Nashua, and on

February 2, 1999, submitted a

redesignation request, maintenance

plan, requisite emission inventory, and

conformity budgets for the City of

Nashua. Similarly, on February 2, 1999,

New Hampshire submitted a

redesignation request, maintenance

plan, requisite emission inventory, and

conformity budget for the City of

Manchester. All of these components

are being approved today and are

discussed in detail in this document.

New Hampshire submitted evidence

that the State held public hearings on

January 7, 1999, for the Nashua CO

attainment plan revision, the Nashua

CO redesignation request and related

components, and the Manchester CO

redesignation request and related

components.

Why Did New Hampshire Initiate an

Inspection and Maintenance Program

in the Nashua Area?

In 1985, the State of New Hampshire

submitted several SIP revisions forming

the components the CO attainment plan

that included a basic I/M program for

CO. This basic CO I/M program was

implemented in Nashua and eleven

surrounding towns 4 starting in 1987.

The program was designed to cease

operating on January 1, 1995 and the

State legislature allowed it to cease at

that time.5 The Nashua area came into

attainment with the CO NAAQS in

1987, and has continued to maintain

attainment with the CO standard since

then.

Prior to redesignation, New

Hampshire cannot remove the Nashua

CO I/M program from its SIP unless it

makes a demonstration under CAA

section 193, the so-called savings

clause, that the State is replacing that

program with another that achieves

equivalent or greater emissions

reductions in the nonattainment area.

Therefore, in addition to requesting that

EPA redesignate the Nashua area to

attainment, the State also submitted a

request to replace the Nashua CO I/M

program with controls consisting of the

Tier 1 emission standards and the

reformulated gasoline program (RFG).

These programs became effective in

New Hampshire in 1994 and 1995,

respectively.

The New Hampshire Department of

Environmental Services (NHDES)

conducted an analysis that provides

evidence that the Tier 1 emission

standards and the RFG program are

providing equal or more emission

reductions that the Nashua CO I/M

program. The calculations show that the

replacement package of measures (i.e.

Tier 1 standards and RFG) provides

approximately 10 tons per day more

emission reductions than the basic I/M

program for CO. Therefore, New

Hampshire demonstrated that the

replacement programs provided more of

a benefit than the Nashua CO I/M

program. Based on this conclusion, EPA

is approving New Hampshire’s request

to replace the I/M program with the

aforementioned replacement controls as

a prerequisite for redesignating Nashua

to attainment for CO. For more

information, please see the Technical

Support Document.

What Are the Related Clean Air Act

Requirements, and How Does New

Hampshire Meet Them?

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 1990 Clean

Air Act Amendments provides five

specific requirements that an area must

meet in order to be redesignated from

nonattainment to attainment.

1. The area must have attained the

applicable NAAQS;

2. The area must have a fully

approved SIP under section 110(k) of

CAA;

3. The air quality improvement must

be permanent and enforceable;

4. The area must have a fully

approved maintenance plan pursuant to

section 175A of the CAA;

5. The area must meet all applicable

requirements under section 110 and Part

D of the CAA.

The New Hampshire redesignation

request meets the five requirements of

section 107(d)(3)(E) as discussed in the

following:

1. Attainment of the CO NAAQS—

New Hampshire has CO air monitoring

data that provides evidence that both

Manchester and Nashua have met the

CO NAAQS. To attain the CO NAAQS,

an area must have complete qualityassured data showing no more than one

exceedance of the NAAQS over at least

two consecutive years. The ambient air

CO monitoring data relied upon by New

Hampshire in its redesignation request

shows no violations of the CO NAAQS

since 1987 in Nashua and since 1988 in

Manchester. In addition, the state

71062 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

submitted modeling results using EPA’s

MOBILE5b emission model with

specific inputs described in the

submittal and New Hampshire also ran

the CAL3QHC (version 2.0) dispersion

model for the key traffic intersections

addressed in the CO SIP. These

modeling runs show no violations of the

CO NAAQS throughout the

maintenance period (through 2010 and

2020). New Hampshire also has

committed to continue to monitor CO in

both Manchester and Nashua.

2. Fully Approved SIP—New

Hampshire’s CO SIPs are fully approved

by EPA as meeting all the requirements

of Section 110 of the Act, including the

requirement in Section 110(a)(2)(I) to

meet all the applicable requirements of

Part D (relating to nonattainment),

which were due prior to the date of New

Hampshire’s redesignation request. On

February 26, 1985, March 1, 1985,

September 12, 1985, and December 3,

1985, New Hampshire submitted

documents that, taken together,

constitute the CO attainment plan for

Nashua, including a CO I/M program for

the Nashua area. In addition to this I/M

program, the State implemented several

intersection and traffic flow measures in

Nashua to reach attainment. On August

4, 1986, EPA issued a conditional

approval of the States’ I/M plan for the

Nashua area (51 FR 27878). The I/M

plan, which was a necessary component

of the Nashua attainment plan, was

subsequently approved on June 12, 1987

(52 FR 22503), resulting in EPA’s final

approval of the attainment plan SIP on

August 25, 1988 (53 FR 32391).

On October 5, 1982, and December 20,

1982, the State submitted an attainment

plan for Manchester that EPA

subsequently approved on June 27, 1983

(48 FR 29479). To reach attainment, the

state implemented signal adjustments

and the addition of turn lanes in the

downtown Manchester area.

Before EPA may redesignate the New

Hampshire areas to attainment, the SIP

must have fulfilled the applicable

requirements of part D. Under part D, an

area’s classification indicates the

requirements to which it is subject.

Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic

nonattainment requirements applicable

to all nonattainment areas, classified as

well as not classifiable. Therefore, to be

redesignated to attainment, the State

must meet the applicable requirements

of subpart 1 of part D—specifically

sections 172(c) and 176. Additionally,

the 1990 CAA required that CO

nonattainment areas such as Manchester

and Nashua to achieve other specific

new requirements. Each of these

requirements are discussed in greater

detail below.

Reasonably Available Control

Measures: The General Preamble for the

implementation of Title One of the

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57

FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)) explains that

section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for

all nonattainment areas to provide for

the implementation of all Reasonably

Available Control Measures (RACM) as

expeditiously as practicable. The EPA

interprets this requirement to impose a

duty on all nonattainment areas to

consider all available control measures

and to adopt and implement such

measures as are reasonably available for

implementation in the area as

components of the area’s attainment

demonstration. This includes the

previously mentioned CO I/M program

in Nashua and the street and

intersection improvements in both

Manchester and Nashua. Because each

area has reached attainment, no

additional measures are needed to

provide for attainment.

Emission Inventory: Under the Clean

Air Act as amended, States have the

responsibility to inventory emissions

contributing to NAAQS nonattainment,

to track these emissions over time, and

to ensure that control strategies are

being implemented that reduce

emissions and move areas toward

attainment. Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA

requires that nonattainment plan

provisions include a comprehensive,

accurate, and current inventory of actual

emissions from all sources of relevant

pollutants in the nonattainment area.

New Hampshire included the requisite

inventory in the February 2, 1999

submittals for both Manchester and

Nashua using 1990 as the base year for

the inventory. Stationary point sources,

stationary area sources, on-road mobile

sources, and non-road mobile sources of

CO were included in the inventories.

The inventory is designed to address

actual CO emissions for the area during

the peak CO season. Available guidance

for preparing emission inventories is

provided in the General Preamble (57

FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)). In today’s

action, EPA is approving the emission

inventories for the Manchester and

Nashua areas.

New Source Review: In an October 14,

1994 memorandum from Mary D.

Nichols entitled ‘‘Part D New Source

Review (part D NSR) Requirements for

Areas Requesting Redesignation to

Attainment,’’ EPA established a new

policy under which nonattainment areas

may be redesignated to attainment

notwithstanding the lack of a fullyapproved part D NSR program, provided

the program is not relied upon for

maintenance. Consistent with policy,

EPA is not requiring as a prerequisite to

redesignation that the Manchester and

Nashua CO nonattainment areas have a

fully approved part D NSR program that

meets the CAA requirements of 1990. In

making this decision, EPA found that

New Hampshire has not relied on its

current SIP approved NSR program for

CO sources to maintain attainment. On

July 2, 1999, New Hampshire submitted

NSR SIP revisions to make its rules

consistent with the CAA requirements

of 1990. In addition, the federal

Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) program under 40 CFR 52.21 will

apply in the Manchester and Nashua CO

areas once redesignated to prevent

emission increases from new major new

sources or major modifications in these

areas from causing or contributing to a

violation of the NAAQS.

Conformity: Under section 176(c) of

the CAA, States are required to submit

revisions to their SIPs that include

criteria and procedures to ensure that

federal actions conform to the air

quality planning goals in the applicable

SIPs. The requirement to determine

conformity applies to transportation

plans, programs, and projects

developed, funded or approved under

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

Act (‘‘transportation conformity’’), as

well as all other federal actions

(‘‘general conformity’’). Congress

provided for the State revisions to be

submitted one year after the date of

promulgation of final EPA conformity

regulations. EPA promulgated revised

final transportation conformity

regulations on August 15, 1997 (62 FR

43780) and final general conformity

regulations on November 30, 1993 (58

FR 63214).

These conformity rules require that

the States adopt both transportation and

general conformity provisions in the SIP

for areas designated nonattainment or

subject to a maintenance plan approved

under CAA section 175A. Pursuant to

Sec. 51.390 of the transportation

conformity rule, the State of New

Hampshire was required to submit a SIP

revision containing transportation

conformity criteria and procedures

consistent with those established in the

federal rule by August 15, 1998.

Similarly, pursuant to Sec. 51.851 of the

general conformity rule, New

Hampshire was required to submit a SIP

revision containing general conformity

criteria and procedures consistent with

those established in the federal rule by

December 1, 1994.

On July 10, 1999, the State of New

Hampshire submitted a general

conformity rule that EPA approved into

the SIP on August 16, 1999 (64 FR

44417). In addition, New Hampshire has

a State approved transportation

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 71063

conformity rule that was officially

submitted to EPA for inclusion into the

SIP on December 7, 1998. EPA has not

yet taken action on the transportation

conformity rule.

Although New Hampshire does not

yet have an approved transportation

conformity SIP, EPA may approve this

redesignation request. EPA interprets

the requirement of a fully approved SIP

in section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean that,

for a redesignation request to be

approved, the State must have met all

requirements that become applicable to

the subject area before or at the time of

the submission of the redesignation

request. EPA’s federal conformity rules

require the performance of conformity

analyses in the absence of state-adopted

rules. Therefore, a delay in approving

state rules does not relieve an area from

the obligation to implement conformity

requirements.

Areas are subject to the conformity

requirements regardless of whether they

are redesignated to attainment and must

implement conformity under all

circumstances, therefore, it is reasonable

to view these requirements as not being

applicable requirements for purposes of

evaluating a redesignation request.

Furthermore, New Hampshire has

continually fulfilled all of the

requirements of the federal

transportation conformity and general

conformity rules, so it is not necessary

that the State have their transportation

conformity rule approved in the SIP

before redesignation to insure that New

Hampshire meet the substance of the

conformity requirements.

On January 30, 1996, EPA modified

its national policy regarding the

interpretation of the provisions of

section 107(d)(3)(E) concerning the

applicable requirements for purposes of

reviewing a CO redesignation request

(61 FR 2918 (January 30, 1996)). Under

this new policy, for the reasons

discussed, EPA believes that the CO

redesignation request may be approved

notwithstanding the lack of approved

state transportation conformity rules.

Each of the redesignation requests

from New Hampshire contained carbon

monoxide motor vehicle emission

budgets for use in conformity. Those

budgets were 55.83 tons per day for

Manchester and 60.13 tons per day for

Nashua. On March 2, 1999, the D.C.

Circuit Court ruled that submitted

emission budgets cannot be used for

transportation conformity

determinations until EPA has

affirmatively found them adequate. EPA

published an adequacy notice in the

Federal Register on February 29, 2000

(65 FR 10785) notifying the public that

we have found the motor vehicle

emissions budgets for the New

Hampshire cities of Manchester and

Nashua, received by EPA on February 2,

1999 as part of the CO redesignation

requests, adequate for conformity

purposes. This Federal Register notice

was simply an announcement of a

finding that we have already made in a

letter to the New Hampshire Department

of Environmental Services on November

2, 1999. These budgets must be used in

future conformity determinations,

thereby capping motor vehicle

emissions and preventing monitored CO

values from exceeding the NAAQS.

In this action, EPA is approving the

CO emission budgets submitted by New

Hampshire for the cities of Manchester

and Nashua into the CO SIP.

3. Improvement in Air Quality Due to

Permanent and Enforceable Measures—

EPA approved all of the components of

New Hampshire’s CO SIPs, submitted in

1982 for Manchester and 1985 for

Nashua. Emission reductions achieved

through the implementation of control

measures contained in New

Hampshire’s CO SIPs are enforceable. In

Manchester, this included the addition

of turn lanes at Elm and Bridge Streets.

In Nashua, this included making Lowell

Street a two way thoroughfare, the

development of the Kinsley Street

extension, removal of parking on Main

Street, and Main Street traffic

optimizations. In addition, a basic CO

I/M program was initiated in Nashua

and eleven surrounding towns in 1987

to address high levels of CO recorded at

the Main Street monitor. EPA is

allowing New Hampshire to replace this

program with the Tier 1 motor vehicle

standards and RFG, which were

implemented in1994 and 1995,

respectively.

Manchester and Nashua have been

achieving the CO NAAQS since 1987

and 1988, respectively, and both areas

continue to monitor attainment to date.

The air quality improvements in both

cities are due to the permanent and

enforceable measures contained in the

SIPs. EPA finds that the combination of

certain existing EPA-approved SIP and

federal measures contribute to the

permanence and enforceability of

reduction in ambient CO levels that

have allowed the area to attain the

NAAQS.

4. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan

Under Section 175A—Section 175A of

the CAA sets forth the elements of a

maintenance plan for areas seeking

redesignation from nonattainment to

attainment. The plan must demonstrate

continued attainment of the applicable

NAAQS for at least ten years after the

Administrator approves a redesignation

to attainment. Eight years after the

redesignation, the state must submit a

revised maintenance plan which

demonstrates attainment for the ten

years following the initial ten-year

period. To provide for the possibility of

future NAAQS violations, the

maintenance plan must contain

contingency measures, with a schedule

for implementation adequate to assure

prompt correction of any air quality

problems.

Section 175A of the Clean Air Act

states that the twenty year maintenance

period must consist of an initial ten year

maintenance plan and the submittal of

a second ten year maintenance plan

eight years after redesignation. In the

Manchester and Nashua CO

redesignation requests, New Hampshire

modeled for 2010 in addition to 2020.

In addition, the State submitted a

maintenance plan that extends to 2020

even though maintenance plans are

typically only applicable for a ten year

period, or until 2010. EPA will not

require a second maintenance plan for

the 2010 to 2020 period provided that

New Hampshire submits to EPA an

acknowledgment that the maintenance

plan will remain in effect for a second

ten year period, that New Hampshire

will continue to implement that plan,

and that both cities will remain in

attainment. This acknowledgment must

be received by EPA within eight years

of the effective date of this

redesignation. New Hampshire has

acknowledged this requirement in the

February 2, 1999 submittals for both

Manchester and Nashua.

In this notice, EPA is approving the

State of New Hampshire’s maintenance

plans for the Cities of Manchester and

Nashua because EPA finds that New

Hampshire’s submittal meets the

requirements of section 175A.

A. Attainment Emission Inventory

The State of New Hampshire

submitted a comprehensive inventory of

CO emissions for the Manchester and

Nashua area. The inventory includes

emissions from area, stationary, and

mobile sources using 1990 as the base

year for calculations. The 1990

inventory is considered representative

of attainment conditions because the

NAAQS was not violated during 1990

and was prepared in accordance with

EPA guidance. New Hampshire

established CO emissions for 1990 as

well as forecasts to the year 2020. These

estimates were derived from the State’s

1990 emissions inventory. The State

submittals contains the following

information:

71064 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

6New Hampshire’s NLEV program was approved

into the SIP on March 9, 2000 (65 FR 12476).

7A notice of proposed rulemaking for New

Hampshire’s enhanced safety I/M program was

published on December 17, 1998 (63 FR 69589).

CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSION SUMMARY FOR MANCHESTER—BASE YEAR AND PROJECTED, 1999–2020

[Tons per day]

Year On-road

mobile

Off-road

mobile

Stationary

area

Stationary

point

Total—all

categories

1990 ..................................................................................... 59.84 12.01 9.61 0.16 81.62

1999 ..................................................................................... 35.86 12.78 10.15 0.16 58.95

2002 ..................................................................................... 35.22 13.09 10.38 0.16 58.85

2005 ..................................................................................... 34.58 13.42 10.61 0.16 58.77

2010 ..................................................................................... 34.20 13.72 10.81 0.16 58.89

2020 ..................................................................................... 38.90 14.43 11.20 0.16 64.69

CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSION SUMMARY FOR NASHUA—BASE YEAR AND PROJECTED, 1999–2020

[Tons per day]

Year On-road

mobile

Off-road

mobile

Stationary

area

Stationary

point

Total—all

categories

1990 ..................................................................................... 62.72 9.07 7.69 0.40 79.88

1999 ..................................................................................... 41.61 9.60 8.12 0.40 59.73

2002 ..................................................................................... 42.56 9.79 8.26 0.40 61.01

2005 ..................................................................................... 43.51 9.96 8.39 0.40 62.26

2010 ..................................................................................... 45.51 10.11 8.50 0.40 64.52

2020 ..................................................................................... 52.96 10.55 8.80 0.40 72.71

In today’s action, EPA is approving

the emission inventories for Manchester

and Nashua.

B. Demonstration of Maintenance—

Projected Inventories

Total CO emissions were projected

from 1990 base year out to 2020. These

projected inventories were prepared in

accordance with EPA guidance, and it is

anticipated that the area will maintain

CO levels below the NAAQS.

C. Verification of Continued Attainment

Continued attainment of the CO

NAAQS in the Manchester and Nashua

areas depends, in part, on the State’s

efforts toward tracking indicators of

continued attainment during the

maintenance period, and the State will

submit periodic inventories of CO

emissions. Therefore, eight years from

today, New Hampshire must submit to

EPA an acknowledgment that the

maintenance plan will remain in effect

and New Hampshire will continue to

implement it for a second ten year

period and that the area will maintain

attainment through 2020.

D. Contingency Plan

The level of CO emissions in the

Manchester and Nashua areas will

largely determine its ability to stay in

compliance with the CO NAAQS in the

future. Despite the State’s best efforts to

demonstrate continued compliance with

the NAAQS, the ambient air pollutant

concentrations may exceed or violate

the NAAQS, although highly unlikely.

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires

that the contingency provisions include

a requirement that the State implement

all measures contained in the SIP prior

to redesignation, and New Hampshire

has fulfilled this requirement. In

addition, New Hampshire has provided

contingency measures in the event of a

future CO air quality problem.

New Hampshire has developed a

continency plan consisting of the New

Hampshire’s low emission vehicle

program 6 (NLEV), which was

implemented for model year 1999, and

the New Hampshire Enhanced Safety

Inspection Program, which was

implemented in 1999.7 Although New

Hampshire is implementing these

programs as measures to achieve the

NAAQS for ground level ozone, they are

not required in nonclassified CO

nonattainment areas under the CAA and

can therefore be used as contingency

measures. In order to be adequate, the

maintenance plan should include at

least one contingency measure that will

go into effect with a triggering event.

New Hampshire is relying largely on

these two contingency measures that

will go into effect regardless of any

triggering event, thereby fulfilling this

requirement. EPA accepts this approach.

E. Subsequent Maintenance Plan

Revisions

In accordance with section 175A(b) of

the CAA, the State must implement two

ten year maintenance plans. New

Hampshire must submit to EPA eight

years from today an acknowledgment

that its 20 year maintenance plan will

remain in effect for a second ten year

period.

5. Meeting Applicable Requirements

of Section 110 and Part D—In this

notice, EPA has set forth the basis for its

conclusion that New Hampshire has a

fully approved SIP that meets the

applicable requirements of Section 110

and Part D of the CAA.

II. Final Action

EPA is approving the revision to the

CO SIP for the City of Nashua; the CO

redesignation request, maintenance

plan, transportation conformity budget,

and emissions inventory for the City of

Nashua; and the CO redesignation

request, maintenance plan,

transportation conformity budget, and

emissions inventory for the City of

Manchester. The EPA is publishing this

action without prior proposal because

the Agency views these as a

noncontroversial amendments and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in the proposed rules section

of this Federal Register publication,

EPA is publishing a separate document

that will serve as the proposal to

approve the SIP revision should

relevant adverse comments be filed.

This rule will be effective January 29,

2001 without further notice unless the

Agency receives relevant adverse

comments by December 29, 2000.

If the EPA receives such comments,

then EPA will publish a notice

withdrawing the final rule and

informing the public that the rule will

not take effect. All public comments

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 71065

received will then be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

the proposed rule. Only parties

interested in commenting on the

proposed rule should do so at this time.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this rule will be

effective on January 29, 2001 and no

further action will be taken on the

proposed rule.

III. Administrative 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. 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 preexisting requirements under state law

and does not impose any additional

enforceable duty beyond that required

by state law, it does not contain any

unfunded mandate or significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, as

described in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). For

the same reason, this rule also does not

significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655 (May 10, 1998)). 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 (64 FR 43255

(August 10, 1999)), because it merely

approves a state rule implementing a

federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (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. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729 (February 7, 1996)), in issuing

this rule, EPA has taken the necessary

steps to eliminate drafting errors and

ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,

and provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct. EPA has complied

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859

(March 15, 1988)) by examining the

takings implications of the rule in

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of

Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under

the executive order. This rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by

the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,

generally provides that before a rule

may take effect, the agency

promulgating the rule must submit a

rule report, which includes a copy of

the rule, to each House of the Congress

and to the Comptroller General of the

United States. EPA will submit a report

containing this rule and other required

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.

House of Representatives, and the

Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. A major rule

cannot take effect until 60 days after it

is published in the Federal Register.

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as

defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by January 29, 2001.

Interested parties should comment in

response to the proposed rule rather

than petition for judicial review, unless

the objection arises after the comment

period allowed for in the proposal.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: November 14, 2000.

Mindy S. Lubber,

Regional Administrator, EPA—New England.

Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of

the Code of Federal Regulations 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 EE—New Hampshire

2. Section 52.1523 is amended by

revising the table to read as follows:

§ 52.1523 Attainment dates for national

standards.

* * * * *

Air quality control region

SO2

PM10 NO2 CO O3

Primary Secondary

NH portion Andoscoggin Valley Interstate AQCR 107 .... (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a)

Central NH Intrastate AQCR 149 .................................... (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a)

NH portion Merrimack Valley-Southern NH Interstate

121:

Belnap County .......................................................... (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a)

Sullivan County ......................................................... (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a)

Cheshire County .............................................................. (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (d)

71066 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Air quality control region

SO2

PM10 NO2 CO O3

Primary Secondary

Portmouth-Dover-Rochester area (See 40 CFR

81.330) .................................................................. (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (e)

NH portion Boston-Lawrence-Worcester area (See

40 CFR 81.330) .................................................... (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (e)

Manchester area (See 40 CFR 81.330) ................... (a) (b) (a) (a) (a) (c)

aAir quality levels presently below primary standards or area is unclassifiable.

bAir quality levels presently below secondary standards or area is unclassifiable.

c November 15, 1993.

d November 15, 1995.

e November 15, 1999.

3. Section 52.1528 is added to read as

follows:

§ 52.1528 Control strategy: Carbon

monoxide.

(a) Approval—On February 1, 1999,

the New Hampshire Department of

Environmental Services submitted a

revision to the State Implementation

Plan to remove the Nashua Inspection/

Maintenance program for carbon

monoxide that ceased operating on

January 1, 1995. The Nashua Inspection/

Maintenance was originally approved at

§ 52.1520(c)(39). The Nashua

Inspection/Maintenance program was

replaced with controls consisting of the

existing federal Tier 1 emission

standards for new vehicles and the

federal reformulated gasoline program.

(b) Approval—On February 2, 1999,

the New Hampshire Department of

Environmental Services submitted a

request to redesignate the City of

Manchester carbon monoxide

nonattainment area to attainment for

carbon monoxide. As part of the

redesignation request, the State

submitted a maintenance plan as

required by 175A of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990. Elements of the

section 175A maintenance plan include

a base year (1990 attainment year)

emission inventory for carbon

monoxide, a demonstration of

maintenance of the carbon monoxide

NAAQS with projected emission

inventories to the year 2010 for carbon

monoxide, a plan to verify continued

attainment, a contingency plan, and an

obligation to submit additional

information in eight years

acknowledging that the maintenance

plan will remain in effect through the

year 2020, as required by the Clean Air

Act. If the area records a violation of the

carbon monoxide NAAQS (which must

be confirmed by the State), New

Hampshire will implement one or more

appropriate contingency measure(s)

which are contained in the contingency

plan. The menu of contingency

measures includes the enhanced safety

inspection program and New

Hampshire’s low emission vehicle

program (NLEV) as contingency

measures. The redesignation request

establishes a motor vehicle emissions

budget of 55.83 tons per day for carbon

monoxide to be used in determining

transportation conformity for the

Manchester area. The redesignation

request and maintenance plan meet the

redesignation requirements in sections

107(d)(3)(E) and 175A of the Act as

amended in 1990, respectively.

(c) Approval—On February 2, 1999,

the New Hampshire Department of

Environmental Services submitted a

request to redesignate the City of

Nashua carbon monoxide

nonattainment area to attainment for

carbon monoxide. As part of the

redesignation request, the State

submitted a maintenance plan as

required by 175A of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990. Elements of the

section 175A maintenance plan include

a base year (1990 attainment year)

emission inventory for carbon

monoxide, a demonstration of

maintenance of the carbon monoxide

NAAQS with projected emission

inventories to the year 2010 for carbon

monoxide, a plan to verify continued

attainment, a contingency plan, and an

obligation to submit additional

information in eight years

acknowledging that the maintenance

plan will remain in effect through the

year 2020, as required by the Clean Air

Act. If the area records a violation of the

carbon monoxide NAAQS (which must

be confirmed by the State), New

Hampshire will implement one or more

appropriate contingency measure(s)

which are contained in the contingency

plan. The menu of contingency

measures includes the enhanced safety

inspection program and New

Hampshire’s low emission vehicle

program (NLEV) as contingency

measures. The redesignation request

establishes a motor vehicle emissions

budget of 60.13 tons per day for carbon

monoxide to be used in determining

transportation conformity for the

Nashua area. The redesignation request

and maintenance plan meet the

redesignation requirements in sections

107(d)(3)(E) and 175A of the Act as

amended in 1990, respectively.

PART 81—[AMENDED]

4. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment

Status Designations

5. The table in § 81.330 entitled ‘‘New

Hampshire-Carbon Monoxide’’ is

revised to read as follows:

§ 81.330 New Hampshire.

* * * * *

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 230 / Wednesday, November 29, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 71067

NEW HAMPSHIRE—CARBON MONOXIDE

Designated area:

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

Manchester Area:

Hillsborough County (part), City of

Manchester.

1–29–01 Attainment.

Nashua Area:

Hillsborough County (part), City of

Nashua.

1–29–01 Attainment.

AQCR 107 Androscoggin Valley Interstate.Unclassifiable/Attainment.

Coos County

AQCR 121 Merrimack Valley–S NH Interstate.Unclassifiable/Attainment.

Belknap County

Cheshire County

Hillsborough County (part), Area outside of Nashua and Manchester

Merrimack County

Rockingham County

Stratford County

Sullivan County

AQCR 149 Central New Hampshire Intrastate.Unclassifiable/Attainment.

Carroll County

Grafton County

[FR Doc. 00–30275 Filed 11–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 80

[FRL–6908–8]

RIN 2060–AI60

Petition by American Samoa for

Exemption from Anti-Dumping

Requirements for Conventional

Gasoline

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (‘‘EPA’’ or ‘‘the Agency’’) is

granting a petition by the Territory of

American Samoa for exemption from

the anti-dumping requirements for

gasoline sold in the United States after

January 1, 1995. This action is being

taken because compliance with the antidumping requirements is not feasible or

is unreasonable due to American

Samoa’s unique geographic location and

economic factors. If the gasoline antidumping exemption were not granted,

American Samoa would be required to

import gasoline from a supplier meeting

the anti-dumping requirements adding a

considerable expense to gasoline

purchased by the American Samoan

consumer. American Samoa is in full

attainment with the National Ambient

Air Quality Standard (‘‘NAAQS’’) for

ozone. This action is not expected to

cause harmful effects to the citizens of

American Samoa.

EPA is concurrently proposing in the

Proposed Rules section of today’s

Federal Register approval of American

Samoa’s petition for reasons discussed

in this document. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this document. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. All correspondence should

be directed to the addresses shown

below.

DATES: This action will be effective on

January 29, 2001, unless the Agency

receives adverse or critical comments or

a request for a public hearing by

December 29, 2000. If the Agency

receives adverse or critical comments,

EPA will publish in the Federal

Register timely notice withdrawing this

action and the comments will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule. If

a request for a public hearing is

received, this will be addressed in a

subsequent Federal Register document.

ADDRESSES: Any persons wishing to

submit comments should submit them

(in duplicate, if possible) to the two

dockets listed below, with a copy

forwarded to Marilyn Winstead McCall,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Transportation and Regional Programs

Division, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., (Mail Code: 6406J), Washington,

DC 20460.

Public Docket: Materials relevant to

this petition are available for inspection

in public docket A–99–17 at the Air

Docket Office of the EPA, Room M–

1500, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,

D.C. 20460, (202) 260–7548, between

the hours of 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday. A duplicate public

docket A–91–40 has been established at

U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, (Mail Code: A–2–1), 17th Floor,

San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744–

1225, and is available between the hours

of 8:30 a.m. to noon, and from 1 p.m.

to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. As

provided in 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable

fee may be charged for copying services.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marilyn Winstead McCall at (202) 564–

9029, facsimile: (202) 565–2085, e-mail

address:

McCall.mwinstead@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

Entities potentially affected by this

rule are those involved with the

production, distribution, importation,

and sale of conventional gasoline used

in the Territory of American Samoa.

Regulated categories and entities

include: