[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 230 (Wednesday, November 29, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71060-71067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30275]


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

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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#86e4f3f2e3e8f5edffa8ece3e0e0c6e3f6e7a8e1e9f0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c4a6b1b0a1aab7afbdeaaea1a2a284a1b4a5eaa3abb2">[email protected]</span></a>.

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

[[Page 71061]]

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Tier 1 motor vehicle standards have been implemented 
beginning with model year 1994.
    \2\ Reformulated gasoline has been sold since 1995 in the four 
southernmost counties of New Hampshire (i.e., Merrimack, 
Hillsborough, Rockingham, and Strafford).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Nashua, Hollis, Merrimack, Litchfield, Hudson, Milford, 
Amherst, Pelham, Londonderry, Derry, Windham, and Salem.
    \5\ House Bill 674, approved by the New Hampshire State 
Legislature in 1993, terminated the Motor Vehicle Inspection 
Program, effective January 1, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 
quality-assured 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

[[Page 71062]]

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 fully-approved 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

[[Page 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:

[[Page 71064]]



               Carbon Monoxide Emission Summary for Manchester--Base Year and Projected, 1999-2020
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      On-road        Off-road       Stationary      Stationary      Total--all
              Year                    mobile          mobile           area            point        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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      On-road        Off-road       Stationary      Stationary      Total--all
              Year                    mobile          mobile           area            point        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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ New Hampshire's NLEV program was approved into the SIP on 
March 9, 2000 (65 FR 12476).
    \7\ A notice of proposed rulemaking for New Hampshire's enhanced 
safety I/M program was published on December 17, 1998 (63 FR 69589).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 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 pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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:


Sec. 52.1523  Attainment dates for national standards.

* * * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               SO<INF>2</INF>
    Air quality control region     --------------------------     PM<INF>10</INF>         NO<INF>2</INF>           CO           O<INF>3</INF>
                                      Primary     Secondary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NH portion Andoscoggin Valley               (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)
 Interstate AQCR 107..............
Central NH Intrastate AQCR 149....          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)
NH portion Merrimack Valley-
 Southern NH Interstate 121:
    Belnap County.................          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)
    Sullivan County...............          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)
Cheshire County...................          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>d</INF>)

[[Page 71066]]

 
    Portmouth-Dover-Rochester area          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>e</INF>)
     (See 40 CFR 81.330)..........
    NH portion Boston-Lawrence-             (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>e</INF>)
     Worcester area (See 40 CFR
     81.330)......................
    Manchester area (See 40 CFR             (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>b</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)          (<INF>a</INF>)         (<INF>c</INF>)
     81.330)......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Air quality levels presently below primary standards or area is unclassifiable.
\b\ Air 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:


Sec. 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 Sec. 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 Sec. 81.330 entitled ``New Hampshire-Carbon 
Monoxide'' is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 81.330  New Hampshire.

* * * * *

[[Page 71067]]



                                                             New Hampshire--Carbon Monoxide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Designation                                               Classification
         Designated area:         ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date                          Type                          Date                         Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manchester Area:
    Hillsborough County (part),        1-29-01  Attainment...................................
     City of Manchester.
Nashua Area:
    Hillsborough County (part),        1-29-01  Attainment...................................
     City of Nashua.
    AQCR 107 Androscoggin Valley                Unclassifiable/Attainment....................
     Interstate.
    Coos County
AQCR 121 Merrimack Valley-S NH                  Unclassifiable/Attainment....................
 Interstate.
    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                  Unclassifiable/Attainment....................
 Intrastate.
    Carroll County
    Grafton County
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 00-30275 Filed 11-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>