Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Hampshire; Manchester and Nashua Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plans, 77628-77632 [2013-30576]

Download as PDF 77628 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: December 16, 2013. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6. [FR Doc. 2013–30729 Filed 12–23–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS [EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0661; A–1–FRL– 9904–44–Region–1] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Hampshire; Manchester and Nashua Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plans Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:33 Dec 23, 2013 Jkt 232001 revision submitted by the State of New Hampshire. This SIP revision establishes carbon monoxide (CO) limited maintenance plans for the City of Manchester, New Hampshire and the City of Nashua, New Hampshire. As part of its limited maintenance plan, New Hampshire will continue year-round CO monitoring at the Londonderry Moose Hill station in Londonderry, New Hampshire with triggers to reestablish CO monitoring sites in Manchester and Nashua if elevated CO levels are recorded in Londonderry. Future carbon monoxide transportation conformity evaluations for Manchester and Nashua would for the length of their limited maintenance plans be considered to satisfy the regional emissions analysis and ‘‘budget test’’ requirements. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 23, 2014. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R01–OAR–2012–0661 by one of the following methods: 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. 4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification Number EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0661,’’ Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109– 3912. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold, Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (mail code OEP05– 2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office’s normal hours of operation. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number EPA–R01–OAR– 2012–0661. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov, or email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. In addition, copies of the state submittal are also available for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the State Air Agency; Air Resources Division, Department of Environmental Services, 6 Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95, Concord, NH 03302–0095. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional E:\FR\FM\24DEP1.SGM 24DEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05– 2), Boston, MA 02109–3912, telephone number (617) 918–1668, fax number (617) 918–0668, email cooke.donald@ epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble. I. Background and Purpose II. Criteria for Limited Maintenance Plan Designation A. EPA Guidance B. Emission Inventory C. Demonstration of Maintenance D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment III. Contingency Measures IV. State Commitments V. Conformity VI. Proposed Action VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS The City of Manchester, New Hampshire (Manchester) and the City of Nashua, New Hampshire (Nashua) were designated nonattainment by EPA for carbon monoxide on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962) and April 11, 1980 (45 FR 24869), respectively. The current National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for CO is 9.0 parts per million (ppm) for an 8-hour average concentration and 35 ppm for a 1-hour concentration, not to be exceeded more than once per calendar year. In 1991, following passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA), both cities were designated ‘‘nonattainment’’ and ‘‘not classified’’ (November 6, 1991; 56 FR 56694) although ambient monitoring showed NAAQS attainment had been achieved by that time. In February 1999, the State of New Hampshire submitted a formal CO redesignation request and a CO maintenance plan for Manchester and Nashua. Effective January 29, 2001 (November 29, 2000; 65 FR 71060), EPA redesignated Manchester and Nashua from nonattainment to attainment for CO and approved New Hampshire’s CO maintenance plan. On May 30, 2007, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NH DES) submitted a SIP revision to EPA that contained modifications to their CO maintenance plan for the Nashua CO maintenance area. These modifications which were approved by EPA through a direct final rule (September 10, 2007; 72 FR 51564) changed the triggering mechanism by which contingency measures would be implemented in Nashua, and allowed the State to discontinue CO monitoring in the Nashua maintenance area. New Hampshire would rely on data from the CO monitor in Manchester to determine when, and if, monitoring would be reestablished in the Nashua maintenance area, and, in some circumstances, when contingency measures would be triggered in the Nashua maintenance area. At the time of the SIP revision approval, CO concentrations measured in Nashua were below the NAAQS for nearly 20 years, and maximum measured concentrations were less than 50% of the 9 parts per million 8-hour CO standard. On August 1, 2012, the NH DES submitted a limited maintenance plan SIP revision for the remainder of Manchester and Nashua’s second tenyear maintenance plans (January 29, 2011 to January 29, 2021). The revision also requests discontinuance of CO monitoring in Manchester to be replaced by a CO monitoring station in Londonderry, New Hampshire (mid-way between Manchester and Nashua). These revisions are the subject of today’s notice of proposed rulemaking. Under the CO limited maintenance plan New Hampshire would continue to implement strategies that have helped reduce CO emissions in Manchester and Nashua. These strategies include: New Hampshire’s Vehicle Inspection/ Maintenance On Board Diagnostic (OBD II) program; Vehicle Miles Travel reductions (implement congestion and emission reduction programs such as traffic signal coordination, increased mass transit, RideShare, anti-idling and other traffic mitigation measures); and Low Emissions Vehicles Standards. New Hampshire has also committed to continuing CO monitoring in Londonderry with triggers to reestablish CO monitoring in Manchester and Nashua. In the event monitored carbon monoxide concentrations reach or 77629 exceed the limited maintenance eligibility criteria of 7.65 parts per million, then the area would revert to a full maintenance plan. II. Criteria for Limited Maintenance Plan Designation A. EPA Guidance For the Manchester and Nashua areas, NH DES’s SIP revision uses EPA’s limited maintenance plan approach, as detailed in the EPA guidance memorandum, ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas’’ from Joseph Paisie, Group Leader, Integrated Policy and Strategies Group, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards (OAQPS), dated October 6, 1995, (the Paisie Memorandum, [a copy of which is included in the Docket as part of the States’ SIP revision]). Pursuant to this approach EPA will consider the maintenance demonstration satisfied for ‘‘not classified’’ areas if the monitoring data show the design value is at or below 7.65 parts per million, or 85 percent of the level of the 8-hour carbon monoxide NAAQS. The design value must be based on eight consecutive quarters of data. For such areas, there is no requirement to project emissions of air quality over the maintenance period. EPA believes if the area begins the maintenance period at, or below, 85 percent of the CO 8 hour NAAQS, the applicability of ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration’’ (PSD), the control measures already in the SIP, and Federal measures (including the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program emission standards, limiting CO emissions), should provide adequate assurance of maintenance over the initial 10-year maintenance period. In addition, the design value for the area must continue to be at or below 7.65 ppm until the time of final EPA action on the redesignation. The 8-hour CO design values for each of New Hampshire’s CO maintenance areas are summarized in Table 1 below. In all cases, 8-hour design values are significantly less than the 7.65 ppm threshold specified in EPA guidance, thus making each area potentially eligible for the limited maintenance plan option. TABLE 1—8-HOUR DESIGN VALUES (PPM) BY YEAR FOR MANCHESTER AND NASHUA Manchester Bridge Street Year 2001 ............................................................................................................................................. 2002 ............................................................................................................................................. 2003 ............................................................................................................................................. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:33 Dec 23, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24DEP1.SGM 3.6 * * 24DEP1 Manchester Pearl Street ........................ 2.0 3.4 Nashua Main Street 4.1 4.0 4.0 77630 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules TABLE 1—8-HOUR DESIGN VALUES (PPM) BY YEAR FOR MANCHESTER AND NASHUA—Continued Manchester Bridge Street Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. Manchester Pearl Street * * * * * * * * Nashua Main Street 3.4 1.8 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 2.4 2.3 4.0 3.2 3.2 2.4 * * * * * Monitoring discontinued. B. Emission Inventory Nashua, sufficient to attain the NAAQS. (See Table 2 below.) The State also developed an attainment emissions inventory identifying the level of emissions statewide associated with attaining and maintaining the CO NAAQS. (See Table 3 below.) These inventories are consistent with EPA’s Consistent with EPA’s guidance for limited maintenance plans, the State developed an attainment emissions inventory to identify the level of emissions in Hillsborough County, which includes Manchester and most recent guidance on emissions inventories for nonattainment areas available at the time, and they document a downward trend in CO emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data achieving attainment and continued maintenance of the CO NAAQS. TABLE 2—CO EMISSIONS FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, 1999–2008 CO emissions (tons per year) Category 1999 2002 2005 2008 Point ................................................................................................................. Area ................................................................................................................. Non-Road Mobile ............................................................................................. On-Road Mobile ............................................................................................... 184 12,822 32,162 92,831 143 12,864 29,216 58,379 191 13,210 26,776 58,666 92 13,384 23,259 40,576 Total .......................................................................................................... 137,999 100,602 98,841 77,311 TABLE 3—CO EMISSIONS FOR NEW HAMPSHIRE (STATEWIDE), 1999–2008 CO emissions (tons per year) Category 1999 2002 2005 2008 Point ................................................................................................................. Area ................................................................................................................. Non-Road Mobile ............................................................................................. On-Road Mobile ............................................................................................... 4,923 78,133 123,530 345,413 2,724 74,099 124,801 294,533 4,754 73,706 119,322 236,990 3,357 47,798 104,887 174,154 Total .......................................................................................................... 552,000 496,157 434,772 330,196 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS C. Demonstration of Maintenance The maintenance demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied if the monitoring data show that the area is meeting the air quality criteria for limited maintenance areas (7.65 ppm or 85% of the CO NAAQS). There is no requirement to project emissions over the maintenance period. The EPA believes since the area is below 85 percent of exceedance levels, the air quality along with the continued applicability of PSD requirements, any control measures already in the SIP, and Federal measures, should provide adequate assurance of maintenance over the remainder of the 10-year maintenance period. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:33 Dec 23, 2013 Jkt 232001 When EPA approves a limited maintenance plan, EPA is concluding that an emissions budget may be treated as essentially not constraining for the length of the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect that such an area will experience so much growth in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment In its SIP revision, NH DES commits to continue CO monitoring year-round at the Londonderry Moose Hill station in Londonderry. NH DES worked closely with EPA to carefully select this site due to its central proximity to Manchester and Nashua. The PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Londonderry Moose Hill Station came online on January 1, 2011 as a National Core (NCore) multi-pollutant monitoring station measuring a wide variety of pollutants. The Londonderry station measures fine particulate (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides, ozone, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide, in addition to wind speed, wind direction, and relative humidity. III. Contingency Measures Section 175A(d) of the Act requires that a maintenance plan include contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area. Under section 175A(d), contingency measures do not have to be E:\FR\FM\24DEP1.SGM 24DEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS fully adopted at the time of redesignation. However, the contingency plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that the contingency measures are adopted expeditiously once they are triggered by a specified event. Previously implemented contingency measures and emissions reductions strategies in New Hampshire have proven successful, and will be continued through the maintenance period. These include: Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance (I/M); vehicle miles traveled reductions; and other emissions reduction programs. Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance (I/M)—EPA approved New Hampshire’s I/M program on January 25, 2013 (78 FR 5292). In its CO maintenance plan SIP revision, NH DES commits to continued implementation of this program. Vehicle Miles Traveled reductions— In its CO maintenance plan SIP revision, NH DES commits to continue working with the NH Department of Transportation and regional Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to identify effective congestion and emission reduction project and programs such as traffic signal coordination, increased mass transit, RideShare, anti-idling and other traffic management strategies. Other emissions reductions programs—NH DES and local MPOs are actively promoting low emissions vehicles and emissions reductions strategies such as anti-idling programs and park & ride lot construction as part of their long range transportation plans. IV. State Commitments New Hampshire will monitor CO levels using the Londonderry Moose Hill station and emissions inventories. Because New Hampshire proposes to discontinue monitoring CO in Manchester, it will adopt a more stringent contingency threshold or ‘‘trigger’’ than indicated in the 2007 SIP revision. In the event the second highest CO concentration in any calendar year monitored in Londonderry reaches 50 percent of the Federal 1-hour or 8-hour NAAQS for CO, New Hampshire will, within six months of recording such concentrations, reestablish the CO monitoring site in Manchester consistent with EPA siting criteria, and resume analyzing and reporting those data. If the reestablished Manchester CO monitor measures a violation of the either the Federal 1-hour or 8-hour NAAQS for CO, contingency measures will be implemented in Manchester and Nashua. Contingency measures in Nashua would cease once a reestablished CO monitor in Nashua VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:33 Dec 23, 2013 Jkt 232001 shows that the area is in attainment of the CO standard. V. Conformity Section 176(c) of the Act defines transportation conformity as conformity to the SIP’s purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the NAAQS and achieving expeditious attainment of such standards. The Act further defines transportation conformity to mean that no Federal transportation activity will: (1) Cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any area; (2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any standard in any area; or (3) delay timely attainment of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in any area. The Federal Transportation Conformity Rule, 40 CFR part 93 subpart A, sets forth the criteria and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of transportation plans, programs and projects which are developed, funded or approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation, and by metropolitan planning organizations or other recipients of funds under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws (49 U.S.C. Chapter 53). The transportation conformity rule applies within all nonattainment and maintenance areas. As prescribed by the transportation conformity rule, once an area has an applicable State Implementation Plan with motor vehicle emissions budgets, the expected emissions from planned transportation activities must be consistent with (‘‘conform to’’) such established budgets for that area. According to EPA’s guidance on limited maintenance plans, in the case of the Manchester and Nashua New Hampshire CO limited maintenance plan areas, the emissions budgets may be treated as essentially not constraining for the length of the maintenance period as long as the area continues to meet the limited maintenance criteria, because there is no reason to expect that these areas will experience so much growth in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other words, emissions from on-road transportation sources need not be capped for the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to believe that emissions from such sources would increase to a level that would threaten the air quality in this area for the duration of this maintenance period. Therefore, for limited maintenance plan CO maintenance areas, all Federal actions that require conformity determinations under the transportation conformity rule are considered to satisfy the regional PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 77631 emissions analysis and ‘‘budget test’’ requirements in 40 CFR 93.118 of the rule. Since limited maintenance plan areas are still maintenance areas, however, transportation conformity determinations are still required for transportation plans, programs and projects. Specifically, for such determinations, transportation plans, transportation improvement programs, and projects must still demonstrate that they are fiscally constrained (40 CFR part 108) and must meet the criteria for consultation and Transportation Control Measure (TCM) implementation in the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.112 and 40 CFR 93.113, respectively). In addition, projects in limited maintenance areas will still be required to meet the criteria for CO hot spot analyses to satisfy ‘‘project level’’ conformity determinations (40 CFR 93.116 and 40 CFR 93.123) which must incorporate the latest planning assumptions and models that are available. All aspects of transportation conformity (with the exception of satisfying the emission budget test) will still be required. If the Manchester or Nashua CO attainment areas monitor CO concentrations at or above the limited maintenance eligibility criteria or 7.65 parts per million, then that maintenance area would no longer qualify for a limited maintenance plan and would revert to a full maintenance plan. In this event, the limited maintenance plan would remain applicable for conformity purposes only until the full maintenance plan is submitted and EPA has found its motor vehicle emissions budgets adequate for conformity purposes or EPA approves the full maintenance plan SIP revision. Any required new conformity determinations could not be made until there is an adequate budget or approved full maintenance plan. At that time, regional emissions analyses would resume as a transportation conformity criteria. VI. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve conversion of the Manchester and Nashua current carbon monoxide maintenance plans to a limited maintenance plan for the remainder of the City of Manchester, and the City of Nashua, New Hampshire CO maintenance plans which terminate on January 29, 2021. EPA is proposing to approve replacement of the CO air quality monitoring in Manchester with carbon monoxide monitoring at the Londonderry Moose Hill station in Londonderry, New Hampshire with triggers to reestablish CO monitoring E:\FR\FM\24DEP1.SGM 24DEP1 77632 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS sites in Manchester and Nashua if elevated CO levels are recorded in Londonderry. VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and • does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:33 Dec 23, 2013 Jkt 232001 not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: December 10, 2013. Michael P. Kenyon, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England. [FR Doc. 2013–30576 Filed 12–23–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 54 [REG–143172–13] RIN 1545–BL90 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employee Benefits Security Administration 29 CFR Part 2590 RIN 1210–AB60 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES [CMS–9946–P] 45 CFR Part 146 RIN 0938–AS16 Amendments to Excepted Benefits Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury; Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor; Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services. ACTION: Proposed rules. AGENCY: This document contains proposed rules that would amend the regulations regarding excepted benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the Internal Revenue Code, and the Public Health Service Act. Excepted benefits are generally exempt from the health reform SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 requirements that were added to those laws by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. DATES: Comments are due on or before February 24, 2014. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to the Department of Labor as specified below. Any comment that is submitted will be shared with the other Departments and will also be made available to the public. Warning: Do not include any personally identifiable information (such as name, address, or other contact information) or confidential business information that you do not want publicly disclosed. All comments may be posted on the Internet and can be retrieved by most Internet search engines. No deletions, modifications, or redactions will be made to the comments received, as they are public records. Comments may be submitted anonymously. Comments, identified by ‘‘Excepted Benefits,’’ may be submitted by one of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Mail or Hand Delivery: Office of Health Plan Standards and Compliance Assistance, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Room N–5653, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, Attention: Excepted Benefits. Comments received will be posted without change to www.regulations.gov and available for public inspection at the Public Disclosure Room, N–1513, Employee Benefits Security Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210, including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Turner or Beth Baum, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor, at (202) 693–8335; Karen Levin, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, at (202) 317–5500; Jacob Ackerman, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, at (410) 786–1565. Customer Service Information: Individuals interested in obtaining information from the Department of Labor concerning employment-based health coverage laws, may call the EBSA Toll-Free Hotline at 1–866–444–EBSA (3272) or visit the Department of Labor’s Web site (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa). In addition, information from HHS on private health insurance for consumers can be found on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) E:\FR\FM\24DEP1.SGM 24DEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 247 (Tuesday, December 24, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 77628-77632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30576]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0661; A-1-FRL-9904-44-Region-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
New Hampshire; Manchester and Nashua Carbon Monoxide Limited 
Maintenance Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
State of New Hampshire. This SIP revision establishes carbon monoxide 
(CO) limited maintenance plans for the City of Manchester, New 
Hampshire and the City of Nashua, New Hampshire. As part of its limited 
maintenance plan, New Hampshire will continue year-round CO monitoring 
at the Londonderry Moose Hill station in Londonderry, New Hampshire 
with triggers to reestablish CO monitoring sites in Manchester and 
Nashua if elevated CO levels are recorded in Londonderry. Future carbon 
monoxide transportation conformity evaluations for Manchester and 
Nashua would for the length of their limited maintenance plans be 
considered to satisfy the regional emissions analysis and ``budget 
test'' requirements. This action is being taken under the Clean Air 
Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 23, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2012-0661 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (617) 918-0047.
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0661,'' 
Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning 
Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 
02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold, 
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, 
(mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The 
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number EPA-R01-OAR-
2012-0661. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov, or 
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your 
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, 
Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the 
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal 
holidays.
    In addition, copies of the state submittal are also available for 
public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the 
State Air Agency; Air Resources Division, Department of Environmental 
Services, 6 Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95, Concord, NH 03302-0095.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Planning 
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional

[[Page 77629]]

Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 
Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-
3912, telephone number (617) 918-1668, fax number (617) 918-0668, email 
cooke.donald@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to 
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background and Purpose
II. Criteria for Limited Maintenance Plan Designation
    A. EPA Guidance
    B. Emission Inventory
    C. Demonstration of Maintenance
    D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
III. Contingency Measures
IV. State Commitments
V. Conformity
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    The City of Manchester, New Hampshire (Manchester) and the City of 
Nashua, New Hampshire (Nashua) were designated nonattainment by EPA for 
carbon monoxide on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962) and April 11, 1980 (45 FR 
24869), respectively. The current National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS) for CO is 9.0 parts per million (ppm) for an 8-hour average 
concentration and 35 ppm for a 1-hour concentration, not to be exceeded 
more than once per calendar year. In 1991, following passage of the 
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA), both cities were designated 
``nonattainment'' and ``not classified'' (November 6, 1991; 56 FR 
56694) although ambient monitoring showed NAAQS attainment had been 
achieved by that time. In February 1999, the State of New Hampshire 
submitted a formal CO redesignation request and a CO maintenance plan 
for Manchester and Nashua. Effective January 29, 2001 (November 29, 
2000; 65 FR 71060), EPA redesignated Manchester and Nashua from 
nonattainment to attainment for CO and approved New Hampshire's CO 
maintenance plan.
    On May 30, 2007, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental 
Services (NH DES) submitted a SIP revision to EPA that contained 
modifications to their CO maintenance plan for the Nashua CO 
maintenance area. These modifications which were approved by EPA 
through a direct final rule (September 10, 2007; 72 FR 51564) changed 
the triggering mechanism by which contingency measures would be 
implemented in Nashua, and allowed the State to discontinue CO 
monitoring in the Nashua maintenance area. New Hampshire would rely on 
data from the CO monitor in Manchester to determine when, and if, 
monitoring would be reestablished in the Nashua maintenance area, and, 
in some circumstances, when contingency measures would be triggered in 
the Nashua maintenance area. At the time of the SIP revision approval, 
CO concentrations measured in Nashua were below the NAAQS for nearly 20 
years, and maximum measured concentrations were less than 50% of the 9 
parts per million 8-hour CO standard.
    On August 1, 2012, the NH DES submitted a limited maintenance plan 
SIP revision for the remainder of Manchester and Nashua's second ten-
year maintenance plans (January 29, 2011 to January 29, 2021). The 
revision also requests discontinuance of CO monitoring in Manchester to 
be replaced by a CO monitoring station in Londonderry, New Hampshire 
(mid-way between Manchester and Nashua). These revisions are the 
subject of today's notice of proposed rulemaking.
    Under the CO limited maintenance plan New Hampshire would continue 
to implement strategies that have helped reduce CO emissions in 
Manchester and Nashua. These strategies include: New Hampshire's 
Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance On Board Diagnostic (OBD II) program; 
Vehicle Miles Travel reductions (implement congestion and emission 
reduction programs such as traffic signal coordination, increased mass 
transit, RideShare, anti-idling and other traffic mitigation measures); 
and Low Emissions Vehicles Standards. New Hampshire has also committed 
to continuing CO monitoring in Londonderry with triggers to reestablish 
CO monitoring in Manchester and Nashua. In the event monitored carbon 
monoxide concentrations reach or exceed the limited maintenance 
eligibility criteria of 7.65 parts per million, then the area would 
revert to a full maintenance plan.

II. Criteria for Limited Maintenance Plan Designation

A. EPA Guidance

    For the Manchester and Nashua areas, NH DES's SIP revision uses 
EPA's limited maintenance plan approach, as detailed in the EPA 
guidance memorandum, ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for 
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, Group 
Leader, Integrated Policy and Strategies Group, Office of Air Quality 
and Planning Standards (OAQPS), dated October 6, 1995, (the Paisie 
Memorandum, [a copy of which is included in the Docket as part of the 
States' SIP revision]). Pursuant to this approach EPA will consider the 
maintenance demonstration satisfied for ``not classified'' areas if the 
monitoring data show the design value is at or below 7.65 parts per 
million, or 85 percent of the level of the 8-hour carbon monoxide 
NAAQS. The design value must be based on eight consecutive quarters of 
data. For such areas, there is no requirement to project emissions of 
air quality over the maintenance period. EPA believes if the area 
begins the maintenance period at, or below, 85 percent of the CO 8 hour 
NAAQS, the applicability of ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration'' 
(PSD), the control measures already in the SIP, and Federal measures 
(including the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program emission 
standards, limiting CO emissions), should provide adequate assurance of 
maintenance over the initial 10-year maintenance period. In addition, 
the design value for the area must continue to be at or below 7.65 ppm 
until the time of final EPA action on the redesignation.
    The 8-hour CO design values for each of New Hampshire's CO 
maintenance areas are summarized in Table 1 below. In all cases, 8-hour 
design values are significantly less than the 7.65 ppm threshold 
specified in EPA guidance, thus making each area potentially eligible 
for the limited maintenance plan option.

                      Table 1--8-hour Design Values (ppm) by Year for Manchester and Nashua
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Manchester      Manchester      Nashua Main
                              Year                                 Bridge Street   Pearl Street       Street
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001............................................................             3.6  ..............             4.1
2002............................................................               *             2.0             4.0
2003............................................................               *             3.4             4.0

[[Page 77630]]

 
2004............................................................               *             3.4             4.0
2005............................................................               *             1.8             3.2
2006............................................................               *             3.0             3.2
2007............................................................               *             3.0             2.4
2008............................................................               *             3.5               *
2009............................................................               *             3.5               *
2010............................................................               *             2.4               *
2011............................................................               *             2.3               *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Monitoring discontinued.

B. Emission Inventory

    Consistent with EPA's guidance for limited maintenance plans, the 
State developed an attainment emissions inventory to identify the level 
of emissions in Hillsborough County, which includes Manchester and 
Nashua, sufficient to attain the NAAQS. (See Table 2 below.) The State 
also developed an attainment emissions inventory identifying the level 
of emissions statewide associated with attaining and maintaining the CO 
NAAQS. (See Table 3 below.) These inventories are consistent with EPA's 
most recent guidance on emissions inventories for nonattainment areas 
available at the time, and they document a downward trend in CO 
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data 
achieving attainment and continued maintenance of the CO NAAQS.

                            Table 2--CO Emissions for Hillsborough County, 1999-2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   CO emissions (tons per year)
                    Category                     ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       1999            2002            2005            2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................             184             143             191              92
Area............................................          12,822          12,864          13,210          13,384
Non-Road Mobile.................................          32,162          29,216          26,776          23,259
On-Road Mobile..................................          92,831          58,379          58,666          40,576
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................         137,999         100,602          98,841          77,311
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                         Table 3--CO Emissions for New Hampshire (Statewide), 1999-2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   CO emissions (tons per year)
                    Category                     ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       1999            2002            2005            2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................           4,923           2,724           4,754           3,357
Area............................................          78,133          74,099          73,706          47,798
Non-Road Mobile.................................         123,530         124,801         119,322         104,887
On-Road Mobile..................................         345,413         294,533         236,990         174,154
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................         552,000         496,157         434,772         330,196
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Demonstration of Maintenance

    The maintenance demonstration requirement is considered to be 
satisfied if the monitoring data show that the area is meeting the air 
quality criteria for limited maintenance areas (7.65 ppm or 85% of the 
CO NAAQS). There is no requirement to project emissions over the 
maintenance period. The EPA believes since the area is below 85 percent 
of exceedance levels, the air quality along with the continued 
applicability of PSD requirements, any control measures already in the 
SIP, and Federal measures, should provide adequate assurance of 
maintenance over the remainder of the 10-year maintenance period.
    When EPA approves a limited maintenance plan, EPA is concluding 
that an emissions budget may be treated as essentially not constraining 
for the length of the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to 
expect that such an area will experience so much growth in that period 
that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result.

D. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment

    In its SIP revision, NH DES commits to continue CO monitoring year-
round at the Londonderry Moose Hill station in Londonderry. NH DES 
worked closely with EPA to carefully select this site due to its 
central proximity to Manchester and Nashua. The Londonderry Moose Hill 
Station came online on January 1, 2011 as a National Core (NCore) 
multi-pollutant monitoring station measuring a wide variety of 
pollutants. The Londonderry station measures fine particulate 
(PM2.5), nitrogen oxides, ozone, sulfur dioxide and carbon 
monoxide, in addition to wind speed, wind direction, and relative 
humidity.

III. Contingency Measures

    Section 175A(d) of the Act requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation 
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area. Under section 
175A(d), contingency measures do not have to be

[[Page 77631]]

fully adopted at the time of redesignation. However, the contingency 
plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and should 
ensure that the contingency measures are adopted expeditiously once 
they are triggered by a specified event. Previously implemented 
contingency measures and emissions reductions strategies in New 
Hampshire have proven successful, and will be continued through the 
maintenance period. These include: Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance (I/
M); vehicle miles traveled reductions; and other emissions reduction 
programs.
    Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance (I/M)--EPA approved New Hampshire's 
I/M program on January 25, 2013 (78 FR 5292). In its CO maintenance 
plan SIP revision, NH DES commits to continued implementation of this 
program.
    Vehicle Miles Traveled reductions--In its CO maintenance plan SIP 
revision, NH DES commits to continue working with the NH Department of 
Transportation and regional Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) 
to identify effective congestion and emission reduction project and 
programs such as traffic signal coordination, increased mass transit, 
RideShare, anti-idling and other traffic management strategies.
    Other emissions reductions programs--NH DES and local MPOs are 
actively promoting low emissions vehicles and emissions reductions 
strategies such as anti-idling programs and park & ride lot 
construction as part of their long range transportation plans.

IV. State Commitments

    New Hampshire will monitor CO levels using the Londonderry Moose 
Hill station and emissions inventories. Because New Hampshire proposes 
to discontinue monitoring CO in Manchester, it will adopt a more 
stringent contingency threshold or ``trigger'' than indicated in the 
2007 SIP revision. In the event the second highest CO concentration in 
any calendar year monitored in Londonderry reaches 50 percent of the 
Federal 1-hour or 8-hour NAAQS for CO, New Hampshire will, within six 
months of recording such concentrations, reestablish the CO monitoring 
site in Manchester consistent with EPA siting criteria, and resume 
analyzing and reporting those data. If the reestablished Manchester CO 
monitor measures a violation of the either the Federal 1-hour or 8-hour 
NAAQS for CO, contingency measures will be implemented in Manchester 
and Nashua. Contingency measures in Nashua would cease once a 
reestablished CO monitor in Nashua shows that the area is in attainment 
of the CO standard.

V. Conformity

    Section 176(c) of the Act defines transportation conformity as 
conformity to the SIP's purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity 
and number of violations of the NAAQS and achieving expeditious 
attainment of such standards. The Act further defines transportation 
conformity to mean that no Federal transportation activity will: (1) 
Cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any area; 
(2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any 
standard in any area; or (3) delay timely attainment of any standard or 
any required interim emission reductions or other milestones in any 
area. The Federal Transportation Conformity Rule, 40 CFR part 93 
subpart A, sets forth the criteria and procedures for demonstrating and 
assuring conformity of transportation plans, programs and projects 
which are developed, funded or approved by the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, and by metropolitan planning organizations or other 
recipients of funds under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws 
(49 U.S.C. Chapter 53). The transportation conformity rule applies 
within all nonattainment and maintenance areas. As prescribed by the 
transportation conformity rule, once an area has an applicable State 
Implementation Plan with motor vehicle emissions budgets, the expected 
emissions from planned transportation activities must be consistent 
with (``conform to'') such established budgets for that area.
    According to EPA's guidance on limited maintenance plans, in the 
case of the Manchester and Nashua New Hampshire CO limited maintenance 
plan areas, the emissions budgets may be treated as essentially not 
constraining for the length of the maintenance period as long as the 
area continues to meet the limited maintenance criteria, because there 
is no reason to expect that these areas will experience so much growth 
in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other 
words, emissions from on-road transportation sources need not be capped 
for the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to believe that 
emissions from such sources would increase to a level that would 
threaten the air quality in this area for the duration of this 
maintenance period. Therefore, for limited maintenance plan CO 
maintenance areas, all Federal actions that require conformity 
determinations under the transportation conformity rule are considered 
to satisfy the regional emissions analysis and ``budget test'' 
requirements in 40 CFR 93.118 of the rule.
    Since limited maintenance plan areas are still maintenance areas, 
however, transportation conformity determinations are still required 
for transportation plans, programs and projects. Specifically, for such 
determinations, transportation plans, transportation improvement 
programs, and projects must still demonstrate that they are fiscally 
constrained (40 CFR part 108) and must meet the criteria for 
consultation and Transportation Control Measure (TCM) implementation in 
the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.112 and 40 CFR 93.113, respectively). In 
addition, projects in limited maintenance areas will still be required 
to meet the criteria for CO hot spot analyses to satisfy ``project 
level'' conformity determinations (40 CFR 93.116 and 40 CFR 93.123) 
which must incorporate the latest planning assumptions and models that 
are available. All aspects of transportation conformity (with the 
exception of satisfying the emission budget test) will still be 
required.
    If the Manchester or Nashua CO attainment areas monitor CO 
concentrations at or above the limited maintenance eligibility criteria 
or 7.65 parts per million, then that maintenance area would no longer 
qualify for a limited maintenance plan and would revert to a full 
maintenance plan. In this event, the limited maintenance plan would 
remain applicable for conformity purposes only until the full 
maintenance plan is submitted and EPA has found its motor vehicle 
emissions budgets adequate for conformity purposes or EPA approves the 
full maintenance plan SIP revision. Any required new conformity 
determinations could not be made until there is an adequate budget or 
approved full maintenance plan. At that time, regional emissions 
analyses would resume as a transportation conformity criteria.

VI. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve conversion of the Manchester and Nashua 
current carbon monoxide maintenance plans to a limited maintenance plan 
for the remainder of the City of Manchester, and the City of Nashua, 
New Hampshire CO maintenance plans which terminate on January 29, 2021.
    EPA is proposing to approve replacement of the CO air quality 
monitoring in Manchester with carbon monoxide monitoring at the 
Londonderry Moose Hill station in Londonderry, New Hampshire with 
triggers to reestablish CO monitoring

[[Page 77632]]

sites in Manchester and Nashua if elevated CO levels are recorded in 
Londonderry.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified 
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the 
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, 
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on 
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: December 10, 2013.
Michael P. Kenyon,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2013-30576 Filed 12-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P