81 FR 32235 - Air Plan Approval; New Hampshire; Ozone Maintenance Plan
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 99 (May 23, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 99 (May 23, 2016)
| Page Range | 32235-32239 | |
| FR Document | 2016-11963 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 32235-32239] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-11963] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R01-OAR-2012-0289; FRL-9946-69-Region 1] Air Plan Approval; New Hampshire; Ozone Maintenance Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Direct final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New Hampshire that contains an ozone maintenance plan for New Hampshire's former 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas. The Clean Air Act requires that areas that are designated attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and also had been previously designated either nonattainment or maintenance for the 1-hour ozone standard, develop a plan showing how the state will maintain the ozone standard for the area. The intended effect of this action is to approve New Hampshire's maintenance plan. This action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 22, 2016, unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 22, 2016. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01- OAR-2012-0289 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Arnold, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Suite 100, Mail Code OEP05- 02, Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone number (617) 918-1047, fax number (617) 918-0047, email [email protected]. 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. What is the background for this action? II. What action is EPA taking? [[Page 32236]] III. What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan? IV. How has New Hampshire addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan? V. Final Action VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background for this action? This action addresses requirements associated with the transition from the 1-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has established, and periodically reviews and revises, the NAAQS for ground-level ozone. On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38855), EPA published a final rule for a new 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). On April 30, 1994 (69 FR 23858), EPA designated and classified areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Also, on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA published the Phase 1 rule for implementation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Among other requirements, this rule set forth requirements for anti-back sliding purposes for areas designated attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Subsequently, in 2008, and in 2015, EPA again revised the ozone NAAQS to 0.075 ppm and 0.070 ppm, respectively. II. What action is EPA taking? EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New Hampshire on March 2, 2012. The SIP revision consists of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard for New Hampshire. The maintenance plan demonstrates how the state intends to maintain the 1997 8-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone. The CAA section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan requirement applies to areas that are designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8- hour ozone standard and also had a designation of either nonattainment or attainment with an approved maintenance plan for the 1-hour ozone standard as of June 15, 2004, the effective date of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard designation for these areas (See 69 FR 23857). In New Hampshire, this area consists of the cities and towns listed in Table 1. Table 1--1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment/Maintenance Areas Designated Unclassifiable/Attainment for the 8-Hour Standard as of June 15, 2004 [= New Hampshire maintenance planning area] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Area County Cities and towns included ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Boston-Lawrence-Worcester Hillsborough Mont Vernon, Wilton. Area. (part). Manchester Area............. Hillsborough Antrim, Bennington, (part). Deering, Francestown, Greenfield, Greenville, Hancock, Hillsborough, Lyndeborough, Mason, New Boston, New Ipswich, Peterborough, Sharon, Temple, Weare, Windsor. Merrimack Allenstown, Andover, (part). Boscawen, Bow, Bradford, Canterbury, Chichester, Concord, Danbury, Dunbarton, Epsom, Franklin, Henniker, Hill, Hopkinton, Loudon, New London, Newbury, Northfield, Pembroke, Pittsfield, Salisbury, Sutton, Warner, Webster, Wilmot. Rockingham County........... Rockingham Deerfield, Northwood, (part). Nottingham. Strafford County............ Strafford Barrington, Farmington, (part). Lee, Madbury, Middleton, Milton, New Durham, Strafford. Cheshire County............. Cheshire (all). Alstead, Chesterfield, Dublin, Fitzwilliam, Gilsum, Harrisville, Hinsdale, Jaffrey, Keene, Marlborough, Marlow, Nelson, Richmond, Rindge, Roxbury, Stoddard, Sullivan, Surry, Swanzey, Troy, Walpole, Westmoreland, Winchester. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ III. What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan? Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, the implementation rule for the 1997 ozone standard requires that areas that were either nonattainment or maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, but attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submit a plan to demonstrate the continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established June 15, 2007, three years after the effective date of the initial 1997 8-hour ozone designations, as the deadline for submission of plans for these areas. See 40 CFR 51.905. On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance \1\ that applies, in part, to areas that are designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard and either have an approved 1-hour ozone maintenance plan or were designated nonattainment of the 1-hour ozone standard. The purpose of the guidance is to assist the states in the development of a section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan SIP. There are five components of a section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan which are: (1) An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical summer day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX ) for a ten-year period from a base year as chosen by the state; (2) a maintenance demonstration which shows how the area will remain in compliance with the 1997 8-hour ozone standard for 10 years after the effective date of designations (June 15, 2004); (3) a commitment to continue to operate air quality monitors; (4) a contingency plan that will ensure that a violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is promptly addressed; and (5) an explanation of how the state will track the progress of the maintenance plan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ ``Maintenance Plan Guidance Document for Certain 8-hour Ozone Areas Under Section 110(a)(1) of Clean Air Act,'' EPA memorandum dated May 20, 2005, from Lydia Wegman to Air Division Directors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subsequently, in the implementation rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264; March 6, 2015), EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Nevertheless, New Hampshire's March 2, 2012 SIP revision of a Section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is pending before us, so we are taking action on it at this time. IV. How has New Hampshire addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan? EPA has determined that the New Hampshire Department of [[Page 32237]] Environmental Services (NHDES) 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan addresses all of the necessary components of a Section 110(a)(1) 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as discussed below. A. Emissions Inventory An emissions inventory is an itemized list of emission estimates for sources of air pollution in a given area for a specified time period. NHDES has provided a comprehensive emissions inventory for ozone precursors (NOX and VOCs) in the area. NHDES uses 2002 as the base year from which it projects emissions. The submittal also includes an explanation of the methodology used for determining the anthropogenic emissions (point, area, and mobile sources) in the maintenance area. The inventory is based on emissions for a ``typical summer day.'' B. Maintenance Demonstration With regard to demonstrating continued maintenance of the 1997 8- hour ozone standard, NHDES projects that the total emissions from the maintenance area will decrease during the ten-year maintenance period. NHDES has projected emissions from 2002 until 2014. The projected trend in emissions is downward. This clearly demonstrates that the 1997 8- hour ozone standard will be maintained for the ten year period between 2004 and 2014, which is the required test. Table 2 shows the total VOC and NOx emissions for the maintenance area in New Hampshire for the base year (2002), an interim year (2012), and a final year (2014).\2\ More detailed emissions tables can be found in the NHDES submittal. The trend in emissions is downward, for each pollutant in the area. As such, the plan demonstrates that, from an emissions projections standpoint, emissions are projected to decrease. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ It should be noted that the emissions shown in this table are for the entire five counties named, rather than the somewhat smaller maintenance area, due to the difficulty of parsing out inventory data to a sub-county basis. This difference is not considered significant, and does not affect the downward trend shown in the emissions. Table 2--2002, 2012, and 2014 VOC and NOX Emissions for Cheshire, Hillsborough, Merrimack, Rockingham, and Strafford Counties [Pounds per day] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VOC NOX Source category ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2002 2012 2014 2002 2012 2014 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Point................................................... 15,898 6,696 7,005 67,347 48,358 50,739 Area.................................................... 93,778 85,443 91,068 10,516 9,091 9,134 Non-Road Mobile......................................... 68,223 40,210 35,121 49,787 36,131 31,215 On-Road Mobile.......................................... 87,161 36,904 34,245 261,303 75,202 62,347 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total............................................... 265,060 169,253 167,439 388,953 168,782 153,435 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Ambient Monitoring With regard to the ambient air monitoring component of a maintenance plan, New Hampshire's submittal describes the ozone monitoring network in the maintenance area and New Hampshire commits to the continuing operation of an effective air quality monitoring network to verify the area's attainment status in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), specifically, 40 CFR part 58. New Hampshire's SIP revision was submitted on March 2, 2012 and includes ozone design values \3\ for 2010 and 2011 which demonstrate that the maintenance area is meeting the 0.08 ppm 1997 8-hour ozone standard. In addition, based on more recent ozone data from 2014, all of New Hampshire meets the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Furthermore, preliminary ozone data for 2015 shows that all of New Hampshire continues to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Table 3 shows the ozone design values for each monitor in the five county area listed in Table 2. As noted in Table 1, portions of these counties make up New Hampshire's maintenance area. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ The design value at an ozone monitor is the 3-year average annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration measured at that monitor. The design value for an area is the highest design value recorded at any monitor in the area. Table 3--Ozone Design Values (ppm) for Monitors in the New Hampshire Maintenance Area ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Design Value Monitor location AQS \4\ No. ------------------------------- 2014 2015 \5\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keene........................................................... 330050007 0.062 0.060 Peterborough.................................................... 330115001 0.070 0.067 Nashua.......................................................... 330111011 0.066 0.064 Concord......................................................... 330131007 0.063 0.062 Portsmouth...................................................... 330150014 0.068 0.066 Rye............................................................. 330150016 0.068 0.068 Londonderry..................................................... 330150018 0.067 0.065 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Contingency Measures EPA interprets section 110(a)(1) of the CAA to require that the state develop a contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of a NAAQS is promptly corrected. Therefore, as required by section 110(a)(1) of the Act, New Hampshire has listed in its submittal possible contingency measures, as well as a protocol the state will follow, in the event of a future ozone air quality problem. As noted in New Hampshire's [[Page 32238]] SIP revision, at the conclusion of each ozone season, NHDES will evaluate whether the design value for any ozone monitor in the maintenance area meets the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. If the design value is above the standard, NHDES will evaluate the potential causes of this design value increase, specifically, whether this increase is due to an increase in local in-state emissions, an increase in upwind out-of-state emissions, or an exceptional event as defined in 40 CFR 50.1. If an increase in in-state emissions is determined to be a contributing factor to the design value increase, NHDES will evaluate the projected in-state emissions for the maintenance area for the ozone season in the following year. If in-state emissions are not expected to satisfactorily decrease in the following ozone season in order to mitigate the violation, New Hampshire will implement one or more of the contingency measures listed in the submittal, or substitute other VOC or NOx control measures to achieve additional in-state emission reductions. The contingency measure(s) will be selected by the Governor, or the Governor's designee, within six months of the end of the ozone season for which contingency measures have been determined necessary. Further details on the types of possible control measures to be used as contingencies can be found in the New Hampshire submittal. New Hampshire's submittal satisfies EPA's contingency measure requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ AQS is EPA's Air Quality System. States submit ozone monitoring data to AQS. \5\ Ozone design values for 2015 are based on preliminary data. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- E. Tracking Progress New Hampshire's SIP revision notes that the State will track the maintenance of attainment by analyzing air quality trends at local monitors and annually updating the state's emissions inventories. NHDES produces comprehensive emission inventories on a three-year cycle and revises the inventories annually using updated emissions data for the largest sources. Finally, as a practical matter, at this point in time, the 10 year maintenance period (2004-2014) has ended and, as noted by the ozone design values in Table 3 above, the area has maintained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. V. Final Action EPA is approving into the New Hampshire SIP the Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(1) 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the New Hampshire area that is required to have such a plan. This area includes the cities and towns listed in Table 1 above. The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment 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 July 22, 2016 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by June 22, 2016. 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 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. All 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 July 22, 2016 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. 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. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the 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 action 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. 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 July 22, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for [[Page 32239]] 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: May 4, 2016. H. Curtis Spalding, Regional Administrator, EPA New England. Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 0 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart EE--New Hampshire 0 2. Section 52.1534 is amended by adding paragraph (j) to read as follows: Sec. 52.1534 Control strategy: Ozone. * * * * * (j) Approval--EPA is approving the Clean Air Act section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard in the area of the New Hampshire required to have such a plan. This area includes portions of Hillsborough, Merrimack, Rockingham, and Strafford Counties, and all of Cheshire County. This maintenance plan was submitted to EPA on March 2, 2012. [FR Doc. 2016-11963 Filed 5-20-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 32235
Affairs, Enforcement Programs and gun storage or safety device for that maintain the ozone standard for the
Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, handgun. area. The intended effect of this action
Firearms, and Explosives. * * * * * is to approve New Hampshire’s
■ 4. In § 478.74, revise the fifth and
maintenance plan. This action is being
List of Subjects in 27 CFR Part 478
sixth sentences and add a seventh taken in accordance with the Clean Air
Administrative practice and sentence to read as follows: Act.
procedure, Arms and munitions, DATES: This direct final rule will be
Customs duties and inspection, Exports, § 478.74 Request for hearing after notice effective July 22, 2016, unless EPA
Imports, Intergovernmental relations, of suspension, revocation, or imposition of receives adverse comments by June 22,
Law enforcement officers, Military civil fine.
2016. If adverse comments are received,
personnel, Penalties, Reporting and * * * If the decision is that the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
recordkeeping requirements, Research, license should be revoked, or, in actions the direct final rule in the Federal
Seizures and forfeitures, and under 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(5) or 924(p), that Register informing the public that the
Transportation. the license should be revoked or rule will not take effect.
suspended, or that a civil fine should be ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Authority and Issuance imposed, a certified copy of the identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
Accordingly, for the reasons summary shall be furnished to the OAR–2012–0289 at http://
discussed in the preamble, 27 CFR part licensee with the final notice of www.regulations.gov, or via email to
478 is amended as follows: revocation, suspension, or imposition of arnold.anne@epa.gov. For comments
a civil fine on ATF Form 5300.13. If the submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
PART 478—COMMERCE IN FIREARMS decision is that the license should not online instructions for submitting
AND AMMUNITION be revoked, or in actions under 18 comments. Once submitted, comments
U.S.C. 922(t)(5) or 924(p), that the cannot be edited or removed from
■ 1. The authority citation for 27 CFR license should not be revoked or Regulations.gov. For either manner of
part 478 continues to read as follows: suspended, and a civil fine should not submission, the EPA may publish any
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 18 U.S.C. 847, be imposed, the licensee shall be comment received to its public docket.
921–930; 44 U.S.C. 3504(h). notified in writing. During the hearing Do not submit electronically any
the licensee will have the opportunity to information you consider to be
■ 2. In § 478.72, add a new fifth submit facts and arguments for review Confidential Business Information (CBI)
sentence to read as follows: and consideration; offers of settlement or other information whose disclosure is
will not be entertained at the hearing restricted by statute. Multimedia
§ 478.72 Hearing after application denial.
but may be made before or after the submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
* * * During the hearing the hearing. accompanied by a written comment.
applicant will have the opportunity to Dated: May 17, 2016. The written comment is considered the
submit facts and arguments for review
Loretta E. Lynch, official comment and should include
and consideration; offers of settlement
Attorney General. discussion of all points you wish to
will not be entertained at the hearing
[FR Doc. 2016–12100 Filed 5–20–16; 8:45 am] make. The EPA will generally not
but may be made before or after the
consider comments or comment
hearing. * * * BILLING CODE 4410–FY–P
contents located outside of the primary
■ 3. In § 478.73, revise the last sentence submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
of paragraph (a) to read as follows: other file sharing system). For
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY additional submission methods, please
§ 478.73 Notice of revocation, suspension,
or imposition of civil fine. contact the person identified in the FOR
40 CFR Part 52 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
(a) * * * In addition, pursuant to 18 For the full EPA public comment policy,
U.S.C. 922(t)(5) and 18 U.S.C. 924(p), a [EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0289; FRL–9946–69– information about CBI or multimedia
notice of revocation, suspension, or Region 1]
submissions, and general guidance on
imposition of a civil fine may be issued making effective comments, please visit
Air Plan Approval; New Hampshire;
on ATF Form 4500 whenever the http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
Ozone Maintenance Plan
Director has reason to believe that a commenting-epa-dockets.
licensee has knowingly transferred a AGENCY: Environmental Protection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
firearm to an unlicensed person and Agency. Anne Arnold, Air Quality Planning
knowingly failed to comply with the ACTION: Direct final rule. Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection
requirements of 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(1) with Agency, Suite 100, Mail Code OEP05–
respect to the transfer and, at the time SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 02, Boston, MA 02109–3912, telephone
that the transferee most recently Agency (EPA) is approving a State number (617) 918–1047, fax number
proposed the transfer, the national Implementation Plan (SIP) revision (617) 918–0047, email arnold.anne@
instant criminal background check submitted by the State of New epa.gov.
system was operating and information Hampshire that contains an ozone
was available to the system maintenance plan for New Hampshire’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
demonstrating that the transferee’s former 1-hour ozone nonattainment Throughout this document whenever
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with RULES
receipt of a firearm would violate 18 areas. The Clean Air Act requires that ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
U.S.C. 922(g) or 922(n) or State law; or areas that are designated attainment for EPA.
that a licensee has violated 18 U.S.C. the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and Organization of this document. The
922(z)(1) by selling, delivering, or also had been previously designated following outline is provided to aid in
transferring any handgun to any person either nonattainment or maintenance for locating information in this preamble.
other than a licensee, unless the the 1-hour ozone standard, develop a I. What is the background for this action?
transferee was provided with a secure plan showing how the state will II. What action is EPA taking?
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 May 20, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM 23MYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_32334/page/1.svg)
![32236 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
III. What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance 30, 1994 (69 FR 23858), EPA designated (CAA or Act) section 110(a)(1) ozone
plan? and classified areas for the 1997 8-hour maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour
IV. How has New Hampshire addressed the ozone NAAQS. Also, on April 30, 2004 ozone standard for New Hampshire. The
components of a Section 110(a)(1) (69 FR 23951), EPA published the Phase maintenance plan demonstrates how the
maintenance plan?
V. Final Action
1 rule for implementation of the 1997 8- state intends to maintain the 1997 8-
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews hour ozone NAAQS. Among other hour National Ambient Air Quality
requirements, this rule set forth Standard for ozone.
I. What is the background for this requirements for anti-back sliding The CAA section 110(a)(1)
action? purposes for areas designated maintenance plan requirement applies
This action addresses requirements attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone to areas that are designated as
associated with the transition from the standard. attainment/unclassifiable for the 1997 8-
1-hour National Ambient Air Quality Subsequently, in 2008, and in 2015, hour ozone standard and also had a
Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level EPA again revised the ozone NAAQS to designation of either nonattainment or
ozone to the 1997 8-hour ozone 0.075 ppm and 0.070 ppm, respectively. attainment with an approved
NAAQS. maintenance plan for the 1-hour ozone
II. What action is EPA taking?
EPA has established, and periodically standard as of June 15, 2004, the
reviews and revises, the NAAQS for EPA is approving a State effective date of the 1997 8-hour ozone
ground-level ozone. On July 18, 1997 Implementation Plan (SIP) revision standard designation for these areas (See
(62 FR 38855), EPA published a final submitted by the State of New 69 FR 23857). In New Hampshire, this
rule for a new 8-hour ozone standard of Hampshire on March 2, 2012. The SIP area consists of the cities and towns
0.08 parts per million (ppm). On April revision consists of the Clean Air Act listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1—1-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT/MAINTENANCE AREAS DESIGNATED UNCLASSIFIABLE/ATTAINMENT FOR THE 8-
HOUR STANDARD AS OF JUNE 15, 2004
[= New Hampshire maintenance planning area]
Area County Cities and towns included
Boston-Lawrence-Worcester Hillsborough (part) ................... Mont Vernon, Wilton.
Area.
Manchester Area ....................... Hillsborough (part) ................... Antrim, Bennington, Deering, Francestown, Greenfield, Greenville, Hancock,
Hillsborough, Lyndeborough, Mason, New Boston, New Ipswich, Peter-
borough, Sharon, Temple, Weare, Windsor.
Merrimack (part) ...................... Allenstown, Andover, Boscawen, Bow, Bradford, Canterbury, Chichester,
Concord, Danbury, Dunbarton, Epsom, Franklin, Henniker, Hill, Hopkinton,
Loudon, New London, Newbury, Northfield, Pembroke, Pittsfield, Salisbury,
Sutton, Warner, Webster, Wilmot.
Rockingham County .................. Rockingham (part) ................... Deerfield, Northwood, Nottingham.
Strafford County ........................ Strafford (part) ......................... Barrington, Farmington, Lee, Madbury, Middleton, Milton, New Durham,
Strafford.
Cheshire County ....................... Cheshire (all) ........................... Alstead, Chesterfield, Dublin, Fitzwilliam, Gilsum, Harrisville, Hinsdale,
Jaffrey, Keene, Marlborough, Marlow, Nelson, Richmond, Rindge,
Roxbury, Stoddard, Sullivan, Surry, Swanzey, Troy, Walpole, Westmore-
land, Winchester.
III. What is a Section 110(a)(1) that are designated attainment/ 2004); (3) a commitment to continue to
maintenance plan? unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour ozone operate air quality monitors; (4) a
standard and either have an approved 1- contingency plan that will ensure that a
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the hour ozone maintenance plan or were violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone
Clean Air Act, the implementation rule designated nonattainment of the 1-hour NAAQS is promptly addressed; and (5)
for the 1997 ozone standard requires ozone standard. The purpose of the an explanation of how the state will
that areas that were either guidance is to assist the states in the track the progress of the maintenance
nonattainment or maintenance areas for development of a section 110(a)(1) plan.
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, but maintenance plan SIP. There are five Subsequently, in the implementation
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone components of a section 110(a)(1) rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR
NAAQS, submit a plan to demonstrate maintenance plan which are: (1) An 12264; March 6, 2015), EPA revoked the
the continued maintenance of the 1997 attainment inventory, which is based on 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established actual typical summer day emissions of Nevertheless, New Hampshire’s March
June 15, 2007, three years after the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 2, 2012 SIP revision of a Section
effective date of the initial 1997 8-hour oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for a ten-year 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan for
ozone designations, as the deadline for period from a base year as chosen by the the 1997 8-hour ozone standard is
submission of plans for these areas. See state; (2) a maintenance demonstration pending before us, so we are taking
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with RULES
40 CFR 51.905. which shows how the area will remain action on it at this time.
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued in compliance with the 1997 8-hour IV. How has New Hampshire addressed
guidance 1 that applies, in part, to areas ozone standard for 10 years after the the components of a Section 110(a)(1)
effective date of designations (June 15, maintenance plan?
1 ‘‘Maintenance Plan Guidance Document for
Certain 8-hour Ozone Areas Under Section 110(a)(1) 20, 2005, from Lydia Wegman to Air Division EPA has determined that the New
of Clean Air Act,’’ EPA memorandum dated May Directors. Hampshire Department of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 May 20, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM 23MYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_32334/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 32237
Environmental Services (NHDES) 1997 includes an explanation of the demonstrates that the 1997 8-hour
8-hour ozone maintenance plan methodology used for determining the ozone standard will be maintained for
addresses all of the necessary anthropogenic emissions (point, area, the ten year period between 2004 and
components of a Section 110(a)(1) 1997 and mobile sources) in the maintenance 2014, which is the required test.
8-hour ozone maintenance plan as area. The inventory is based on
Table 2 shows the total VOC and NOx
discussed below. emissions for a ‘‘typical summer day.’’
emissions for the maintenance area in
A. Emissions Inventory B. Maintenance Demonstration New Hampshire for the base year (2002),
An emissions inventory is an itemized With regard to demonstrating an interim year (2012), and a final year
list of emission estimates for sources of continued maintenance of the 1997 8- (2014).2 More detailed emissions tables
air pollution in a given area for a hour ozone standard, NHDES projects can be found in the NHDES submittal.
specified time period. NHDES has that the total emissions from the The trend in emissions is downward, for
provided a comprehensive emissions maintenance area will decrease during each pollutant in the area. As such, the
inventory for ozone precursors (NOX the ten-year maintenance period. plan demonstrates that, from an
and VOCs) in the area. NHDES uses NHDES has projected emissions from emissions projections standpoint,
2002 as the base year from which it 2002 until 2014. The projected trend in emissions are projected to decrease.
projects emissions. The submittal also emissions is downward. This clearly
TABLE 2—2002, 2012, AND 2014 VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS FOR CHESHIRE, HILLSBOROUGH, MERRIMACK, ROCKINGHAM,
AND STRAFFORD COUNTIES
[Pounds per day]
VOC NOX
Source category
2002 2012 2014 2002 2012 2014
Point ......................................................... 15,898 6,696 7,005 67,347 48,358 50,739
Area .......................................................... 93,778 85,443 91,068 10,516 9,091 9,134
Non-Road Mobile ..................................... 68,223 40,210 35,121 49,787 36,131 31,215
On-Road Mobile ....................................... 87,161 36,904 34,245 261,303 75,202 62,347
Total .................................................. 265,060 169,253 167,439 388,953 168,782 153,435
C. Ambient Monitoring attainment status in accordance with the New Hampshire meets the 1997 8-hour
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), ozone standard. Furthermore,
With regard to the ambient air specifically, 40 CFR part 58. New preliminary ozone data for 2015 shows
monitoring component of a maintenance Hampshire’s SIP revision was submitted that all of New Hampshire continues to
plan, New Hampshire’s submittal on March 2, 2012 and includes ozone meet the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
describes the ozone monitoring network design values 3 for 2010 and 2011 which Table 3 shows the ozone design values
in the maintenance area and New demonstrate that the maintenance area for each monitor in the five county area
Hampshire commits to the continuing is meeting the 0.08 ppm 1997 8-hour listed in Table 2. As noted in Table 1,
operation of an effective air quality ozone standard. In addition, based on portions of these counties make up New
monitoring network to verify the area’s more recent ozone data from 2014, all of Hampshire’s maintenance area.
TABLE 3—OZONE DESIGN VALUES (PPM) FOR MONITORS IN THE NEW HAMPSHIRE MAINTENANCE AREA
Design Value
Monitor location AQS 4 No.
2014 2015 5
Keene ........................................................................................................................................... 330050007 0.062 0.060
Peterborough ............................................................................................................................... 330115001 0.070 0.067
Nashua ......................................................................................................................................... 330111011 0.066 0.064
Concord ....................................................................................................................................... 330131007 0.063 0.062
Portsmouth ................................................................................................................................... 330150014 0.068 0.066
Rye ............................................................................................................................................... 330150016 0.068 0.068
Londonderry ................................................................................................................................. 330150018 0.067 0.065
D. Contingency Measures any violation of a NAAQS is promptly possible contingency measures, as well
corrected. Therefore, as required by as a protocol the state will follow, in the
EPA interprets section 110(a)(1) of the
CAA to require that the state develop a section 110(a)(1) of the Act, New event of a future ozone air quality
Hampshire has listed in its submittal problem. As noted in New Hampshire’s
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with RULES
contingency plan that will ensure that
2 It should be noted that the emissions shown in considered significant, and does not affect the highest design value recorded at any monitor in the
this table are for the entire five counties named, downward trend shown in the emissions. area.
rather than the somewhat smaller maintenance area, 3 The design value at an ozone monitor is the 3- 4 AQS is EPA’s Air Quality System. States submit
due to the difficulty of parsing out inventory data year average annual fourth-highest daily maximum ozone monitoring data to AQS.
to a sub-county basis. This difference is not 8-hour average ozone concentration measured at 5 Ozone design values for 2015 are based on
that monitor. The design value for an area is the preliminary data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 May 20, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM 23MYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_32334/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 32239
the purposes of judicial review nor does ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Publicly available docket materials are
it extend the time within which a AGENCY available either electronically through
petition for judicial review may be filed, http://www.regulations.gov or in hard
and shall not postpone the effectiveness 40 CFR Part 52 copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross
of such rule or action. Parties with [EPA–R06–OAR–2015–0783; FRL–9946–66– Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–
objections to this direct final rule are Region 6] 2733.
encouraged to file a comment in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
response to the parallel notice of Approval and Promulgation of
Adina Wiley, (214) 665–2115,
proposed rulemaking for this action Implementation Plans; Arkansas; New
wiley.adina@epa.gov.
published in the proposed rules section Mexico; Oklahoma; Disapproval of
Greenhouse Gas Biomass Deferral, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
Step 2 and Minor Source Permitting Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
file an immediate petition for judicial
Requirements and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule AGENCY: Environmental Protection I. Background
and address the comment in the Agency (EPA).
proposed rulemaking. This action may ACTION: Final rule. The background for this action is
not be challenged later in proceedings to discussed in detail in our January 11,
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 2016 proposal. See 81 FR 1141. In that
enforce its requirements. (See section
Agency (EPA) is disapproving severable document we proposed to disapprove
307(b)(2)). portions of the February 6, 2012 severable portions of the February 6,
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Oklahoma State Implementation Plan 2012 Oklahoma SIP submittal
(SIP) submittal that are inconsistent establishing GHG permitting
Environmental protection, Air with federal laws based on recent requirements for minor sources and for
pollution control, Incorporation by decisions by the United States Courts sources that are classified as major, and
reference, Ozone, Reporting and and subsequent EPA rulemaking. This thus, required to obtain a PSD permit
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile submittal established Minor New based solely on their potential GHG
organic compounds. Source Review permitting requirements emissions (referred to as ‘‘Step 2’’ PSD
for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sources in our proposed action) because
Dated: May 4, 2016.
includes Prevention of Significant we determined that these revisions to
H. Curtis Spalding, Deterioration (PSD) permitting the Oklahoma SIP establish permitting
Regional Administrator, EPA New England. provisions for sources that are classified requirements that are inconsistent with
as major, and, thus, required to obtain federal laws resulting from recent
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the
a PSD permit, based solely on their decisions by United States Courts. We
Code of Federal Regulations is amended potential GHG emissions. The PSD
as follows: also proposed to disapprove severable
permitting provisions also require a PSD portions of the November 6, 2012
permit for modifications of otherwise Arkansas SIP submittal, the January 8,
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
major sources because they increased 2013 New Mexico SIP, and the January
PROMULGATION OF only GHG emissions above applicable
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 18, 2013 Oklahoma SIP submittal that
levels. Additionally, we are include the Biomass Deferral in the
disapproving severable portions of SIP Arkansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma
■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 submittals for the States of Arkansas, PSD programs. Our analysis found that
continues to read as follows: New Mexico, and Oklahoma addressing these revisions to the Arkansas, New
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. the EPA’s July 20, 2011 rule deferring Mexico, and Oklahoma SIPs should be
PSD requirements for carbon dioxide disapproved because adoption or
Subpart EE—New Hampshire (CO2) emissions from bioenergy and implementation of these provisions is
other biogenic sources (‘‘Biomass no longer consistent with federal laws
■ 2. Section 52.1534 is amended by Deferral’’). We are disapproving the and regulations for PSD permitting.
adding paragraph (j) to read as follows: provisions adopting the Biomass
Deferral because they are no longer II. Response to Comments
§ 52.1534 Control strategy: Ozone. consistent with federal laws and We received one comment on our
* * * * * regulations. The EPA is finalizing this proposed action. Our response to the
disapproval under section 110 and part submitted comment is provided below.
(j) Approval—EPA is approving the
C of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA).
Clean Air Act section 110(a)(1) Comment: One commenter stated that
DATES: This rule is effective on June 22,
maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ‘‘not requiring states to continue step
2016.
ozone National Ambient Air Quality two of the permitting for GHG as a major
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
Standard in the area of the New source thus requiring a PSD or Title V
Hampshire required to have such a plan. docket for this action under Docket ID
permit is the right decisions based on
No. EPA–R06–OAR–2015–0783. All
This area includes portions of law.’’ Additionally, the commenter
documents in the docket are listed on
Hillsborough, Merrimack, Rockingham, stated that ‘‘GHG emission issues would
the http://www.regulations.gov Web
and Strafford Counties, and all of be better addressed in it’s [sic] own
site. Although listed in the index, some
Cheshire County. This maintenance statute rather than having the supreme
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with RULES
information is not publicly available,
plan was submitted to EPA on March 2, court [sic] dictate the regulatory
e.g., Confidential Business Information
2012. framework of GHG emissions.’’
or other information whose disclosure is
[FR Doc. 2016–11963 Filed 5–20–16; 8:45 am] restricted by statute. Certain other Response: We acknowledge the
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P material, such as copyrighted material, support of the commenter in finding
is not placed on the Internet and will be that our proposed disapproval action is
publicly available only in hard copy. consistent with current law. GHG
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:03 May 20, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23MYR1.SGM 23MYR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_32334/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-07 15:07:15
Document Modified: 2018-02-07 15:07:15
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Direct final rule. | |
| Dates | This direct final rule will be effective July 22, 2016, unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 22, 2016. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. | |
| Contact | Anne Arnold, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Suite 100, Mail Code OEP05- 02, Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone number (617) 918-1047, fax number (617) 918-0047, email [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 32235 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR