[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 23, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34976-34981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-14219]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R01-OAR-2004-CT-0003; A-1-FRL-7777-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Connecticut; Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan Updates; Limited 
Maintenance Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a draft State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This draft 
revision will establish limited maintenance plans for the Hartford-New 
Britain-Middletown, the New Haven-Meriden-Waterbury, and the 
Connecticut Portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 
carbon monoxide attainment areas, and provide the ten-year update to 
these three carbon monoxide maintenance plans. EPA is parallel 
processing this draft SIP revision, for which the State of Connecticut 
scheduled a public hearing on June 17, 2004. This action is being taken 
under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 23, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2004-CT-0003 by one of the following 
methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional Material 
in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is 
EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the system, 
select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket 
identification number. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 
comments.
    3. E-mail: [email protected].
    4. Fax: (617) 918-0661.
    5. Mail: ``RME ID Number R01-OAR-2004-CT-0003'', David B. Conroy, 
Acting Chief, Air Programs Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 
02114-2023.
    6. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: David B. 
Conroy, Acting Chief, Air Programs Branch, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-
2023. 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 Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket 
(RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2004-CT-0003. EPA's policy is that all comments 
received will be included in the public docket without change and may 
be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 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 information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected 
through Regional Material in EDocket (RME), regulations.gov, or e-mail. 
The EPA RME website and the federal regulations.gov website are 
``anonymous access'' systems, 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail 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 
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 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 RME or in hard copy at Office of 
Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New 
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, 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 Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Unit, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 
Office of Ecosystem Protection, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), 
Boston, MA 02114-2023, telephone number (617) 918-1668, fax number 
(617) 918-0668, e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

    In addition to the publicly available docket materials available 
for inspection electronically in Regional Material in EDocket, and the 
hard copy available at the Regional Office, which are identified

[[Page 34977]]

in the ADDRESSES section above, copies of the State submittal and EPA's 
technical support document are also available for public inspection 
during normal business hours, by appointment at the State Air Agency. 
The Bureau of Air Management, Connecticut Department of Environmental 
Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-
1630.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your 
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that 
support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate.
    5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
    6. Offer alternatives.
    7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.
    8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 
regional file/rulemaking identification number in the subject line on 
the first page of your response. It would also be helpful if you 
provided the name, date, and Federal Register citation related to your 
comments.

II. Rulemaking Information

    The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in 
this preamble.

A. Background and Purpose
B. Criteria for Limited Maintenance Plan Designation
    1. EPA Guidance
    2. Emission Inventory
    3. Demonstration of Maintenance
    4. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
C. Contingency
D. State Commitments
E. Conformity
F. Parallel Processing

A. Background and Purpose

    On May 11, 2004, the Connecticut Department of Environmental 
Protection (CT DEP) submitted a draft revision to its State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ``Limited Maintenance Plans for the 
Hartford, the New Haven, and the Connecticut Portion of the New York/
New Jersey/Connecticut Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Areas.'' The 
revision consists of a second follow-on ten-year carbon monoxide 
maintenance plan for the Hartford-New Britain-Middletown Carbon 
Monoxide Attainment Area (period 2006 to 2015) and a request for a 
limited CO maintenance plan designation. The State of Connecticut also 
requested Limited Maintenance Plan approval and early approval of the 
second follow-on ten-year maintenance plans for both the New Haven-
Meriden-Waterbury carbon monoxide attainment area (period 2009 to 
2018), and the Connecticut Portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island (period 2011 to 2020) carbon monoxide attainment area.
    In the early 1990's EPA designated three 8-hour carbon monoxide 
nonattainment areas in Connecticut. These three areas are as follows:
(1) Hartford-New Britain-Middletown (Hartford) Nonattainment Area
    Hartford County (part) * * * Bristol City, Burlington Town, Avon 
Town, Bloomfield Town, Canton Town, E. Granby Town, E. Hartford Town, 
E. Windsor Town, Enfield Town, Farmington Town, Glastonbury Town, 
Granby Town, Hartford City, Manchester Town, Marlborough Town, 
Newington Town, Rocky Hill Town, Simsbury Town, South Windsor Town, 
Suffield Town, West Hartford Town, Wethersfield Town, Windsor Town, 
Windsor Locks Town, Berlin Town, New Britain city, Plainville Town, and 
Southington Town.
    Litchfield County (part) * * * Plymouth Town. Middlesex County 
(part) * * * Cromwell Town, Durham Town, E. Hampton Town, Haddam Town, 
Middlefield Town, Middletown City, Portland Town, E. Haddam Town.
    Tolland County (part) * * * Andover Town, Bolton Town, Ellington 
Town, Hebron Town, Somers Town, Tolland Town, and Vernon Town.
(2) New Haven-Meriden-Waterbury (New Haven) Attainment Area
    Fairfield County (part) * * * Shelton City.
    Litchfield County (part) * * * Bethlehem Town, Thomaston Town, 
Watertown, Woodbury Town.
    New Haven County (entire county).
(3) Connecticut Portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 
(Southwest Connecticut) Nonattainment Area
    Fairfield County (part) * * * All cities and townships except 
Shelton City.
    Litchfield County (part) * * * Bridgewater Town and New Milford 
Town.
    The State of Connecticut developed state implementation plans to 
control carbon monoxide emissions through a number of federally 
mandated control programs as well as State-initiated control programs. 
These control measures resulted in the attainment of the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide. Section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments provides five 
specific requirements that an area must meet in order to be 
redesignated from nonattainment to attainment: (1) The area must have 
attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) The area must have a fully approved 
SIP under section 110(k) of CAA; (3) The air quality improvement must 
be permanent and enforceable; (4) The area must have a fully approved 
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA; (5) The area must 
meet all applicable requirements under section 110 and Part D of the 
CAA. Each of the three Connecticut carbon monoxide nonattainment areas 
individually satisfied the redesignation criteria and were redesignated 
to attainment. Please see Table 1 below:

                                     Table 1.--Connecticut CO SIP Revisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Federal Register       Initial Ten-Year Maintenance
           SIP Revision              EPA Effective Date          citation                      Period
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hartford Area Redesignation and     January 2, 1996....  May 14, 1996, 61 FR       1995-2005.
 Maintenance Plan.                                        24239; Correction,
                                                          November 15, 1996, 61
                                                          FR 58487.
New Haven Area Redesignation and    December 4, 1998...  October 5, 1998, 63 FR    1998-2008.
 Maintenance Plan.                                        53282.
Southwest Connecticut               May 10, 1999.......  March 10, 1999, 64 FR     2000-2010.
 Redesignation and Maintenance                            12005.
 Plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 34978]]

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
The plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS 
for at least ten years after the Administrator approves a redesignation 
to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the state must 
submit a revised maintenance plan which demonstrates attainment for the 
ten years following the initial ten-year period.

B. Criteria for Limited Maintenance Plan Designation

1. EPA Guidance
    For the Hartford, New Haven and Southwest Connecticut areas, CT DEP 
is proposing to utilize EPA's limited maintenance plan approach, as 
detailed in the EPA guidance memorandum, ``Limited Maintenance Plan 
Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, 
Group Leader, Integrated Policy and Strategies Group, Office of Air 
Quality and Planning Standards (OAQPS), dated October 6, 1995, (the 
Paisie Memorandum). 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 (ppm), or 85 percent of the level of the 8-hour carbon monoxide 
CO NAAQS. The design value must be based on eight consecutive quarters 
of data. For such areas, there is no requirement to project emissions 
of 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 PSD requirements, the control measures 
already in the SIP, and Federal measures, 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.
    Current 2003 8-hour CO design values for each of Connecticut's CO 
maintenance areas are summarized in Table 2 below. Also listed are 2003 
design values for the New York and New Jersey portions of the 
metropolitan New York City CO maintenance area. In all cases, current 
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 2.--Current Design Values for Connecticut's CO Maintenance Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2003 8-hour CO
                 CO maintenance area                      design value
                                                             (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metropolitan New York City Maintenance Area:
    Southwest CT Portion.............................                3.2
    New York Portion.................................                3.4
    New Jersey Portion...............................                4.4
Hartford Maintenance Area............................                5.2
New Haven Maintenance Area...........................                2.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Emission Inventory
    The maintenance plan must contain an attainment year emissions 
inventory to identify a level of emissions in the area which is 
sufficient to attain the CO NAAQS. This inventory is to be consistent 
with EPA's most recent guidance on emissions inventories for 
nonattainment areas available at the time and should represent 
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data 
showing attainment.
    A Connecticut statewide carbon monoxide emission inventory was 
prepared for a typical winter weekday in the year 2002, a year in which 
attainment was monitored in all three Connecticut carbon monoxide 
attainment areas, and the 8-hour carbon monoxide design value was below 
the carbon monoxide limited maintenance plan criteria of 7.65 parts per 
million. This statewide inventory was composed of 20.8 tons per day 
from point sources, 817.9 tons per day from area sources, 422.2 tons 
per day from non-road sources, and 1,871.3 tons per day from highway 
sources for a total statewide winter day carbon monoxide emissions of 
3,132 tons.
3. Demonstration of Maintenance
    As described in the Paisie Memorandum, the maintenance 
demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied for ``not 
classified'' CO areas if the design value for the area is equal to, or 
less than 7.65 ppm. As presented in Table 2 the CO design values are 
for all of these areas are well below 7.65 ppm.
    As assurance of maintenance, the CT DEP has provided statewide 
projections of CO emissions in tons per day (tpd) from onroad mobile 
sources for the years 2015 and 2025 during the peak annual CO season to 
demonstrate that carbon monoxide levels continue to decline in the 
remainder of the first ten-year maintenance plan as well as in the 
sequential second ten-year maintenance plan.
    CT DEP developed statewide winter-day CO emission estimates for 
2002, 2015, and 2020, accounting for emissions from the various point, 
area, and non-road and highway categories. Point and area source 
emissions were estimated by applying population growth factors to 1999 
emission estimates contained in Connecticut's 1999 periodic inventory. 
Estimates for the non-road and highway categories were developed using 
EPA's most recent versions of the draft NONROAD model (version 2002a 
dated June 2003) and MOBILE6.2 model (dated September 24, 2003), 
respectively. Connecticut-specific inputs for each model, including 
highway vehicle miles traveled (VMT) growth, are documented in Appendix 
B and Appendix C of the State submittal, respectively. Note that 
MOBILE6.2 inputs for 2015 and 2020 do not include reformulated gasoline 
(i.e., oxygenate effects are not modeled), vehicle emission testing, or 
the proposed adoption of California low emission vehicle program. 
Similarly, NONROAD model estimates for 2015 and 2020 do not include the 
oxygenate effects of reformulated gasoline or EPA's proposed new 
emission and fuel standards for non-road sources. As a result, 2015 and 
2020 emission estimates are conservatively high for the purpose of 
clearly demonstrating that CO emissions will not likely increase for 
the duration of the maintenance periods.

[[Page 34979]]



               Table 3.--Estimated Statewide Winter-Day CO Emission Levels in 2002, 2015, and 2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             2015 \1\ (tons/    2020 \1\ (tons/
                    Source category                       2002 (tons/day)          day)               day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..................................................               20.8               21.9               22.4
Area...................................................              817.9              861.3              881.3
Non-road...............................................              422.2              596.8              640.2
Highway................................................            1,871.3            1,263.4            1,196.1
                                                        --------------------
    Total..............................................              3,132              2,743             2,740
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Highway emission projections for 2015 and 2020 do not include emission reductions from reformulated
  gasoline, vehicle emission testing, or the proposed adoption of California low emission vehicle standards. Non-
  road emission projections for 2015 and 2020 do not include the benefits of EPA's proposed non-road emission
  standards.

4. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    In the limited maintenance plan request, CT DEP committed to 
maintain a continuous CO monitoring network, meeting the requirements 
of 40 CFR part 58, that provides adequate coverage to verify continued 
compliance with the CO NAAQS in each CO maintenance area.
    CT DEP will use data from the monitoring network to determine 
whether design values exceed the eligibility requirement of 7.65 ppm 
for each limited maintenance plan area. If design values in any 
maintenance area exceed 7.65 ppm, CT DEP will coordinate with EPA to: 
(1) Verify the validity of the data; (2) evaluate whether the data 
should be excluded based on an ``exceptional event''; and, if warranted 
based on the data review; (3) develop a full maintenance plan for the 
affected maintenance area(s).

C. Contingency Plan

    Section 175A(d) of the Act requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions, as necessary, to correct promptly any violation 
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area. Under section 
175A(d), contingency measures do not have to be fully adopted at the 
time of redesignation. However, the contingency plan is considered to 
be an enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that the 
contingency measures are adopted expeditiously once they are triggered 
by a specified event.
    CT DEP has developed a two-phase contingency plan to address any 
measured CO concentration, in any of the three maintenance areas, above 
the level of the NAAQS that meets quality assurance criteria and does 
not qualify for exclusion under EPA's ``exceptional events'' policy. 
Implementation of the contingency plan after the first verified CO 
exceedance is intended to provide an opportunity for corrective action 
before any NAAQS violations (i.e., a second CO exceedance in the same 
calendar year) can occur.
    Subsequent to the verification of any measured exceedance of the CO 
NAAQS, the CT DEP will promptly analyze available air quality, 
meteorological, traffic, and other relevant data near the affected 
monitor to determine the likely cause of the exceedance. The CT DEP 
will confer with the appropriate officials at the CT DOT, regional 
planning agencies, and municipalities to determine if a local remedy 
(e.g., traffic signal changes, revised parking ordinances) is 
appropriate to avoid future exceedances of the standard. If such local 
actions are feasible and determined to be effective, CT DEP will work 
with the affected agencies to pursue implementation as soon as 
possible. If local actions are determined to be infeasible or 
ineffective, CT DEP will pursue the second-phase of the contingency 
plan.
    The second phase of the contingency plan will be triggered if 
implementation of local corrective action is judged infeasible or 
ineffective (i.e., if another verified exceedance is recorded after the 
first phase actions are fully implemented). As part of the second-phase 
of the plan, CT DEP will evaluate whether any current or recently 
adopted (at the time of the exceedance) future control programs will 
provide adequate additional emission reductions to prevent future CO 
exceedances at the affected monitor. CT DEP will use EPA-approved 
modeling techniques available at the time of the exceedance (e.g., 
currently MOBILE6.2 for emission estimates) to estimate expected future 
emission reductions and determine the resulting effect at the monitor 
of concern.

D. State Commitments

    EPA's guidance for limited maintenance plans also requires States 
to include several commitments as part of the SIP revision. To fulfill 
those requirements, CT DEP provides the following commitments, which 
will be in effect through the end of each area's second 10-year 
maintenance period, as described in Table 4.

                             Table 4.--Connecticut CO Maintenance Plan Time Periods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Initial ten-year      Second ten-year maintenance
            SIP revision               EPA effective date    maintenance period               period
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hartford Area Redesignation and       January 2, 1996.....  1995-2005...........  2006-2015
 Maintenance Plan.
New Haven Area Redesignation and      December 4, 1998....  1998-2008...........  2009-2018
 Maintenance Plan.
Southwest Connecticut Redesignation   May 10, 1999........  2000-2010...........  2011-2020
 and Maintenance Plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CT DEP will maintain a continuous CO monitoring network, meeting 
the requirements of 40 CFR Part 58, that provides adequate coverage to 
verify continued compliance with the CO NAAQS in each CO maintenance 
area.
    CT DEP will use data from the monitoring network to determine 
whether design values exceed the eligibility requirement of 7.65 ppm 
for each limited maintenance plan area. If design values in any 
maintenance area exceed 7.65 ppm, CT DEP will coordinate with EPA to: 
(1) verify the validity of the data; (2) evaluate whether the data 
should be excluded based on an ``exceptional event'; and, if warranted 
based on the data review, (3) develop a full maintenance plan for the 
affected maintenance areas.

[[Page 34980]]

    CT DEP will continue to ensure that project-level CO evaluations of 
transportation projects (i.e., project-level conformity, as described 
in 40 CFR 93.116) in each area are carried out as part of environmental 
reviews or Connecticut's indirect source permitting program. CT DEP is 
currently considering modifications to the indirect source program, but 
anticipates any changes will require similar project-level CO reviews.

F. 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.
    In the case of the Hartford, New Haven and Southwest Connecticut CO 
limited maintenance plan areas, however, the emissions budgets may be 
treated as essentially not constraining for the length of the initial 
maintenance period and second maintenance period as long as the area 
continues to meet the limited maintenance criteria, because there is no 
reason to expect that these areas will experience so much growth in 
that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other 
words, emissions from on-road transportation sources need not be capped 
for the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to believe that 
emissions from such sources would increase to a level that would 
threaten the air quality in this area for the duration of this 
maintenance period. Therefore, for the limited maintenance plan CO 
maintenance area, all Federal actions that require conformity 
determinations under the transportation conformity rule are 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 one of the carbon monoxide attainment areas monitors carbon 
monoxide 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. At that time regional emissions 
analyses would resume as a transportation conformity criteria.

E. Parallel Processing

    The CT DEP has requested that EPA parallel process this proposed 
SIP revision. Under this procedure, EPA-New England Regional Office 
works closely with the CT DEP, the state air agency, while the state is 
developing new or revised regulations. The state submits a copy of its 
proposed regulation or other revisions to EPA before conducting its 
public hearing. EPA reviews this proposed State action, and prepares a 
notice of proposed rulemaking. EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking is 
published in the Federal Register during the same time frame that the 
State is holding its public hearing. The State and EPA then provide for 
concurrent public comment periods on both the State action and Federal 
action. After the State submits the formal SIP revision request 
(including a response to all public comments raised during the State's 
public participation process), EPA will prepare a final rulemaking 
notice. If the State of Connecticut's formal SIP submittal contains 
changes which occur after EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking, such 
changes must be described in EPA's final rulemaking action. If the 
State's changes are significant, then EPA must decide whether it is 
appropriate to re-propose the State's action.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve a draft State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This SIP revision will 
establish limited maintenance plans for the Hartford-New Britain-
Middletown, the New Haven-Meriden-Waterbury, and the Connecticut 
portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island carbon monoxide 
attainment areas, and provide the ten-year update to these three carbon 
monoxide maintenance plans. EPA is parallel processing this SIP 
revision.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this 
proposal or on other relevant matters. These comments will be 
considered before EPA takes final action. Interested parties may 
participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written 
comments to the EPA New England Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES 
section of this action, or by submitting comments electronically, by 
mail, or through hand delivery/courier following the directions in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, I. General Information section of this 
action.
    Interested parties are also encouraged to participate in the 
concurrent State process by presenting oral or written testimony at the 
State of Connecticut's June 17, 2004 public hearing at 2 p.m. at the 
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, 5th Floor Holcombe 
Room. Written comments may also be submitted on or before 4:30 p.m. on 
June 17, 2004, to Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, 
Bureau of Air Management, Planning and Standards Division, 5th

[[Page 34981]]

Floor, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06106-5127 during the 
State's comment period. For additional information on Connecticut's 
public participation process please contact Ms. Patricia Downes, 
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air 
Management Planning and Standards Division, 5th Floor, 79 Elm Street, 
Hartford, Connecticut 06106-5127 at (860) 424-3027.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under State law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a State rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations.

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

    Dated: June 15, 2004.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 04-14219 Filed 6-22-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P