Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Colorado; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes, Lamar
and Steamboat Springs
[Federal Register: August 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 150)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 47366-47377]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05au04-14]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a; FRL-7784-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Colorado; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes, Lamar
and Steamboat Springs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Colorado
on July 31, 2002, for the purpose of redesignating the Lamar, Colorado
and Steamboat Springs, Colorado areas from
[[Page 47367]]
nonattainment to attainment for particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM10) under the 1987 standards. The Governor's submittal,
among other things, documents that the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
areas have attained the PM10 national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS), requests redesignation to attainment and includes a
maintenance plan for each of the areas demonstrating maintenance of the
PM10 NAAQS for ten years. EPA is approving these
redesignation requests and maintenance plans because Colorado has met
the applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended.
Upon the effective date of this approval, the Lamar and Steamboat
Springs areas will be designated attainment for the PM10
NAAQS. This action is being taken under sections 107, 110, and 175A of
the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on October 4, 2004, without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by September 7, 2004. If
adverse comment is 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: Written comments may be mailed to Richard R. Long, Director,
Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80202.
Comments may also be submitted electronically, or through hand
delivery/courier. Please follow the detailed instructions described in
section (I)(B)(1)(i) through (iii) of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Libby Faulk, EPA, Region VIII, (303)
312-6083.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' are used, we mean the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. EPA's Final Action
A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This Direct Final Rule?
III. Summary of Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
A. What Requirements Must Be Followed for Redesignations to Attainment?
B. Do the Lamar and Steamboat Springs Redesignation Requests and
Maintenance Plans Meet the CAA Requirements?
C. Have the Transportation Conformity Requirements Been Met?
D. Did Colorado Follow the Proper Procedures for Adopting This Action?
IV. Background
V. Consideration of CAA section 110(l)
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
1. The Regional Office has established an official public
rulemaking file available for inspection at the Regional Office. EPA
has established an official public rulemaking file for this action
under CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a. The official public file consists of
the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public
comments received, and other information related to this action.
Although a part of the official docket, the public rulemaking file does
not include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official
public rulemaking file is the collection of materials that is available
for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Program, EPA Region 8, 999
18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. You may view the public
rulemaking file at the Regional Office Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to
4 p.m., excluding federal holidays. Copies of the Incorporation by
Reference material are also available at the Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-
108 (Mail Code 6102T), 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
2. Copies of the State submittal are also available for public
inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the State
Air Agency. Copies of the State documents relevant to this action are
also available for public inspection at the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Control Division, 4300
Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, Colorado 80246-1530.
3. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the Regulations.gov web site located at
http://www.regulations.gov 
where you can find, review, and
submit comments on Federal rules that have been published in the
Federal Register, the Government's legal newspaper, and are open for
comment.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper,
will be made available for public viewing at the EPA Regional Office,
as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing
copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in
the version of the comment that is placed in the official public
rulemaking file. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted
material, will be available at the Regional Office for public inspection.
B. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate rulemaking identification number by including the text
``Public comment on proposed rulemaking CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a'' in
the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that
your comments are submitted within the specified comment period.
Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked
``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside
of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying
the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA
will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information
provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the
comment that is placed in the official public docket. 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.
i. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail). Please
send any comments to long.richard@epa.gov and faulk.libby@epa.gov and
include the text ``Public comment on proposed rulemaking CO-001-0076a,
CO-001-0077a'' in the subject line. EPA's e-mail system is not an
``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly
without going through
[[Page 47368]]
``Regulations.gov'' (see below), EPA's e-mail system will automatically
capture your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that are automatically
captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as part of the comment
that is placed in the official public docket.
ii. Regulations.gov. Your use of Regulations.gov is an alternative
method of submitting electronic comments to EPA. Go directly to
Regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov, then click on the
button ``TO SEARCH FOR REGULATIONS CLICK HERE,'' and select Environmental
Protection Agency as the Agency name to search on. The list of current
EPA actions available for comment will be listed. Please follow the
online instructions for submitting comments. The system is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM
that you mail to the mailing address identified in Section 2, directly
below. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect,
Word or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any
form of encryption.
2. By Mail. Send your comments to: Richard R. Long, Director, Air
and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-
2466. Please include the text ``Public comment on proposed rulemaking
CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a'' in the subject line on the first page of
your comment.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Richard
R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite
300, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:55 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
C. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically to EPA. You may claim information that you submit to EPA
as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI (if you
submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the official public regional rulemaking file. If you submit the copy
that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not
marked as CBI will be included in the public file and available for
public inspection without prior notice. If you have any questions about
CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact
II. EPA's Final Action
A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This Direct Final Rule?
We are approving the Governor's submittal of July 31, 2002, that
requests redesignation for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1987 PM10
standards. Included in Colorado's submittal are changes to the ``State
Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--
Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)'' which we are approving,
under section 110 of the CAA, into Colorado's SIP. We are also
approving the maintenance plans for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
PM10 nonattainment areas, which were submitted with
Colorado's July 31, 2002 redesignation requests. We are approving these
requests and maintenance plans because Colorado has adequately
addressed all of the requirements of the CAA for redesignation to
attainment applicable to the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
PM10 nonattainment areas. Upon the effective date of this
action, the Lamar and Steamboat Springs areas' designation status under
40 CFR part 81 will be revised to attainment.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse
comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 4, 2004 without
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by September
7, 2004. If the EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. 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.
III. Summary of Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
A. What Requirements Must Be Followed for Redesignations to Attainment?
In order for a nonattainment area to be redesignated to attainment,
the following conditions in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA must be met:
(i) We must determine that the area has attained the NAAQS;
(ii) The applicable implementation plan for the area must be fully
approved under section 110(k) of the CAA;
(iii) We must determine that the improvement in air quality is due
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable implementation plan and applicable
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions;
(iv) We must fully approve a maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and,
(v) The State containing such an area must meet all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
Our September 4, 1992 guidance entitled ``Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' outlines how to assess
the adequacy of redesignation requests against the conditions listed above.
The following is a brief discussion of how Colorado's redesignation
requests and maintenance plans meet the requirements of the CAA for
redesignation of the Lamar and Steamboat Springs areas to attainment
for PM10.
[[Page 47369]]
B. Do the Lamar and Steamboat Springs Redesignation Requests and
Maintenance Plans Meet the CAA Requirements?
i. Attainment of the PM10 NAAQS
A state must demonstrate that an area has attained the
PM10 NAAQS through submittal of ambient air quality data
from an ambient air monitoring network representing maximum
PM10 concentrations. The data, which must be quality assured
and recorded in the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS),
must show that the average annual number of expected exceedances for
the area is less than or equal to 1.0, pursuant to 40 CFR 50.6. In
making this showing, the three most recent years of complete air
quality data must be used.
Colorado operates two PM10 monitoring sites in the Lamar
PM10 nonattainment area. Colorado submitted ambient air
quality data from the monitoring site which demonstrate that the area
has attained the PM10 NAAQS. These air quality data were
quality-assured and placed in AIRS. There were three exceedances of the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS recorded in the Lamar area between 1996
and 2000 due to high winds. Lamar has a Natural Events Action Plan
(NEAP) that was approved by EPA on June 5, 1998 that addresses high
wind events. The three exceedances between 1996 and 2000 were flagged
in the AIRS database and were not included in the attainment
demonstration because of Lamar's approved NEAP (see section III.B.iii.
for additional information regarding Lamar's NEAP). EPA approved the
flagging of the three exceedances in a letter to the State on July 3,
2001. The annual PM10 NAAQS has never been exceeded in
Lamar. The three most recent years of data for the area (2000--2002)
are complete (i.e., data are available for at least 75% of the
scheduled PM10 samples per quarter) with no recorded
violations. We believe that Colorado has adequately demonstrated,
through ambient air quality data, that the PM10 NAAQS have
been attained in the Lamar area.
Colorado also operates two PM10 monitoring sites in the
Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment area. Colorado
submitted ambient air quality data from both monitoring sites which
demonstrate that the area has attained the PM10 NAAQS. These
air quality data were quality assured and placed in AIRS. Two
exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS were measured in 1993
and 1996. However, the 3-year average of estimated exceedances remained
below 1.0 (per year) (40 CFR 50.6) and therefore did not result in a
violation of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. The three most recent
years of data for the area (2000-2002) are complete (i.e., data are
available for at least 75% of the scheduled PM10 samples per
quarter) with no recorded violations. The annual PM10 NAAQS
has never been exceeded in Steamboat Springs. We believe that Colorado
has adequately demonstrated, through ambient air quality data, that the
PM10 NAAQS have been attained in the Steamboat Springs area.
ii. State Implementation Plan Approval
Those States containing initial moderate PM10
nonattainment areas were required by the 1990 amendments to the CAA to
submit a SIP by November 15, 1991 which demonstrated attainment of the
PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. To approve a redesignation
request, the SIP for the area must be fully approved under section
110(k) and must satisfy all requirements that apply to that area. The
Lamar area was among the initial moderate PM10 nonattainment
areas. EPA fully approved the PM10 SIP for Lamar on June 9,
1994 (59 FR 29732). The Steamboat Springs area was designated
nonattainment for PM10 on December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334).
EPA fully approved the PM10 SIP for Steamboat Springs on
December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). These PM10 SIPs for Lamar
and Steamboat Springs were approved as meeting the moderate
PM10 nonattainment plan requirements.
iii. Improvement in Air Quality Due to Permanent and Enforceable Measures
Section 107(d)(3(E)(iii) of the CAA provides that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must determine that the
improvement in air quality is due to emission reductions which are
permanent and enforceable. The Lamar PM10 nonattainment area
is a unique case in which no area-specific PM10 control
measures were needed to bring the area into attainment (or to ensure
continued attainment). The primary source of PM10 emissions
in Lamar is blowing fugitive dust resulting from high wind events.
Colorado's July 31, 2002 submittal did cite several State-wide
regulations as being responsible for the improvement in air quality in
Lamar as well as control measures implemented under the Lamar Natural
Events Action Plan (NEAP) addressing PM10 emissions as a
result of blowing fugitive dust. EPA's Natural Events Policy (NEP) and
the local measures Lamar implemented under the area's NEAP are
discussed in more detail below. The State-wide regulations cited are
the following: ``Emission Control Regulation for Particulates, Smoke,
Carbon Monoxide and Sulfur Oxides'' (Regulation No. 1), ``Air Pollution
Emission Notices, Construction Permits and Fees, Operating Permits and
Including the Prevention of Significant Deterioration'' (Regulation No.
3), ``New Woodstoves and Woodburning Appliance Use During High
Pollution Days'' (Regulation No. 4), ``Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources'' (Regulation No. 6), and the ``Common Provisions
Regulation.''
Recognizing that certain uncontrollable natural events, such as
high winds, and wildfires, can have on the NAAQS, the EPA issued a
Natural Events Policy (NEP) on May 30, 1996. The NEP sets forth
procedures through the development of a Natural Events Action Plan
(NEAP) for protecting public health in areas where the PM10
standard may be violated due to these uncontrollable natural events.
One of the requirements of the NEP is that Best Available Control
Measures (BACM) must be implemented at contributing anthropogenic
sources of dust in order for PM10 exceedances to be treated
as due to uncontrollable natural events. BACM for PM10 are
defined by EPA as techniques that achieve the maximum degree of
emission reduction from a source as determined on a case-by-case basis
considering technological and economic feasibility (59 FR 41998). An
additional requirement of the NEP is that in order for an area to
request redesignation of a nonattainment to attainment, the area must
demonstrate that the area would be meeting the NAAQS but for the
emissions caused by natural events.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This policy applies to emissions caused by natural events
that have occurred since January 1, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past eight years, the monitors located at the Municipal
Power Plant and Municipal Building in Lamar, Colorado experienced
exceedances of the 24-hour NAAQS for PM10. Each of these
exceedances was associated with unusually high winds and blowing dust
in the Lamar area. In response to Lamar's exceedances of the
PM10 NAAQS, the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment's Air Pollution Control Division, in conjunction with the
City of Lamar's Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation, and
Prowers County Commissioners, the Natural Resources Conservation
Services, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, and other agencies
developed a NEAP. The NEAP was presented to EPA in 1998. EPA
subsequently approved the NEAP for
[[Page 47370]]
Lamar as meeting all the requirements of the 1996 NEP. Since 1998, it
is this plan that has assisted the area in addressing blowing dust due
to uncontrollable winds. In the Lamar area the BACM that were
implemented as part of the 1998 NEAP to address high wind events
include wind breaks, controls at the East Lamar Landfill, vegetative
cover at Escondido Park, soil stabilization along rail lines,
installation of perennial grass over croplands, and the implementation
of soil erosion conservation practices. In addition, the 1996 NEP
requires that the State provide a five-year review of the NEAP, which
was submitted to EPA in 2003 and subsequently approved. The five-year
review of the NEAP for Lamar includes commitments for additional BACM
control measures, including irrigation of tree groves established for
wind breaks, additional litter control at the East Lamar Landfill,
stabilization of the entrance road to Escondido Park, and the purchase
and use of a regenerative air street sweeper. In addition to the BACM
control measures, public education and notification procedures have
been implemented as part of the NEAP for Lamar. Based on our approval
of the 1998 Lamar NEAP and our subsequent approval of the 2003 Lamar
NEAP's five-year review, EPA has concluded that, but for the emissions
caused by natural events, the Lamar area has demonstrated attainment of
the PM10 NAAQS.
In addition to the local and State control measures discussed
above, the Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program has helped
reduce PM10 emissions in Lamar as older, higher emitting
diesel vehicles are replaced with newer vehicles that meet tighter
emission standards. Overall, despite growth in the Lamar nonattainment
area (e.g., in population and vehicle miles traveled), attainment of
the PM10 NAAQS has been demonstrated. We have evaluated the
various control measures, in addition to the 2000 attainment year
emission inventory and the projected emissions described below, and
have concluded that the continued attainment of the PM10
NAAQS in the Lamar area has resulted from emission reductions that are
permanent and enforceable.
The primary sources of PM10 emissions in the Steamboat
Springs area are re-entrained road dust (from highways, paved roads,
chip sealed roads, and unpaved roads) and woodburning. The permanent
and enforceable control measures that brought the Steamboat Springs
PM10 nonattainment area into attainment and were approved by
EPA into Colorado's SIP in 1997 are described in detail below.
The City of Steamboat Springs and Routt County adopted local
ordinance and resolutions that limit the number and types of
woodburning devices in new construction in the Steamboat Springs area.
Installation of new solid fuel burning devices is limited to one
approved device for any building. The Steamboat Springs area adopted
these measures in the late 1980s and early 1990s and the measures were
included in State regulation in 1993 (Section VIII.E. of the ``State
Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--
Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)''). The rule was approved by
EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188).
The Steamboat Springs area adopted two street sanding control
strategies for the nonattainment area. The first street sanding control
strategy requires that any user that applies street sanding materials
in the Steamboat Springs area must use materials containing less than
two percent fines, except on U.S. Highway 40 from the junction of U.S.
Highway 131 towards Rabbit Ears Pass. This strategy was included in
State regulations in 1996 (Section VIII.B. of the ``State
Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--
Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). The second street sanding
control strategy requires that the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) reduce the amount of sand applied on U.S.
Highways 40 and 131 in the Steamboat Springs area by 10 percent. This
strategy was included in State regulation in 1996 (Section VIII.C. of
the ``State Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for
Nonattainment--Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). Both the
street sanding controls were approved by EPA on December 31, 1997 (62
FR 68188).
In addition, the Steamboat Springs area adopted street sweeping
requirements for a defined section of Lincoln Avenue (Highway 40 in
town). Street cleaning using vacuum sweepers or any other sweepers with
equal efficiency must be performed four times within four days of the
roadways becoming free and clear of snow and ice following each sanding
deployment use. This strategy was included in State regulations in 1996
(Section VIII.D. of the ``State Implementation Plan--Specific
Regulations for Nonattainment--Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local
Areas)). The rule was approved by EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188).
In addition to the local control measures that have been adopted in
the Steamboat Springs area, Colorado's July 31, 2002 submittal did cite
several Statewide regulations that limit emissions from any new source
that may locate in the Steamboat Springs area. These rules are: ``Air
Pollution Emission Notices, Construction Permits and Fees, Operating
Permits and Including the Prevention of Significant Deterioration''
(Regulation No. 3), ``Standards of Performance for New Stationary
Sources'' (Regulation No. 6), and the ``Common Provisions Regulation.''
In addition to these State and Local control measures, the Federal
Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program has helped reduce
PM10 emissions in Steamboat Springs as older, higher
emitting diesel vehicles are replaced with newer vehicles that meet
tighter emission standards. Overall, despite growth in the Steamboat
Springs nonattainment area (e.g., in population and vehicle miles
traveled), attainment of the PM10 NAAQS has been
demonstrated. We have evaluated the various control measures, in
addition to the 1999 attainment year emission inventory and the
projected emissions described below, and have concluded that the
continued attainment of the PM10 NAAQS in the Steamboat
Springs area has resulted from emission reductions that are permanent
and enforceable.
iv. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under Section 175A of the CAA
Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA requires that, for a nonattainment
area to be redesignated to attainment, we must fully approve a
maintenance plan which meets the requirements of section 175A of the
CAA. The plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the relevant
NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after our approval of the
redesignation. Eight years after our approval of a redesignation,
Colorado must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating
attainment for the 10 years following the initial 10 year period. The
maintenance plan must also contain a contingency plan to ensure prompt
correction of any violation of the NAAQS. (See sections 175A(b) and
(d).) Our September 4, 1992 guidance outlines five core elements that
are necessary to ensure maintenance of the relevant NAAQS in an area
seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Those elements,
as well as guidelines for subsequent maintenance plan revisions, are as
follows:
[[Page 47371]]
a. Attainment Inventory
The maintenance plan should include an attainment emission
inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area which is
sufficient to attain the NAAQS. An emission inventory for Lamar was
developed for the attainment year 2000 as well as the projection
inventory for the year 2015. The emission inventory incorporates
emission estimates for woodburning (fireplaces and wood stoves),
restaurant and mobile exhaust emissions, highway, arterial and local
re-entrained road dust emissions, and gravel road emissions. Summary
emission figures from the 2000 attainment year inventory and the 2015
projected inventory for the Lamar area are provided in Tables 1, 2, and
3 below.
Table 1.--2000 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory for Road Dust
Activity in Pounds per Day for Lamar City
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paved roads
Highway -------------------------- Unpaved
Arterial Local roads
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000.............. 2530 866 3195 24
2015.............. 2792 993 3665 28
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Highway re-entrained road dust emissions for the year 2000 were
developed using the latest traffic counts from Colorado Deparment of
Transportation (CDOT) as well as revised emissions factors that
incorporate the latest EPA methods for determining paved road emission
and measured silt loadings from the area.
\**\ Arterial and local street re-entrained emissions for 2000 were
determined using VMT information contained in the 1993 SIP element (grown
to 2000 by appropriate growth rates) as well as the latest EPA methods for
determining paved road emissions and measured silt loadings form the area.
\***\ Gravel road emissions were developed using VMT information contained
in the 1993 SIP element (grown to 2000 by appropriate growth rates) as
well as EPA methods for determining gravel road emissions.
Table 2.--2000 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory for Vehicle
Exhaust, Fireplaces, Woodstoves and Point Sources in Pounds per
Day for Lamar City
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehicle Point
exhaust Fireplace Woodstoves sources
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000....... 56 208 269 1271
2015....... 56 228 294 1281
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ The woodburning emission estimates and mobile exhaust emissions for
the year 1997 were taken from the 1993 SIP element that was approved by
EPA on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732) and rolled forward to 2000. VMT was also
adjusted using actual CDOT traffic counts.
Table 3.--2000 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory for Tilling,
Wind Erosion/Feedlot, Grain Elevators, and Storage Piles in Pounds
per Day for Lamar City
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind
Tilling erosion/ Grain Storage
feedlot elevators piles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000.................... 28 4231 2 22
2015.................... 28 4231 2 22
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ The tilling, wind erosion, and the area's feedlot emissions were
rolled forward from 2000 inventory levels as well as the storage piles
emission inventory. The 2000 emissions are the same as the 1997 emissions
documented in the 1994 Lamar SIP.
More detailed descriptions of the 2000 attainment year inventory
and the 2015 projected inventory for the Lamar area are documented in
the maintenance plan in Chapter 3, section B and in the Colorado
technical support documentation. Colorado's submittal contains detailed
emission inventory information that was prepared in accordance with EPA
emission inventory guidance.\2\ Following our review, we have
determined that Colorado prepared an adequate attainment inventory for
the Lamar area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA's current guidance on the preparation of PM10
emission inventories includes, ``PM10 Emission Inventory
Requirements,'' September 1994, ``Emission Inventory Improvement
Program Technical Report Series, Volumes I-VII,'' July 1997 and
September 1999, ``Revised 1999 National Emission Inventory
Preparation Plan,'' February 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An emission inventory for Steamboat Springs was developed for the
attainment year 1999 as well as the projection inventory for the 2005
and 2010 interim years and the 2015 maintenance year. The emission
inventory incorporates the emission estimates for aircrafts,
restaurants, stationary sources, woodburning, mobile exhaust, and re-
entrained road dust emissions from paved and unpaved roads that are
contained in the nonattainment area SIP element that was approved by
EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). Aircraft emissions were
determined by using EPA and Colorado's Air Pollution Control Division
(APCD) developed emission factors and activity data provided by the
City of Steamboat Springs. Restaurant emissions were developed using
emission factors and survey data of activity in the Steamboat Springs
area. Woodburning emissions were determined by using EPA and APCD
developed emission factors and survey data of woodburning activity and
practices in the Steamboat Springs area. Re-entrained dust from paved
and unpaved roads were developed using APCD and CDOT vehicle miles
traveled data and emission factors that were calculated using the EPA-
approved formula, local silt loading data, and the application of
credits from street sweeping and street sand reduction control
measures. Mobil exhaust was determined using EPA's PART5 model.
Stationary source emission in the Steamboat Springs area were
[[Page 47372]]
determined by calculating allowable emissions from three facilities in
the area in existence in the mid-1990s. The Craig and Hayden power
plants were modeled at allowable emissions for all years however these
emissions were not included in the emission inventories because they
are not located within the Steamboat Springs nonattainment--attainment/
maintenance area and modeling domain. Summary emission figures from the
1999 attainment year inventory, the 2005 and 2010 interim years, and
the 2015 projected inventory for the Steamboat Springs area are
provided in Table 1 below.
Table 1.--1999, 2005, 2010 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory
in Pounds per Day for Steamboat Springs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM10 emissions (lbs./day)
---------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2005 2010 2015
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft.............. 24 27 30 34
Restaurant Grills..... 99 114 127 143
Vehicle Exhaust....... 53 52 56 63
Paved Roads........... 9122 10059 11271 12630
Unpaved Roads......... 7519 7233 8104 9080
Stationary Sources.... 584 242 271 304
Woodburning........... 1057 1216 1353 1522
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More detailed descriptions of the 1999 attainment year inventory,
the 2005 and 2010 interim years, and the 2015 projected inventory for
the Steamboat Springs area are documented in the maintenance plan in
Chapter 3, section B and in the Colorado technical support
documentation. Colorado's submittal contains detailed emission
inventory information that was prepared in accordance with EPA emission
inventory guidance.\3\ Following our review, we have determined that
Colorado prepared an adequate attainment inventory for the Steamboat
Springs area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA's current guidance on the preparation of PM10
emission inventories includes, ``PM10 Emission Inventory
Requirements,'' September 1994, ``Emission Inventory Improvement
Program Technical Report Series, Volumes I-VII,'' July 1997 and
September 1999, ``Revised 1999 National Emission Inventory
Preparation Plan,'' February 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Maintenance Demonstration
A state may generally demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by
either showing that future emissions of a pollutant or its precursors
will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory, or by modeling
to show that the future mix of sources and emission rates will not
cause a violation of the NAAQS. Colorado chose the chemical mass
balance (CMB) modeling approach for the Lamar area and the dispersion
modeling approach for the Steamboat Springs area.
The maintenance demonstration for the Lamar area uses the CMB roll-
forward methodology, which is the same level of modeling used in the
original attainment demonstration for the moderate PM10 SIP
for this area. The CMB receptor model data are used to identify the
sources of emissions that influence PM10 concentrations in
the area. Colorado used the attainment inventory to further refine the
CMB source identification and then apportion the design day
concentration. The design day concentration was determined using EPA's
``Table look-up'' method. Based on the number of samples collected
during a three year period from 1998--2000 (2026 samples total), the
third highest concentration measured during that period is used as the
design value. For the Lamar area, the design value is 137 [mu]g/
m3. Colorado prepared a maintenance inventory for the year
2015 and rolled forward the design day concentration based on the
changes that occurred in the emission inventory from the attainment
year to the maintenance year. Based on this process, the Lamar 2015
maintenance concentration is 145.4 [mu]g/m3. Since this 2015
projection for Lamar is below the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS of 150
[mu]g/m3, maintenance is demonstrated.
Although EPA would normally insist on some interim year projections
between the attainment year and 2015, we have no reason to believe that
total emissions for the Lamar area will be greater than the 2015
projections in any of the interim years. Colorado applied simple,
environmentally conservative, growth rates to all source categories.
Thus, total emissions in all years before 2015 in the Lamar area should
be less than 2015 total emissions and no interim year projections are
required.
Since no violation of the PM10 annual NAAQS have ever
occurred in the Lamar area and since the maintenance demonstration
clearly shows maintenance of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in this
area through the year 2015, it is reasonable and adequate to assume
that protection of the 24-hour standard will be sufficient to protect
the annual standard as well. Thus, EPA believes Colorado has adequately
demonstrated that the Lamar area will maintain the PM10
NAAQS for at least the next ten years. Detailed information regarding
the CMB modeling results and source apportionment can be found in
Chapter 3, section C of the Lamar maintenance plan and in the technical
support document.
The maintenance demonstration for the Steamboat Springs area relied
on the dispersion modeling methodology, which is the same level of
modeling used in the original attainment demonstration for the moderate
PM10 SIP for this area. Maintenance is demonstrated when the
highest modeled values at each receptor on the modeling grid are below
the 150 [mu]g/m3. The emission inventories for 2005, 2010,
and 2015 were input into the dispersion model to obtain 2005, 2010, and
2015 projected PM10 concentrations. The dispersion modeling
for the Steamboat Springs PM10 maintenance area demonstrates
that in 2005 the highest concentration is 121 [mu]g/m3, in
2010 the highest concentration is 132 [mu]g/m3, and in 2015
the highest concentration is 146 [mu]g/m3 for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
Since no exceedances of the PM10 annual NAAQS have ever
occurred in the Steamboat Springs area and since the maintenance
demonstration clearly shows maintenance of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS in this area through the year 2015, it is reasonable and adequate
to assume that protection of the 24-hour standard will be sufficient to
protect the annual standard as well. Thus, EPA believes Colorado has
adequately demonstrated that the Steamboat
[[Page 47373]]
Springs area will maintain the PM10 NAAQS for at least the
next ten years. Detailed information regarding the dispersion modeling
results and source apportionment can be found in Chapter 3, section C
of the Steamboat Springs maintenance plan and in the technical support
document.
c. Monitoring Network
Once a nonattainment area has been redesignated to attainment, the
State must continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring
network, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment
status of the area. The maintenance plan should contain provisions for
continued operation of air quality monitors that will provide such
verification. Colorado operates two PM10 monitoring sites in
the Lamar area and two in the Steamboat Springs area. We approve these
sites annually, and any future change would require discussion with,
and approval from, us. In their July 31, 2002 submittal, Colorado
committed to continue to operate these PM10 monitoring
stations in Lamar and Steamboat Springs, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
d. Verification of Continued Attainment
A state's maintenance plan submittal should indicate how it will
track the progress of the maintenance plan. This is necessary due to
the fact that the emission projections made for the maintenance
demonstration depend on assumptions of point and area source growth.
Colorado commits to operating both the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
PM10 monitoring network and analyze the PM10
concentrations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to verify continued
maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS. In addition, Colorado commits
to track the progress of both the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
maintenance plans through a periodic review (every three years) of the
assumptions made in the emissions inventories to verify continued
maintenance of the PE10 NAAQS in both areas. EPA relies on
these commitments in approving the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
maintenance plans.
e. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan also
include contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area. For
the purposes of section 175A, a state is not required to have fully
adopted contingency measures that will take effect without further
action by the State in order for the maintenance plan to be approved.
However, the contingency plan is an enforceable part of the SIP and
should ensure that contingency measures are adopted expeditiously when
a violation of the NAAQS has occurred in a redesignated area. The plan
should clearly identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit
for action by the State. The State should also identify the specific
indicators, or triggers, which will be used to determine when the
contingency plan will be implemented.
Chapter 3, section H, of both the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
maintenance plan contains the area's PM10 contingency plan.
Exceedances trigger one level of response and violations trigger
another. If there's an exceedance, the Air Pollution Control Division
(APCD) and the local government staff will develop appropriate
contingency measures intended to prevent or correct a violation of the
PM10 standard for the PM10 maintenance area. APCD
and local government staff will consider relevant information,
including information about historical exceedances, meteorological
data, the most recent estimates of growth and emissions, and whether
the exceedance might be attributed to an exceptional event. The Lamar
and Steamboat Springs maintenance plans indicate that the State will
generally notify EPA and local governments in the PM10
maintenance area within 30 days of the exceedance, but no later than 45
days. The process for exceedances will be completed within six months
of the exceedance notification.
If a violation of the PM10 NAAQS has occurred, a public
hearing process at the State and local level will begin. If the
Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) agrees that the
implementation of local measures will prevent further exceedances or
violations, the AQCC may endorse or approve of the local measures
without adopting State requirements. If, however, the AQCC finds
locally adopted contingency measures to be inadequate, the AQCC will
adopt State enforceable measures as deemed necessary to prevent
additional exceedances or violations. Contingency measures will be
adopted and fully implemented within one year of the PM10
NAAQS violation. Any State-enforceable measures will become part of the
next revised maintenance plan, submitted to us for approval.
The Lamar PM10 maintenance plan specifies the following
as potential contingency measures for the Lamar area: street sweeping
requirements; road paving requirements; street sand specifications;
woodburning restrictions; use of alternative de-icers; re-establishing
nonattainment new source review permitting requirements for stationary
sources; \4\ controls at existing stationary sources; transportation
control measures designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled; or other
emission control measures as deemed appropriate, considering various
factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The maintenance plan refers to ``Re-establishing new source
review permitting requirement for stationary sources.'' Given that
PSD permitting requirements will apply to the area after the
effective date of this action, we interpret the maintenance plan's
reference to mean ``nonattainment new source review.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Steamboat Springs PM10 maintenance plan specifies
the following as potential contingency measures for the Steamboat
Springs area: reinstating the 10 percent street sand reduction
requirement for State highways; increasing the Lincoln Avenue street
sweeping frequency from two to four times after each sanding event;
increased street sweeping requirements; road paving requirements; more
stringent street sand specifications; voluntary or mandatory
woodburning curtailment; bans on all woodburning; expanded, mandatory
use of alternative de-icers; re-establishing nonattainment new source
review permitting requirements for stationary sources; \3\
transportation control measures designed to reduce vehicle miles
traveled; or other emission control measures as deemed appropriate,
considering various factors.
f. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
In accordance with section 175A(b) of the CAA, the State of
Colorado is required to submit a revision to the maintenance plan eight
years after the redesignation of the Lamar and Steamboat Springs areas
to attainment for PM10. This revision is to provide for
maintenance of the NAAQS for an additional ten years following the
first ten year period. Colorado committed, in the Lamar and Steamboat
Springs redesignation requests, to submit a revised maintenance plan,
for each area, to EPA eight years after the approval of the
redesignation request and maintenance plan.
v. Meeting Applicable Requirements of Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
In order for an area to be redesignated to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E) requires that it must have met all applicable requirements
of section 110 and part D of the CAA. We interpret this
[[Page 47374]]
to mean that, for a redesignation request to be approved, the State
must have met all requirements that applied to the subject area prior
to, or at the time of, submitting a complete redesignation request. In
our evaluation of a redesignation request, we don't need to consider
other requirements of the CAA that became due after the date of the
submission of a complete redesignation request.
a. Section 110 Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) contains general requirements for nonattainment
plans. These requirements were met for Lamar with Colorado's May 7,
1993 submittal for the Lamar PM10 nonattainment area. EPA
fully approved the Lamar PM10 SIP on June 9, 1994 (59 FR
29732). The section 110(a)(2) requirements were met for Steamboat
Springs with Colorado's September 16, 1997 submittal for the Steamboat
Springs PM10 nonattainment area. EPA fully approved the
Steamboat Springs PM10 SIP on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188).
b. Part D Requirements
Before a PM10 nonattainment area may be redesignated to
attainment, the State must have fulfilled the applicable requirements
of part D. Subpart 1 of part D establishes the general requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas, subpart 4 of part D establishes
specific requirements applicable to PM10 nonattainment areas.
The requirements of sections 172(c) and 189(a) regarding attainment
of the PM10 NAAQS, and the requirements of section 172(c)
regarding reasonable further progress, imposition of Reasonably
Available Control Measures (RACM), the adoption of contingency
measures, and the submission of an emission inventory, have been
satisfied through our June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732) approval of the Lamar
PM10 SIP and our December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188) approval of
the Steamboat Springs PM10 SIP.
Although EPA's regulations (see 40 CFR 51.396) require that states
adopt transportation conformity provisions in their SIPs for areas
designated nonattainment or subject to an EPA-approved maintenance
plan, we have decided that a transportation conformity SIP is not an
applicable requirement for purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request under section 107(d) of the CAA. This decision is reflected in
EPA's 1996 approval of the Boston carbon monoxide redesignation. (See
61 FR 2918, January 30, 1996.)
We approved the requirements of the part D new source review (NSR)
permit program for the Lamar moderate PM10 nonattainment
area on August 18, 1994 (59 FR 42500) and for the Steamboat Springs
moderate PM10 nonattainment area on December 31, 1997 (62 FR
68188). Colorado's nonattainment area NSR permitting regulations were
fully approved on September 19, 1994 (59 FR 47807). Once the Lamar and
Steamboat Springs areas are redesignated to attainment, the prevention
of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements of part C of the CAA
will apply. Colorado's PSD regulations, which we approved as meeting
all applicable Federal requirements, apply to any area designated as
unclassifiable or attainment and, thus, will become fully effective in
the Lamar and Steamboat Springs area upon redesignation of the area to
attainment.
C. Have the Transportation Conformity Requirements Been Met?
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
Our conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs and
projects conform to SIPs and that transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. On March 2, 1999, the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a
decision in Environmental Defense Fund v. the Environmental Protection
Agency, No. 97-1637, that we must make an affirmative determination
that the submitted motor vehicle emission budgets contained in State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) are adequate before they are used to
determine the conformity of Transportation Plans or Transportation
Improvement Programs. In response to the court decision, we make any
submitted SIP revision containing an emission budget available for
public comment and respond to these comments before announcing our
adequacy determination. The criteria and process by which we determine
whether a SIP's motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for
conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and in the
guidance ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999
Conformity Court Decision,'' dated May 14, 1999.
In the Lamar maintenance plan, Colorado established a new mobile
source emissions budget of 7,534 lbs./day for the year 2015 and beyond.
In the Steamboat Springs maintenance plan, Colorado established a new
mobile source emissions budget of 21,773 lbs./day for the year 2015 and
beyond. The new mobile source emissions budgets for both Lamar and
Steamboat Springs are the total of the 2015 mobile source
PM10 emissions for each area and includes emissions from
vehicle exhaust, highways, paved arterial and local roads, and gravel
roads. EPA's approval of 7,534 lbs./day for Lamar and 21,773 lbs./day
for Steamboat Springs as the budget for those areas means that these
values must be used for conformity determinations for 2015 and beyond.
EPA sent a letter to the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division
(APCD) on September 25, 2002 stating that the motor vehicle emission
budgets that were submitted with the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
PM10 maintenance plan is adequate. This finding has also
been announced on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/
transp/conform/adequacy.htm. We documented our adequacy determination
for Lamar and Steamboat Springs in the Federal Register on October 28,
2002 (67 FR 65789). The budgets took effect on November 12, 2002 (15
days after our announcement in the Federal Register).
D. Did Colorado Follow the Proper Procedures for Adopting This Action?
The CAA requires States to observe certain procedural requirements
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission.
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA provides that each implementation plan
submitted by a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and public
hearing. Section 110(l) of the CAA similarly provides that each
revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under the CAA
must be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public
hearing.
Colorado held a public hearing for the proposed rule changes on
November 15, 2001. The rulemaking was adopted by the Air Quality
Control Commission (AQCC) directly after the November 15, 2001 hearing
and was formally submitted to EPA by the Governor on July 31, 2002. We
have evaluated the Governor's submittal and have determined that
Colorado met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.
IV. Background
To implement our 1987 revisions to the particulate matter NAAQS, on
August 7, 1987 (52 FR 29383), we categorized areas of the nation into
three groups based on the likelihood that protection of the
PM10 NAAQS would require revisions of the existing SIP. We
[[Page 47375]]
identified Lamar as PM10 ``Group I'' area of concern, i.e.,
areas with a strong likelihood of violating the PM10 NAAQS
and requiring a substantial SIP revision and the Steamboat Springs area
as a ``Group II'' area of concern, i.e., areas where attainment of the
NAAQS is uncertain and the SIP may require only slight adjustment.
The Lamar area was among several Group I PM10 areas, all
of which were designated and classified as moderate PM10
nonattainment areas by operation of law upon enactment of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 (November 15, 1990). See 56 FR 56694 at 56705-
56706 (November 6, 1991). By November 15, 1991, States containing
initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas were required to
submit most elements of their PM10 SIPs. (See sections
172(c), 188, and 189 of the CAA.) Some provisions, such as
PM10 contingency measures required by section 172(c)(9) of
the CAA and nonattainment new source review (NSR) provisions, were due
at later dates. In order for a nonattainment area to be redesignated to
attainment, the above mentioned conditions in section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA must be met. EPA fully approved the PM10 SIP for
Lamar on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732).
Pursuant to sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Act, areas
previously identified as Group I (55 FR 45799, October 31, 1990) and
other areas which had monitored violations of the PM10 NAAQS
prior to January 1, 1989 were, by operation of law upon enactment of
the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (Public Law 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399),
designated nonattainment and classified as moderate for
PM10. Formal codification in 40 CFR part 81 of those areas
was announced in a Federal Register notice dated November 6, 1991 (56
FR 56694) (see also 57 FR 56762, November 30, 1992). All other areas of
the country were designated unclassifiable for PM10 by
operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments (see section
107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the Act). EPA redesignated and classified the
Steamboat Springs area as a PM10 moderate nonattainment area
on December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334) and fully approved the
PM10 SIP for Steamboat Springs on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188).
EPA promulgated new standards for PM10 on September 18,
1997. Areas were to be designated under the new PM10
standard by July 2000. On May 14, 1999, the United States Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in American Trucking Associations, Inc. et
al., v. United States Environmental Protection Agency vacated the 1997
PM10 standard. Because of the Court ruling, we are
continuing to implement the pre-existing PM10 standard, and
are therefore approving redesignations to qualified PM10
nonattainment areas. On July 31, 2002 the Governor of Colorado
submitted a request to redesignate the Lamar and Steamboat Springs
moderate PM10 nonattainment areas to attainment (for the
1987 PM10 NAAQS) and submitted maintenance plans for the areas.
V. Consideration of CAA Section 110(l)
Section 110(l) of the CAA states that a SIP revision cannot be
approved if the revision would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress
towards attainment of a NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of
the CAA. As stated above, the Lamar and Steamboat Springs area has
shown continuous attainment of the PM10 NAAQS and has met
the applicable Federal requirements for redesignation to attainment.
The maintenance plan and associated SIP revisions will not interfere
with attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Review
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). This action 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.).
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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
[[Page 47376]]
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 October 4, 2004. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control.
Dated: June 28, 2004.
Robert E. Roberts,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
? 40 CFR parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 are amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
? 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart G--Colorado
? 2. Section 52.320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(101) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(101) On July 31, 2002, the State of Colorado submitted maintenance
plans for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment
areas and requested that these areas be redesignated to attainment for
the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The
redesignation requests and maintenance plans satisfy all applicable
requirements of the Clean Air Act.
(i) Incorporation by Reference
(A) Colorado Air Quality Control Commission, ``State Implementation
Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--Attainment/Maintenance
Areas (Local Elements),'' 5 CCR 1001-20, revisions adopted November 15,
2001, effective December 30, 2001 as follows: Section IV, which is
titled ``Lamar Attainment/Maintenance Area,'' and Section VIII., which
is titled ``Steamboat Springs PM10 Attainment/Maintenance
Area'' and which supersedes and replaces all prior versions of Section
IV and VIII.
(ii) Additional Material
(A) Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, ``Natural
Events Action Plan for High Wind Events, Lamar, Colorado,'' submitted
to EPA on February 9, 1998 and subsequently approved by EPA, June 5,
1998 and Lamar's revised 2003 ``Natural Events Action Plan for High
Wind Events, Lamar, Colorado,'' submitted to EPA on April 16, 2003 and
subsequently approved by EPA, February 9, 2004.
? 3. Section 52.332 is amended by adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.332 Control strategy: Particulate matter.
* * * * *
(n) On July 31, 2002, the State of Colorado submitted maintenance
plans for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment
areas and requested that these areas be redesignated to attainment for
the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The
redesignation requests and maintenance plans satisfy all applicable
requirements of the Clean Air Act.
PART 81--[AMENDED]
? 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
? 2. In Sec. 81.306, the table entitled ``Colorado-PM-10'' is amended by
revising the entries under Prowers County for ``Lamar'' and under Routt
County (part) for ``Steamboat Springs'' to read as follows:
Sec. 81.306 Colorado.
* * * * *
Colorado--PM-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated Area --------------------------------------------------------
Date Type Date Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Prowers County: Lamar........ October 4, 2004.... Attainment
* * * * * * *
Routt County (part)-- October 4, 2004.... Attainment
Steamboat Springs:.
On the East--The Routt
National Forest.
On the South--The
southern border of
sections 19, 10, 21,
T4N, R84W of the 6th
P.M. and the southern
border of sections 23,
24, T4N, R85W of the 6th
P.M.
On the West--Beginning at
the southwestern corner
of section 23, T4N, R85W
of the 6th P.M.
[[Page 47377]]
North along the western
border of sections 23,
14, 11, T4N, R85W.
Thence, along the ridge
which bisects sections
35, 36, 25, 24, 13, 14,
11, 12, 1, T5N, R85W,
and sections 36, 25, 24,
T6N, R85W. Thence
heading northwest along
the ridge which bisects
sections 23, 15, 10, 9,
4, T6N, R85W of 6th P.M.
Thence, heading
northeast along the
ridge which bisects
sections 33, 34, 35, 36,
25, T7N, R85W and
sections 30 and 10 of
T7N, R84W. Thence, north
along the N \1/2\ of the
western edge of section
19, to the NW corner of
section 18, T7N, R84W.
On the North--The
northern boundary of
sections 16, 17, 18,
T7N, R84W of 6th P.M.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-17656 Filed 8-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20090510210638im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}