[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 185 (Friday, September 24, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51694-51702]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-24906]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[CO-001-0034a; FRL-6441-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Colorado; Longmont Carbon Monoxide Redesignation to Attainment
and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 19, 1998, the Governor of Colorado submitted a
request to redesignate the Longmont ``moderate'' carbon monoxide (CO)
nonattainment area to attainment for the CO National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Governor also submitted a CO maintenance
plan. In this action, EPA is approving the Longmont CO redesignation
request and the maintenance plan.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on November 23, 1999 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 25,
1999. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to: Richard R. Long,
Director, Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite
500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the following
offices:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, Air and
Radiation Program, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-
2466; and,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Copies of the State documents relevant to this action are available
for public inspection at: Colorado Air Pollution Control Division,
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 4300 Cherry Creek
Drive South, Denver, Colorado, 80246-1530.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Russ, Air and Radiation Program,
Mailcode 8P-AR, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region
VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466.
Telephone number: (303) 312-6479.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' are used, we mean the Environmental Protection
Agency.
I. What Is the Purpose of This Action?
In this action, we are approving a change in the legal designation
of the Longmont area from nonattainment for CO to attainment, and we're
approving the maintenance plan that is designed to keep the area in
attainment for CO for the next 16 years.
[[Page 51695]]
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were
enacted (Public Law 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C.
7401-7671q). Under section 107(d)(4)(A)(i)-(ii) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), we designated the Longmont area as nonattainment for CO because
quality-assured ambient air quality data for 1988-1989 indicated that
the Longmont area was violating the CO NAAQS. Longmont was classified
as a ``moderate'' CO nonattainment area with a design value of less
than or equal to 12.7 parts per million (ppm). See 56 FR 56694,
November 6, 1991. Further information regarding this classification and
the accompanying requirements are described in the ``General Preamble
for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990.'' See 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992, and sections 186 and 187 of
the CAA.
Under the CAA, we can change area designations if acceptable data
are available and if certain other requirements are met. See CAA
section 107(d)(3)(D). Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA provides that the
Administrator may not promulgate a redesignation of a nonattainment
area to attainment unless:
(i) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the
national ambient air quality standard;
(ii) The Administrator has fully approved the applicable
implementation plan for the area under CAA section 110(k);
(iii) The Administrator determines 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) The Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for
the area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and,
(v) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
II. What Is the State's Process To Submit These Materials to EPA?
Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses our actions on submissions of
revisions to a SIP. The CAA also requires States to observe certain
procedural requirements in developing SIP revisions for submittal to
us. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each SIP revision be
adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing. This must occur
before the State submits the revision to us.
The Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) held a public
hearing for the Carbon Monoxide (CO) Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan for Longmont, on December 18, 1997. The AQCC adopted
the redesignation request and maintenance plan directly after the
hearing. The SIP revision became State effective March 2, 1998, and the
Governor submitted the redesignation request and maintenance plan to us
on August 19, 1998.
We have evaluated the Governor's submittal and have determined that
the State met the procedural requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the
CAA. The Governor's August 19, 1998, submittal became complete on
February 19, 1999, by operation of law under section 110(k)(1)(B) of
the CAA.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan
EPA has reviewed the State's redesignation request and maintenance
plan and believes that approval of the request is warranted, consistent
with the requirements of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). The following are
descriptions of how the section 107(d)(3)(E) requirements have been
met.
(a) Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have Attained the Carbon
Monoxide (CO) NAAQS
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA states that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must determine that the
area has attained the applicable NAAQS. As described in 40 CFR
Sec. 50.8, the national primary ambient air quality standard for carbon
monoxide is 9 parts per million (10 milligrams per cubic meter) for an
8-hour average concentration not to be exceeded more than once per
year. 40 CFR Sec. 50.8 continues by stating that the levels of CO in
the ambient air shall be measured by a reference method based on 40 CFR
part 50, Appendix C, and designated in accordance with 40 CFR part 53,
or an equivalent method designated in accordance with 40 CFR part 53.
Attainment of the CO standard is not a momentary phenomenon based on
short-term data. Instead, we consider an area to be in attainment if
each of the CO ambient air quality monitors in the area doesn't have
more than one exceedance of the CO standard over a one-year period. 40
CFR Sec. 50.8 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix C. If any monitor in the
area's CO monitoring network records more than one exceedance of the CO
standard during a one-year calendar period, then the area is in
violation of the CO NAAQS. In addition, our interpretation of the CAA
and EPA national policy \1\ has been that an area seeking redesignation
to attainment must show attainment of the CO NAAQS for at least a
continuous two-year calendar period. In addition, the area must
continue to show attainment through the date that we promulgate the
redesignation in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Refer to EPA's September 4, 1992, John Calcagni policy
memorandum entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado's CO redesignation request for the Longmont area is based
on an analysis of quality assured ambient air quality monitoring data
that are relevant to the redesignation request. As presented in Section
III of the State's maintenance plan, ambient air quality monitoring
data for consecutive calendar years 1989 through 1996 show a measured
exceedance rate of the CO NAAQS of 1.0 or less per year, per monitor,
in the Longmont nonattainment area. Data are also available for
calendar years 1997 and 1998 that show no exceedances of the CO NAAQS.
All of these data were collected and analyzed as required by EPA (see
40 CFR Sec. 50.8 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix C) and have been archived
by the State in our Aerometric Information and Retrieval System (AIRS)
national database. Further information on CO monitoring is presented in
Section III of the maintenance plan and in the State's TSD.
We have evaluated the ambient air quality data and have determined
that the Longmont area has not violated the CO standard and continues
to demonstrate attainment. Therefore, the Longmont area has met the
first component for redesignation: demonstration of attainment of the
CO NAAQS. We note too that the State of Colorado has committed, in the
maintenance plan, to continue the necessary operation of the CO
monitors in compliance with all applicable federal regulations and
guidelines.
(b) Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
To be redesignated to attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) requires
that an area must meet all applicable requirements under section 110
and part D of the CAA. We interpret section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean
that for a redesignation to be approved by us, the State must meet all
requirements that
[[Page 51696]]
applied to the subject area prior to or at the time of the submission
of 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 submission of a complete
redesignation request.
1. CAA Section 110 Requirements
The Longmont CO element of the Colorado SIP was adopted by the AQCC
on June 16, 1994, submitted by the Governor on July 13, 1994 and was
approved by the EPA on March 10, 1997 (62 FR 10690). The 1994 SIP
element's emission control plan was based on emission reductions from
the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP), the Colorado
Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance (EI/M) program for vehicles model
year 1982 and newer (Colorado Regulation No. 11), an oxygenated fuels
program (Colorado Regulation No. 13), and emission standards for wood-
burning stoves and fireplace inserts (Colorado Regulation No. 4).
By virtue of our March 10, 1997, approval of the Longmont CO SIP,
the State has met the applicable requirements of section 110 of the
CAA.
2. Part D Requirements
Before the Longmont CO nonattainment area may be redesignated to
attainment, the State must have fulfilled the applicable requirements
of part D of the CAA. Under part D, an area's classification indicates
the requirements to which it will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets
forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all
nonattainment areas, whether the area was classified or nonclassifiable
for CO.
The relevant Subpart 1 requirements are contained in sections
172(c) and 176. Our General Preamble (see 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)
provides EPA's interpretations of the CAA requirements for moderate CO
areas with design values of less than 12.7 ppm.
Under section 172(b), the applicable section 172(c) requirements,
as determined by the Administrator, were due November 15, 1992, for the
Longmont nonattainment area. As the Longmont CO redesignation request
and maintenance plan were not submitted by the Governor until well
after November 15, 1992, (actually, August 19, 1998), the General
Preamble (see 57 FR 13529) provides that the applicable requirements of
CAA section 172 were 172(c)(3) (emissions inventory), 172(c)(5)(new
source review permitting program), 172(c)(7)(the section 110(a)(2) air
quality monitoring requirements)), and contingency measures (CAA
section 172(c)(9)). It is also worth noting that we interpret the
requirements of sections 172(c)(1) (reasonable available control
measures--RACM), 172(c)(2) (reasonable further progress--RFP), and
172(c)(6)(other measures), as being irrelevant to a redesignation
request because they only have meaning for an area that is not
attaining the standard. See EPA's September 4, 1992, John Calcagni
memorandum entitled, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment'', and the General Preamble, 57 FR at
13564, dated April 16, 1992. Finally, the State has not sought to
exercise the options that would trigger sections
172(c)(4)(identification of certain emissions increases) and
172(c)(8)(equivalent techniques). Thus, these provisions are also not
relevant to this redesignation request.
Section 176 of the CAA contains requirements related to conformity.
Although EPA's regulations (see 40 CFR Sec. 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.)
The applicable requirements of CAA section 172 are discussed below.
A. Section 172(c)(3)--Emissions Inventory. Section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA requires a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of all actual
emissions from all sources in the Longmont nonattainment area. The
Governor submitted a 1990 base year emissions inventory for Longmont on
December 31, 1992, with subsequent revisions being submitted on July
11, 1994, and October 21, 1994. We approved this 1990 base year CO
emissions inventory on December 23, 1996 (see 61 FR 67466). In addition
to meeting the requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, this
inventory also fulfilled the CAA section 187(a)(1) requirement noted
below.
B. Section 172(c)(5) New Source Review (NSR). The CAA requires all
nonattainment areas to meet several requirements regarding NSR,
including provisions to ensure that increased emissions will not result
from any new or modified stationary major sources and a general offset
rule. The State of Colorado has a fully-approved NSR program (59 FR
42500, August 18, 1994) that meets the requirements of CAA section
172(c)(5). The State also has a fully approved Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program (59 FR 42500, August 18, 1994)
that will apply after the redesignation to attainment is approved by
us.
C. Section 172(c)(7)--Compliance With CAA section 110(a)(2): Air
Quality Monitoring Requirements. According to our interpretations
presented in the General Preamble (57 FR 13498), CO nonattainment areas
are to meet the ``applicable'' air quality monitoring requirements of
section 110(a)(2) of the CAA as explicitly referenced by sections
172(b) and (c) of the CAA. With respect to this requirement, the State
indicates in Section III. (``Air Quality'') of the maintenance plan,
that ambient CO monitoring data have been properly collected and
uploaded to EPA's Aerometric Information and Retrieval System (AIRS)
for the Longmont area. Air quality data through 1996 are included in
Section III. of the maintenance plan and in the State's TSD. We
recently polled the AIRS database and verified that the State has
uploaded additional ambient CO data through 1998. The data in AIRS
indicate that the Longmont area has shown, and continues to show,
attainment of the CO NAAQS. Information concerning CO monitoring in
Colorado is included in the Monitoring Network Review (MNR) prepared by
the State and submitted to EPA. Our personnel have concurred with
Colorado's annual network reviews and have agreed that the Longmont
network remains adequate. Finally, in Section VI. B. of the maintenance
plan, the State commits to the continued operation of the existing CO
monitoring network, according to all applicable Federal regulations and
guidelines, even after the Longmont area is redesignated to attainment
for CO.
D. Section 172(c)(9) Contingency Measures. According to our
interpretations presented in the General Preamble (see 56 FR 13532),
moderate CO nonattainment areas, such as Longmont, were required to
submit contingency measures to address the requirements of section
172(c)(9) of the CAA. These contingency measures were to become
effective, without further action by the State or us, upon a
determination by us that an area had failed to achieve reasonable
further progress (RFP) or to attain the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995.
To address this CAA requirement, the Governor submitted a contingency
measure to EPA on July 13, 1994. We approved this submittal on March
10, 1997 (see 62 FR 10690).
[[Page 51697]]
In addition to the above, subpart 3 of the November 15, 1990, CAA
amendments required the Longmont CO SIP to include a 1990 base year
emissions inventory (CAA section 187(a)(1)), corrections to existing
motor vehicle inspection and maintenance(I/M) programs (CAA section
187(a)(4)), periodic emission inventories (CAA section 187(a)(5)), and
an oxygenated fuels program (CAA section 211(m)(1)). How the State met
these additional requirements and our approvals, are described as
follows:
E. 1990 base year emissions inventory (CAA section 187(a)(1)). The
Governor submitted a 1990 base year emissions inventory for Longmont on
December 31, 1992, with subsequent revisions being submitted on July
11, 1994, and October 21, 1994. We approved this 1990 base year CO
emissions inventory on December 23, 1996 (see 61 FR 67466).
F. Corrections to the Longmont basic I/M program (CAA section
187(a)(4)). A July 14, 1994, Governor's submittal for Longmont provided
that the area was included in the metro-Denver nonattainment area's
motor vehicle enhanced inspection and maintenance (EI/M) program. We
approved Colorado's EI/M program March 10, 1997 (see 62 FR 10690).
G. Periodic emissions inventories (CAA section 187(a)(5)). A
periodic emission inventory (for calendar year 1993) was required for
Longmont because the Governor did not submit a complete redesignation
request and maintenance plan before September 30, 1995. On September
16, 1997, the Governor submitted a SIP revision for a 1993 periodic
emission inventory for Longmont. We approved this revision on July 15,
1998 (see 63 FR 38087).
H. Oxygenated fuels program (CAA section 211(m)). Section 211(m) of
the CAA requires any CO nonattainment area with a design value of 9.5
ppm CO or greater to implement an oxygenated fuels program. The
Governor submitted a revision to Colorado's Regulation No. 13, on
November 27, 1992, to address the oxygenated fuels requirement of the
CAA for all applicable areas in Colorado, including Longmont. We
approved this revision on July 24, 1994 (see 59 FR 37698). Regulation
No. 13 was revised, to shorten the oxygenated fuels program season
(first shortening) by deleting the last two weeks of February from the
program. The Governor submitted this revision to Regulation No. 13 on
September 29, 1995, and December 22, 1995. We approved this revision on
March 10, 1997 (see 62 FR 10690). Regulation No. 13 was further
revised, to again shorten the oxygenated fuels program season (second
shortening) by deleting the second week of February and to reduce the
fuel oxygen content for the first week of November. The Governor
submitted these revisions on October 1, 1998, and we published a direct
final approval of them on August 25, 1999 (64 FR 46279).
(c) Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA provides that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, we must have fully approved the applicable
implementation plan for the area under section 110(k).
As noted above, we previously approved the Longmont CO
nonattainment area SIP revisions. In this action, we are approving the
State's commitment to maintain an adequate monitoring network
(contained in the maintenance plan). Thus, we have fully approved the
Longmont CO SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA.
(d) Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Show That The Improvement In
Air Quality Is Due To Permanent And Enforceable Emissions Reductions
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 permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable
implementation plan, implementation of applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable reductions.
The CO emissions reductions for Longmont, that are further
described in Section IV. of the August 19, 1998, Longmont maintenance
plan, were achieved primarily through the Federal Motor Vehicle Control
Program (FMVCP), Colorado's Regulation No. 11, which defines a
decentralized basic motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program
(for vehicles model year 1981 and older) and an enhanced motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (EI/M) program (for vehicles model year 1982
and newer), the oxygenated fuels program (Colorado Regulation No. 13),
and emission standards for wood-burning stoves and fireplace inserts
(Colorado Regulation No. 4).
In general, the FMVCP provisions require vehicle manufacturers to
meet more stringent vehicle emission limitations for new vehicles in
future years. These emission limitations are phased in (as a percentage
of new vehicles manufactured) over a period of years. As new, lower
emitting vehicles replace older, higher emitting vehicles (``fleet
turnover''), emission reductions are realized for a particular area
such as Longmont. For example, EPA promulgated lower hydrocarbon (HC)
and CO exhaust emission standards in 1991, known as Tier I standards
for new motor vehicles (light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks) in
response to the 1990 CAA amendments. These Tier I emissions standards
were phased in with 40% of the 1994 model year fleet, 80% of the 1995
model year fleet, and 100% of the 1996 model year fleet.
In addition, significant emission reductions were realized for
Longmont due to the implementation of both the basic I/M program and,
beginning in January of 1995, Colorado's enhanced I/M program.
Colorado's Regulation No. 11, ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection
Program'', contains a full description of the I/M requirements
applicable for Longmont.
Oxygenated fuels are gasolines that are blended with additives that
increase the level of oxygen in the fuel and, consequently, reduce CO
tailpipe emissions. Colorado's Regulation 13, ``Oxygenated Fuels
Program'', contains the oxygenated fuels provisions for the Longmont
nonattainment area. Regulation 13 specifies the minimum oxygen content
(by weight) that all Longmont-area gas stations' fuels must comply with
during the wintertime CO high pollution season. The use of oxygenated
fuels has significantly reduced CO emissions and contributed to the
area's attainment of the CO NAAQS.
Colorado's Regulation No. 4 contains emission standards (which
comply with Federal standards) for all new woodburning stoves and
fireplace inserts sold in Colorado. These emission standards have
reduced, and will continue to reduce, the growth in CO emissions and
other pollutants from woodburning devices. Regulation No. 4, with its
most recent revisions, was approved by us into the Colorado SIP on
April 17, 1997 (62 FR 18716).
We have evaluated the various State and Federal control measures,
the original 1990 base year emission inventory (see 61 FR 67466,
December 23, 1996), and the 1993 attainment year emission inventory,
and have concluded that the improvement in air quality in the Longmont
nonattainment area has resulted from emission reductions that are
permanent and enforceable.
[[Page 51698]]
(e) Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section 175A
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA provides that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must have fully approved
a maintenance plan for the area meeting the requirements of section
175A of the CAA.
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
The maintenance 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
promulgation of the redesignation, the State must submit a revised
maintenance plan that demonstrates continued attainment for the
subsequent ten-year period following the initial ten-year maintenance
period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures, with a schedule for
adoption and implementation, that are adequate to assure prompt
correction of a violation. In addition, we issued further maintenance
plan interpretations in the ``General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992), ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990; Supplemental'' (57 FR 18070,
April 28, 1992), and the EPA guidance memorandum entitled ``Procedures
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air
Quality and Planning Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
dated September 4, 1992. In this Federal Register action, EPA is
approving the maintenance plan for the Longmont nonattainment area
because we have determined, as detailed below, that the State's
maintenance plan submittal meets the requirements of section 175A and
is consistent with the documents referenced above. Our analysis of the
pertinent maintenance plan requirements, with reference to the
Governor's August 19, 1998, submittal, is provided as follows:
1. Emissions Inventories--Attainment Year and Projections
EPA's interpretations of the CAA section 175A maintenance plan
requirements are generally provided in the General Preamble and the
September 4, 1992, policy memorandum referenced above. Under our
interpretations, areas seeking to redesignate to attainment for CO may
demonstrate future maintenance of the CO NAAQS either by showing that
future CO emissions will be equal to or less than the attainment year
emissions or by providing a modeling demonstration. For the Longmont
area, the State selected the emissions inventory approach for
demonstrating maintenance of the CO NAAQS.
The maintenance plan that the Governor submitted on August 19,
1998, included comprehensive inventories of CO emissions for the
Longmont area. These inventories include emissions from stationary
point sources, area sources, non-road mobile sources, and on-road
mobile sources. The State selected 1993 as the year from which to
develop the attainment year inventory and included interim-year
projections out to 2015. More detailed descriptions of the 1993
attainment year inventory and the projected inventories are documented
in the maintenance plan in Section V. and in the State's TSD. The
State's submittal contains detailed emission inventory information that
was prepared in accordance with EPA guidance. Summary emission figures
from the 1993 attainment year and the interim projected years are
provided in Table III.--1 below.
Table III.-1.--Summary of CO Emissions in Tons Per Day for Longmont
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993 2000 2005 2010 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources.................................. 0.18 0.21 0.23 0.25 0.27
Area Sources................................... 2.35 2.02 1.79 1.60 1.42
Non-Road Mobile Sources........................ 5.63 6.49 7.11 7.72 8.33
On-Road Mobile Sources......................... 26.59 15.49 14.66 16.11 16.76
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... 34.76 24.21 23.79 25.68 26.78
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Demonstration of Maintenance--Projected Inventories
As noted above, the State projected total CO emissions for the
years 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. The State prepared these projected
inventories in accordance with our guidance (further information is
provided in Section V. of the maintenance plan). The projected
inventories show that CO emissions are not estimated to exceed the 1993
attainment level during the time period 1993 through 2015 and,
therefore, the Longmont area has satisfactorily demonstrated
maintenance.
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
Continued attainment of the CO NAAQS in the Longmont area depends,
in part, on the State's efforts to track indicators throughout the
maintenance period. This requirement is met in Section VI.B. of the
maintenance plan. In Section VI.B., the State commits to continue the
operation of the CO monitors in the Longmont area and to annually
review this monitoring network and make changes as appropriate. Also,
in Section VI.B., the State commits to prepare a periodic emission
inventory of CO emissions every three years after the maintenance plan
is approved by EPA. The above commitments by the State, which will be
enforceable by us following the final approval of the Longmont
maintenance plan SIP revision, are deemed adequate by EPA.
4. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions. To meet this requirement, the State has
identified appropriate contingency measures along with a schedule for
the development and implementation of such measures. As stated in
Section VI. of the maintenance plan, the contingency measures for the
Longmont area will be initially triggered by an exceedance of the CO
NAAQS. Upon an exceedance of the CO NAAQS, the State and Longmont will
convene a committee to recommend for adoption appropriate local
contingency measures to correct a potential violation of the CO NAAQS
(i.e., a second non-overlapping 8-hour average ambient CO measurement
that
[[Page 51699]]
exceeds 9.4 ppm at a single monitoring site during a calendar year is a
violation of the 8-hour CO NAAQS). This process will take approximately
six months. The Colorado AQCC will review the local contingency
measures and if the AQCC concurs, the AQCC may endorse or approve the
local measures without adopting State requirements. If, however, the
AQCC finds that locally adopted contingency measures are inadequate,
the AQCC will adopt State enforceable measures as deemed necessary to
prevent additional exceedances or a violation. The maintenance plan
further states that contingency measures will be adopted and fully
implemented within one year of a CO NAAQS violation. The potential
contingency measures that are identified in Section VI.D. of the
Longmont maintenance plan include increasing the required 2.7 percent
minimum oxygen content of gasoline to a level above the actual oxygen
content of gasolines at the time of the violation, improvements to
Longmont's basic I/M program, increase enforcement of the woodburning
curtailment program, establish a two for one buy-down program for
installation of woodburning devices and/or pellet stoves in new homes
and/or buildings in excess of one device, prohibit the installation of
any woodburning device and/or pellet stove in new housing and/or
building construction projects, establish voluntary no-drive days on
high pollution days, and other measures that may be considered
appropriate. A more complete description of the triggering mechanism
and these contingency measures can be found in Section VI of the
maintenance plan.
Based on the above, we find that the contingency measures provided
in the State's maintenance plan are sufficient and meet the
requirements of section 175A(d) of the CAA.
5. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
In accordance with section 175A(b) of the CAA, Colorado has
committed to submit a revised maintenance plan SIP revision eight years
after the approval of the redesignation. This provision for revising
the maintenance plan is contained in Section VI.E. of the Longmont
maintenance plan.
IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Transportation Conformity Requirements
One key provision of our conformity regulation requires a
demonstration that emissions from the transportation plan and
Transportation Improvement Program are consistent with the emissions
budgets in the SIP (40 CFR sections 93.118 and 93.124). The emissions
budget is defined as the level of mobile source emissions relied upon
in the attainment or maintenance demonstration to maintain compliance
with the NAAQS in the nonattainment or maintenance area. The rule's
requirements and EPA's policy on emissions budgets are found in the
preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58
FR 62193-96) and in the sections of the rule referenced above.
Section IV.C.3.c.1 of the Longmont maintenance plan describes an
emissions budget for on-road mobile sources for the years 1998 and
beyond as being 27 tons per day (TPD) of CO. The Denver Regional
Council of Governments (DRCOG), which is the area's Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO), and the State derived the 27 TPD number
for 1998 and beyond from the 2015 maintenance year inventory value for
on-road mobile sources along with a safety margin calculated based on a
1995 inventory. We cannot approve this 27 TPD value as a budget for
conformity purposes because the budget is not consistent with
maintenance of the CO NAAQS.2 See 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv).
The attainment year's mobile source budget of 27 TPD does not provide
for maintenance of the CO NAAQS when combined with the increasing
emissions levels from non-mobile sources during the 1998-2014 period
(i.e., use of the 27 TPD budget for any year after 1998 would push
total emissions over the maintenance plan's attainment year level of
34.76 TPD) 3. Thus, we are taking no action on language in
section IV.C.3.c. of the maintenance plan in which the State
established an emissions budget for 1998 and beyond of 27 TPD of CO.
The effect of this is that DRCOG and the State may not use 27 TPD as
the budget for conformity purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Pursuant to Section 93.118(e)(4) of the Transportation
Conformity Rule (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A), we previously reviewed
the adequacy of the maintenance plan's carbon monoxide emissions
budgets for purposes of coformity. In a May 14, 1999 letter, from
Richard R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation Program, EPA Region
VIII, to Margie Perkins, Director, Air Pollution Control Divison,
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, we determined
that the emissions budget for 1998 and beyond (27 tons per day) was
inadequate for conformity purposes. Although this action is
consistent with our prior adequacy determination, it should be noted
that, in taking final action on the maintenance plan, we are not
bound by our pror adequacy determination. See 62 FR 43782, August
15, 1997.
\3\ The State used a 1995 inventory to determine the amount of
the safety margin for establishing an emissions budget. The
maintenance demonstration is based on a 1993 inventory. It is not
appropriate to use one inventory for purposes of demonstrating
maintenance and another inventory for purposes of calculating the
safety margin for a motor vehicle emissions budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead, consistent with our conformity regulations and the
preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58
FR 62193-96), we are approving the 2015 mobile source emissions
inventory value of 16.76 TPD of CO as the emissions budget. This 16.76
TPD budget will apply for 2015 and beyond. See 40 CFR 93.118(b)(2)(ii).
For the years prior to 2015, conformity determinations must be
conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 93.118(b)(2)(i).
Finally, based on the discussion above, the emissions budget
definition in the Colorado Ambient Air Quality Standards regulation (5
CCR 1001-14) is incorrect as it applies the 27 TPD figure to 1998 and
beyond. As indicated above, we cannot approve the 27 TPD budget and it
cannot be used for conformity determinations.
V. Final Action
In this action, EPA is approving the Longmont carbon monoxide
redesignation request and the maintenance plan.
EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective November 23,
1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments
by October 25, 1999.
If EPA receives such comments, then we will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any
parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on November 23, 1999 and no further action will
be taken on the proposed rule.
Administrative Requirements
(a) Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866,
[[Page 51700]]
entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
(b) Executive Orders on Federalism
(1) Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local,
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local, or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on state,
local, or tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section
1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
(2) Executive Order 12612: Executive Order on Federalism
On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order
on federalism, Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999),
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, Executive
Order 12612 (52 FR 41685, October 30, 1987) on federalism still
applies. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on 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 12612. The rule
affects only one State and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air
Act.
(c) Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health and
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
(d) Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is
unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements
of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
(e) Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new
requirements, but simply approve requirements that the State is already
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State
action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning
SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246,
255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). Redesignation of an area to
attainment under sections 107(d)(3)(D) and (E) of the Clean Air Act
does not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation
to attainment is an action that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on sources.
Therefore, I certify that the approval of the redesignation request
will not affect a substantial number of small entities.
(f) Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves a
redesignation to attainment and pre-existing requirements under State
or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no
[[Page 51701]]
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, will result from this action.
(g) Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
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 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 the 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 rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
(h) National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action.
Today's action does not require the public to perform activities
conductive to the use of VCS.
(i) Petitions for Judicial Review
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 November 23, 1999. 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).)
Nothing in this action should be construed as making any
determination or expressing any position regarding Colorado's audit
privilege and penalty immunity law, sections 13-25-126.5, 13-90-107,
and 25-1-114.5, Colorado Revised Statutes (Colorado Senate Bill 94-139,
effective June 1, 1994), or its impact upon any approved provision in
the SIP, including the revision at issue here. The action taken herein
does not express or imply any viewpoint on the question of whether
there are legal deficiencies in this or any other Clean Air Act program
resulting from the effect of Colorado's audit privilege and immunity
law. A state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state
enforcement and cannot have any impact on federal enforcement
authorities. EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the Clean
Air Act, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211, or 213,
to enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the Clean Air Act is likewise
unaffected by a state audit privilege or immunity law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon Monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Dated: September 10, 1999.
William P. Yellowtail,
Regional Administrator Region VIII.
Chapter I, title 40, parts 52 and 81 of the Code of Federal
Regulations 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 52.349 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.349 Control strategy: Carbon monoxide.
* * * * *
(d) Revisions to the Colorado State Implementation Plan, Carbon
Monoxide Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for Longmont, as
adopted by the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission on December 18,
1997, State effective March 2, 1998, and submitted by the Governor on
August 19, 1998.
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-Carbon Monoxide''
is amended by revising the entry for ``Longmont Area'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 81.306 Colorado.
* * * * *
Colorado--Carbon Monoxide
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated Area ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
Longmont Area............................. November 23, 1999.......... Attainment.......
Hwy 52 west from the Boulder/Weld
County line to 95th Street/Hoover
Road, then north on 95th Street/
Hoover Road to the intersection of
Plateau Road and SH 119, then west on
Plateau Road to the intersection of
Hygiene Road, then due north to the
Boulder/Larimer County line, then due
east to the intersection of the
Boulder/Larimer/Weld County lines,
then south along the Boulder/Weld
County line to Hwy 52, plus the
portion of the City of Longmont east
of the Boulder/Weld County line in
Weld County.
Boulder County (part):
Weld County (part):
[[Page 51702]]
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-24906 Filed 9-23-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
