[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